Talk:Barton Aqueduct/GA1
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 12:49, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Just some minor suggestions:
- Could you give a basic location description somewhere in the article like "just to the east of the B5211 road and south of Barton Lane". [1]
- My apologies, it was demolished so location doesn't matter..♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- "One brought in to review the plans, at Brindley's request" -do you mean "Once brought in to review the plans, at Brindley's request, he commented in a report to the Duke of Bridgewater that" ?
- Do you have a date for completion of the aqueduct?
- "there was a distortion of one of the arches" -not quite clear to me what this means. A curved or faulty arch?
- "The construction of the aqueduct excited great admiration at the time, and writers of the day often remarked on the strange and novel sight afforded by the canal where it crossed the Irwell. " I'd probably move that up and merge with what you say early in the section about "The structure became one of the wonders of the age and crowds came from all over the country to view it, along with the drilling of the sough for the duke's Worsley navigable levels.[14]" for structure and focus.
- " castle in the air" can you attribute to what Glen Atkinson calls his "castle in the air"?
- So it does...♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
- Newell source, not sure why University of Manchester Archaeological Unit is linked when it isn't a direct link and the Manchester and Cambridge University Press isn't linked.
Looks good, excellent work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:49, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
Thanks for addressing the points. Not easy to review for Eric as I neither want to come across as excessively picky or too lazy with the review. Looks fine for GA and always a pleasure to see articles on structures which no longer exist added to wikipedia.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)