Talk:Clifton Suspension Bridge/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Bruce1ee (talk · contribs) 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this nomination – I'll follow up here with my findings over the next couple of days. —Bruce1ee^talk 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
See comments below ...

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
See comments below ...
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
See comments below ...

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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
See comments below ...
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

1A.
- Lead section: I think the opening sentence should include the year the bridge was completed/opened (1864).
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Plans" section: I think it needs to be said who Thomas Telford was, eg. "Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford".
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operation" section, "although now thousands of electric light bulbs are attached to the bridge instead of flares": is "now" correct, it says later that LEDs were used?
  - YChanged to ...were attached...— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operation" section, "A toll of £0.50 is levied": when was this toll (of £0.50) first introduced?
  - A toll has been levied since the bridge opened, however I will try to check when it was increased to 50p— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Ythe toll rose to 50p in 2007 - I have added this + the proposal to put it up to £1 this year.— Rod ^talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operation" section, "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge including the strengthening of the chain anchor points in 1925 and 1939": suggest changing to something like "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge, including the strengthening of the chain anchor points, which were done in 1925 and 1939".
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operations" section, "On 4 April 2009, the bridge was shut overnight due to a crack in one of the support hangers.": was the crack repaired?
  - YReworded to show closed for 1 night to allow repairs to take place— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Dimensions" section: "Traffic" is not a dimension – there is "Daily traffic" in the infobox, is "Traffic" in this section necessary?
  - Removed from this section & added to operation— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks, but I see you've used that troublesome "now" word (see WP:DATED). —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - YNow removed.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Dimensions" section: either use "feet" or "ft", but not both.
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Incidents" section, "In 1885, a 22-year-old woman named Sarah Ann Henley survived a fall from the bridge": the source says she "threw herself from the Bridge","fall" suggests an accident – thoughts?
  - Not sure - saying she definately "threw herself" is verifiable but perhaps a "label"— Rod ^talk 15:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - YOn second thoughts I think to say "survived a fall" is fine. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No Close paraphrasing/copyright violations found.
- "Plans" section: thanks for expanding this section, but I have a query about Telford: "Entries were received from 22 designers ... Telford submitted four entries ... They then called in Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford to make a final selection ... Telford rejected all the remaining designs ... Telford was then asked to produce a design, which he did" – (1) Telford should be introduced at the first appearance of his name; (2) is there a sequencing problem here? If Telford had already submitted four entries, why was he asked to produce a design? —Bruce1ee^talk 06:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - YSorry that first Telford (who submitted four entries) should have been Brunel.— Rod ^talk 07:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1B.
- Lead section: Is there a reason the grade I listing and the B3129 road facts are not mentioned in the body of the article? I know WP:LEAD allows for trivial facts not listed in the article, but are these trivial facts?
  - YI've added these to operations linking to road to the number of cars— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Lead section: plans for a "cast iron structure" is not mentioned in the body of the article.
  - Is this not covered in Engineering?— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't see it in Engineering. Cast iron is not the same as wrought iron. As I understand it, plans for a cast iron structure were abandoned, or have I got it wrong? —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I've gone back to the books - but still having a problem explaining/sourcing this.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I've looked in Andrews, McIlwain & Vaughan. The only one that has anything relevant is Andrews p14 which says (discussing 1793) "Although Bristol had several iron works and trading links with Coalbrookdale, on the River Severn in Shropshire, the power house of the early Industrial Revolution, Bridges did not appear to consider using cast iron." I am not inclined to change this until I've asked on the talk page if anyone has other sources saying anything different, or done a more comprehensive web search - which I may not be able to do until tomorrow.— Rod ^talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        YAll the sources I can find say the change was from stone to wrought iron (without any serious consideration of cast iron), so I think the lead was wrong. I have changed this & hopefully now matches the rest of the article.— Rod ^talk 11:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Lead section, "It now has plaques that advertise the telephone number of The Samaritans": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
  - YNow removed— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operation" section, "The bridge is now managed by a charitable trust": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
  - YNow removed— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The "Operation" section is not summarized in the lead.
  - What part of "Operation" do you think should be added to the lead?— Rod ^talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - The bridge management company, the tolls, "the first modern bungee jumps", for example. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Hopefully done now.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        YThat's fine, thanks. —Bruce1ee^talk 13:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2B.
- There are several offline sources used, for which I've assumed good faith.
- Infobox: "Total length" is not repeated in the body of the article and is not referenced here – perhaps it could be added to the "Dimensions" section and referenced there.
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Lead section: "forms part of the B3129 road" is not referenced (not included in the body of the article).
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Construction" section: the first half of the last paragraph (starting with "Brunel died in 1859") is not referenced; do the references towards the end of the paragraph cover the first half (I can't check the offline sources)?
  - Refs from the Andrews book added.— Rod ^talk 17:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - I was referring to the last paragraph of the "Construction" section. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - YSorry my error - refs now added.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Operation" section, "It was a symbolic moment which commemorated Bristol's feats in engineering.": this statement is not sourced; was there a commemoration of the event?
  - YI have removed this - seems to refer more to Bristol's aeronautical engineering— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Dimensions" section: not all the figures are referenced.
  - Mostly done - but I'm still searching for the sources of Tower Width: 11 feet (3.4 m) in the books etc
    - YI've now removed tower width - pending finding a source.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "Popular culture" section: the BBC medical drama Casualty is referenced to a YouTube video – is there not a more reliable source to support this statement?
  - Y2 other refs added — Rod ^talk 17:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- "External links" section, Time-lapse video: YouTube videos are generally not accepted in the "External links" section, unless its inclusion can be justified (see WP:YOUTUBE).
  - Removed— Rod ^talk 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - My removal of this has been reverted by another editor as a "good link" - what do you think?— Rod ^talk 18:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - YI removed it, citing WP:YOUTUBE, but I see it's been added again with a comment "not a commercial video, no copyright soundtrack, shows the bridge and the river in an interesting context. very relevant to the article". So I guess it's ok then. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The West Country Tonight Backdrop (currently ref.55) is a dead link (and a blog).
  - Replaced— Rod ^talk 17:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - You've replaced it with a forum, which is not a reliable source (see WP:SOURCE). —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - YI've removed it until we can find a WP:RS source.— Rod ^talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

6B.
- The two images in the "Dimensions" and "Incidents" sections are bunched up; I'd suggest moving the second image (File:Avon gorge and cave arp.jpg) down to the "Popular culture" section.
  - YDone— Rod ^talk 16:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Overall it's a nicely written article with a good coverage of the subject, but please have a look at the above issues I've raised. —Bruce1ee^talk 12:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your changes. I've responded to your queries, and raised a few myself. I see you've requested the help of others for information, so I've put the review on hold until the outstanding issues are dealt with. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the changes, we're almost there. I've added a new query at the end of "1A". —Bruce1ee^talk 06:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All outstanding issued have been resolved now and I've promoted the article to GA. Thanks for all your hard work. —Bruce1ee^talk 10:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]