Talk:Pennsylvania Renaissance Faire/GA1

GA Review

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

I will be reviewing this article. I see some serious problems. First, the article reads like an advertisement rather than an encyclopedic entry. Second, some material in the History section and all the material in the Events section are digressions and should to be removed. They belong in an article on the Mount Hope Estate and Winery rather than this article. Phrases like "the largest in the world" need citations. Whenever claims to being the largest, the smallest, the most popular, the richest, etc., a source for the claim must be cited. Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the claim about the jousting arena being the largest outside Europe, because it is uncited. I reworded the phrase about the attendance of the faire in attempt to make the citation more clear. cmadler (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've copyedited and revised the article. Let me know what you think. Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 15:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved a lot of the other material to a newly-created article on the Mount Hope Estate. cmadler (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey I don't know if matters too much, but the Commons category box was removed in the copyedit that Kathy did. It doesn't matter to me if you guys don't want it; just wanted to point that out in case nobody noticed. Killiondude (talk) 17:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm guessing that was a mistake, but I'm not sure where to put the Commonscat box now. cmadler (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I tossed it into the External links section, as it seemed to be the best place for now. Any objections? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Kathryn, you were right - a lot of that stuff did belong in the Mount Hope article. I noticed you removed the image from the article; would you advocate putting it back in, or was it removed because it violated WP:ADVERT or something? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:12, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I agree. See my comment in the next section regarding the apparent operational structure. cmadler (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FINAL REVIEW:

I'm not entirely satisfied with the sources. Some are at least decade old. Surely, more recent sources exist and should be cited.
The article is not entirely stable. Some discussion exists.
The article fails most significantly in broad coverage. A lot of questions remain unanswered. For example, what is the faire's annual "take at the door". How does this compare to other faires in the US and worldwide? What impact does the faire have environmentally with 250,000 spectators trampling about 35 acres for 12 weekends? Do locals complain of traffic, trash, noise? What impact does the faire have culturally? How is it ranked artistically among other faires of its kind? I would like to see a review of the faire from a competent critic. What are the "good things" about the faire, and what are the "not so good things"? Some "production details" would be appreciated. Who designed the faire? How are the various structures designed, built, and completed? An aerial photograph of the fairgrounds would give the reader an idea of its magnitude. These are only a few of the many such questions that should be asked and answered.

With some reluctance, I feel the article fails some significant criteria and needs much work before it can be deemed a GA. Kathyrncelestewright (talk) 10:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]