Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Northallerton/1

Northallerton[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result pending

This 2008 GA promotion has become out of date in many sections. The demographics section is still dependent on the 2001 census, and other out-of-date content is present as well, such as It was due to close in spring 2008, as the building which opened in 1877 is not up to modern standards. However, the move has been delayed due to lack of space at the Friarage sourced to an article from 2008, or housing prices also from 2008. In addition, uncited text has crept in over the years, including material such as Hambleton Seals Water Polo are a newly formed team which aims to attract local children to a quite small, yet fun sport. that is not in an encyclopedic tone. Hog Farm _Talk 02:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This GAR had originally been closed as delist by Real4jyy, who seems to have not checked the article history, where there is evidence of significant improvement. As Real4jyy is only online once a week, it appears, I have reopened this GAR. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Esemgee, Ed1964, Keith D, and Finlay McWalter: are any of you able to cite the few remaining citation needed tags? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - I should be able to do the courthouse stuff. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 18:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In addition to the remaining citation issues, would it be possible to update the demographics information to use the 2021 census instead of the 2001 census? The statistical information at the beginning of the economy section is also quite dated. Hog Farm _Talk 02:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Esemgee, Ed1964, Keith D, Finlay McWalter, and Hog Farm: Regarding the census; is it necessary for the whole comparison statistics table to remain? This is not cited and is far too detailed IMHO. I am in favour of removing it, if you are...? Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 20:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer that we source the data better (that is, see if we can get a verifiable stable link instead of the what we have for ref [58]). I don't think the table is excessive, but I wouldn't be opposed to it being in a collapsed box - it is dull, but encyclopedias often contain dull things. I'm trying to see if we can massage the ONS query system (perhaps with one of their "custom data set" options) to source the data we have. And hopefully address Hog Farm's concerns about using such old data. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 21:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer to see it kept and sourced, as the information about long-term population trends is useful for the reader. Hog Farm _Talk 15:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As per above I would try to keep the information but update to the 2011 census for now, until ONS publish the full set of 2021 stats, unless we can easily get to the information on 2021 without using the citypopulation site. If this is a stumbling block to retaining GA status then reduce to minimum and fill in later when info is available. Keith D (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with 2011 for now - that's certainly an improvement over using the old 2001 stats. Hog Farm _Talk 18:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found most of the missing cites - there are still a couple to complete. I will look at the census data. The joy of all things (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]