Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Kamloops Airport/1
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result pending
The "419 (City of Kamloops) Squadron" section is almost entirely unsourced and was not present in the article in the 2013 GAN. Is this section necessary for this article? If it is, it should have inline citations. The "History" section is quite long and should be broken up with level 3 headings. Z1720 (talk) 17:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- Contra There are too many linguistical inaccuracies for a "good" article. Also, there is a mention of one accident, but further detail is lacking. Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed the 419 (City of Kamloops) Squadron section. I planned to summarize the section into a brief mention of how the airport was named for the squadron, but already found that summary in the history section. I don't know what "too many linguistical inaccuracies for a good article" means. The brief mention of the accident is cited to a source, but is not a notable incident so I would oppose delisting based upon the lack of comprehensiveness of that one event. The request to break up the History section with level 3 headings seems like a nitpick to me, whoever does it should respect WP:LAYOUT because one thing that's worse than a long section is a bunch of tiny sections. RecycledPixels (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
- @RecycledPixels: You are correct that MOS:OVERSECTION warns against short sections. In the paragraph above that, it also says "Articles longer than a stub are generally divided into sections, and sections over a certain length are generally divided into paragraphs: these divisions enhance the readability of the article." I believe a 15-paragraph section (the current length of the History section) hinders readability and navigation of the article, especially for mobile users. I recommend that sections be about 3-4 paragraphs long, though shorter or longer sections can also be appropriate. Z1720 (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- I agree it should be reorganized. Some of those little short paragraphs can possibly be rewritten into more organized paragraphs, but when I looked at it, I encountered sourcing issues which I've highlighted below, which leads me to support delisting unless those are addressed. RecycledPixels (talk) 01:16, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'll add that I've found some sourcing issues at the end of the history section. A couple are tagged with "failed verification" tags already. Reference #23 (Newswire 23 July 2007) is used several times, but the archived page is paywalled and some of the facts that it is supporting seem a bit dubious to me, like "about 13 percent of the local residents in 2007 choose the Kelowna International Airport over the Kamloops Airport to fly to regional destinations, specifically due to its significant growth." Maybe it's just worded wrong and should be saying that there are more flight destinations at Kamloop, but I can't imagine traveling to a more distant airport for my trip specifically because there has been recent growth at that airport. There are other uncited statements in that section that need to be either trimmed or attributed, I won't clutter it up with a bunch of citation needed tags because the type of person who will be doing any cleanup of this article for GAR will know an uncited statement when they see one. RecycledPixels (talk) 01:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)