Wikipedia:Peer review/Glenrothes/archive4

Glenrothes

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been substantially improved, particularly with regard to the references. It would be useful to establish can be done to try and elevate it to FA status.

Thanks, Mcwesty (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Peer review is backlogged at the moment, which could mean delays of up to two weeks before articles can be reviewed. You can help, by choosing one of the articles in the backlog, and reviewing it. Please consider doing this.

Before I review an article that was previously reviewed, I want to know that all the old concerns have been addressed. That is not obvious from the old PR and FAC pages for this article. --mav (Urgent FACs/FARs/PRs) 19:46, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes no problem. I dont want you to feel like your wasting your time through re-inventing the wheel and that the comments from previous reviews have been in any way ignored. I am confident that the comments expressed previously have been addressed. The majority of concern related to the referencing, which has almost been completely redone. Mcwesty (talk) 09:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comment: The tools in the toolbox at the top of this review page find problems with dead citation urls, links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets, and missing alt text. WP:ALT has details about alt text, meant for readers who can't see the images. The dead urls and dabs will certainly have to be fixed, and it would be good to add the alt text. Finetooth (talk) 02:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC) Done[reply]

Comments from Niagara

Is there a better photo that is representative of Glenrothes? The panorama is hard see at its current width in the infobox. I'd move that further down the page and into a {{Panorama}} template. Done

"It is located approximately equidistant between the cities of Edinburgh (32 miles (51 km)) and Dundee (27 miles (43 km))." → This sentence is used twice, in the lead and the "Geography" section. I've tweaked both of them...
- "It is located approximately 30 miles (48 km) from both Edinburgh and Dundee." → For the lead Done
- "Edinburgh and Dundee are located almost equidistantly from Glenrothes at 32 miles (51 km) and 27 miles (43 km) away, respectively." → For the Geography section Done
"According to the recent population estimate (2006)," → Might as well be direct, instead of being vague... "According to a 2006 population estimate," Done
Why is Glenrothes a former new town?- Removed reference of it being a former new town. Its pretty obvious from the first sentence in the History Section.
Measurements conversions needed in the "Governance" section. Done
"Glenrothes (UK Parliament constituency)" needs to be piped. Done
"Average annual temperatures in Glenrothes range from a max of 18°C to a min of 9°C." → "max" and "min" should be written out; also temperature conversions needed. Done
Add a {{Commons category}} for Glenrothes. Done
Some of the external links don't look they'd satisfy WP:EL (e.g. Salvation Army, a Baptist church, etc). Done

I don't know if mav is still planning a more thorough review, but here are some quick comments. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 16:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff, thanks for your help guys. I'll wait to see if Mav has any final suggestions. Is there an indication on what level the article could currently be graded at?Mcwesty (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing more to add that hasn't been mentioned above. Article is in great shape and should be submitted to FAC once above suggestions have been addressed. I made a few minor copyedits; feel free to do with them what you want. --mav (Urgent FACs/FARs/PRs) 21:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]