Talk:Messers Run
A fact from Messers Run appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 November 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Messers Run has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 8, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Messers Run/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Yulun5566 (talk · contribs) 08:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Neutrality Issues[edit]
"It is difficult to access the stream as most of it is several hundred meters from any road."
Sources[edit]
Some factual details are not consistently referenced for example, "watershed of Messers Run has an area of 5.98 square miles"
Factually Unsound (Referenced article from 1997/R. Moase, T. Copeland, R. Wnuk, R. Mulberger (1997), PA Fish and Boat Commission Comments and Recommendations), hinting that statistics from 1997 still hold in 2015. Should either find another sources to substantiate the section 'Biology' or remove the section
Images and Grammar[edit]
Overly factual article with too many details that dates back to 1997
Lack of images and visually unappealing to anyone reading the article
Other comments[edit]
Should improve these areas or else the article would be deemed to be irrelevant to readers wanting current day information
Let's try this again[edit]
Review was sub-par to the point of trolling, and has been abandoned for about a fortnight. I'm just going to commandeer it rather than send the article back for a second run through GAN. GRAPPLE X 14:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Ref 1 need not be used in the lead.
- I have moved it slightly, but it is still needed as a source for the length, which I do not believe fits anywhere but the lead. I think that the manual of style neither requires nor forbids citations in the lead.
- It doesn't forbid them but generally the point is to use them for something likely to be challenged, in addition to using them in the article body as well. It's fine to keep it there, but what should be addressed is having information in the lead that isn't present elsewhere—shoehorn it in if you must, but the lead of an article shouldn't contain unique information not repeated in its body. GRAPPLE X 14:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
- Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission is linked several times in the body, link only on first non-lead use.
- Done.
- "Surveyed one time by" -> I would just say "surveyed by".
- Done.
- Consider linking the township names in the lead.
- Done.
- There are a few one-line paragraphs, these are to be avoided where possible. Integrate the information into a larger paragraph, or re-distribute the larger paragraphs to add text to the one-liners.
- Done.
- You do use unit conversions through most of the article but the "Biology" section is lacking in the same.
- Done.
- Overall the text is fine, it's dry but to the point and works well.
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- Fine, everything is cited and the sources used are of good quality. Consider adding publishing information for the book sources, though; they seem to be from university presses and this would be worth presenting.
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused (see summary style):
- Covers a range of related information, good depth.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Contains no pro- or anti- river bias.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Two edits in all of 2015, which I would say is more than 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:
- I do feel we can illustrate this article better; images around the subject might be worth including. By way of suggestion, File:Pottsville Formation Worlds End.jpg would illustrate the "Geography and geology" section nicely as an image of the geology the river passes over; File:Turkey Run War Memorial, Mahanoy Twp, Schuylkill Co PA.JPG could be captioned to say that the river's watershed includes Mahanoy Township, and a lot of the fish species mentioned under "Biology" can be pictured, though I quite like File:White Sucker, Catostomus commersonii.jpg to show a white sucker.
- Added the Pottsville Formation picture and one picture of a brook trout (the creek's trout have been more extensively studied than its white suckers) I have in the past been hesitant add these kinds of pictures, as they might mislead readers into thinking that they actually come from Messers Run. However, the captions I used may rectify this, and rocks and fish do look pretty much alike. However, I don't think a picture of a random war memorial helps the reader understand the stream, so I did not add the war memorial picture.
- I do feel we can illustrate this article better; images around the subject might be worth including. By way of suggestion, File:Pottsville Formation Worlds End.jpg would illustrate the "Geography and geology" section nicely as an image of the geology the river passes over; File:Turkey Run War Memorial, Mahanoy Twp, Schuylkill Co PA.JPG could be captioned to say that the river's watershed includes Mahanoy Township, and a lot of the fish species mentioned under "Biology" can be pictured, though I quite like File:White Sucker, Catostomus commersonii.jpg to show a white sucker.
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Messers Run. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:10, 8 June 2017 (UTC)