Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment/Chicago Midway International Airport

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Chicago Midway International Airport

Chicago Midway International Airport is a well written, nicely referenced article. It is currently GA-class but seems to meet A-class Criteria. Obviously these many reasons are why I nominated this article for A-class review. Marcusmax 16:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't get through the lede. Are we sure this is a GA-class article? --Born2flie (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This problem should be fixed, after work from a current Peer review. -Marcusmax (talk) 00:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - this has improved remarkably, and is definitely A-class. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 01:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - is it possible to wrap this up now, and either pass/fail it? December 2, 2007 is quite a long time to be on here. -Marcusmax (talk) 22:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed. I don't know, maybe I'm just pickier than most?
1. reference to the length of the use of the IATA code: IATA code is technical jargon, and should be avoided in the introduction. And is this really one of the most significant things about the airport to be included in the introduction, and so early? The fact that the airport is contained in one square mile seems to be a significant fact, or that it was the world's busiest airport for some 30 years seems to be much more significant and notable than the IATA code.
2. article is about Chicago Midway, not ATA airline. So, extensive coverage of ATA in the introduction over any other airline utilizing the airport as a hub is not warranted. Seems to be more a use of Wikipedia as a news service.
3. bolding of the title is not recommended beyond the first sentence of the introduction. A previous incarnation of the guideline was that italics are used for additional or previous names in the introduction. I had previously used bolding in other sections, similar to this article, but now prefer italics as a move towards reconciling with the MOS, which itself, has grown more vague on this issue.
4. the subsection on previous airline service seems disconnected with the History section timeline format.
5. the article contains multiple wikilinks to the same articles, starting in the introduction.
6. Incidents and accidents section lists an incident that didn't directly involve Midway, just that the aircraft's destination was Midway. Why is that even included? It happened over the Grand Canyon. It belongs in the Air Traffic Control article or an article that covers air traffic over the Grand Canyon. I was gonna have a problem with the December 8 incidents until I read this one.
7. sort tool for date on the incidents table doesn't sort the dates properly in Google Chrome, Firefox, or IE.
I'll wrap this up for now. B-Class, but I defer to the GA-Class assignment the article currently holds. --Born2flie (talk) 13:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Great review, it is good to get details on work that must be done. I have corrected many of the issues currently at hand. I still have much more work to do but things are moving along. -Marcusmax(speak) 01:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.