Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:36, 28 August 2007

Broadwater Farm was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 5, 2007). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

London B‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related B This article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Urban studies and planning Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:PL showcase article

Automated peer review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.
• Per Misplaced Pages:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.
• Per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 2km, use 2 km, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 2 km.
• Per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.
• Per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.
• Per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}) in headings.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon . is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Misplaced Pages's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Elonka 15:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Good article comments

It looks like this article is really close to GA status. My specific recommendations are:

• Remove some of the redlinks
• Give it another good copyediting pass. There are several run-on sentences, or sentences with duplicated words.
• Don't start multiple paragraphs with the same words.
• Ensure that references come after punctuation, not before.
• Avoid parenthetical statements. Just put them in the main text.
• The different sizes of images is a bit distracting. Many should be more consistent, perhaps 250px
• There are too many subsections, some with only a couple sentences. Try to combine them into more general topics.
• Ensure that the lead is a good summary of the entire article, per WP:LEAD.

I'm putting the GA nom "on hold" for now. If these issues can be addressed within a week, the nom can probably proceed, otherwise the nom will fail. It can be resubmitted though later, after the problems are addressed. Best, --Elonka 16:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Reply to above

Apologies for taking so long to respond; recent unforeseen events have meant I've been somewhat busier than usual...

I disagree with the comment about the redlinks; the only things that are redlinked are named geographic locations and individuals who undoubtedly pass WP:N (they just haven't had the articles written yet).

As per my many previous arguments, Footnotes come after punctuation is a guideline, not a policy. It is taken from the Chicago Manual of Style, and is specific to American English; virtually all British & Commonwealth publications place the punctuation last. As this is an article written in British English about a location in Britain, having a single American style whilst everything else is in British style would seem to me to jar more than the fact that it deviates from Misplaced Pages guidelines in a single aspect.

Some of the photos are deliberately in forced size. There are comments in hidden text beside each place where I've done this, to explain why in each case; mostly, either because they have extreme aspect ratios (such as the panorama views) or have detail which would be lost at smaller size (such as the labelling on the map). I agree that it looks messy, but can't see a way round it. I've not forced widths at any point for reasons not allowed under WP style guidelines.

I agree entirely about the subsections; this article was pared down from a longer early version. That said, I think the short subsections in the "Deterioration" section need to be kept, as each relates to a discrete period in the area's history.

At some point when I get the time I'll rewrite and resubmit this, as I think it's an article that could go a lot further, and I've taken it as far as I can — iridescent (talk to me!) 17:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Misleading references

Thank you for the work that's been done on this article, but I still feel that it needs more to get to GA status. Currently the tone of is a bit too much like a promotional piece. And some of the references are flat out misleading. For example, the lead talks about how the area is "safest in the world" and has the "lowest burglary rate in the country", but the linked references have no verification of that. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources. I recommend reviewing all references to ensure that they actually back up the claims. I also recommend that the lead be rewritten to provide a better summary of the overall article. The Broadwater riots were evidently a major incident, yet they're barely mentioned in the lead. Please review the policy on WP:NPOV for advice on achieving a more neutral tone. I'll also repeat what I said above about redlinks, especially since some of the links are repeated throughout the article. However, if references can be provided here which prove that the linked articles are genuinely notable subjects, they might be alright. --Elonka 17:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the "safest urban area in the world" claim as I agree the reference in its current state doesn't say that (at the time of writing, it did say it; however, as the source is the local council's website which isn't necessarily a reliable source, I agree it's not valid). The "lowest burglary rate in the country" is, I believe, accurate but again the source is the council's website so I've replaced it with a less contentious "burglary rate of almost zero", with appropriate citation. The figures in the "Crime rates" section are cited from reliable sources, and consequently I've left them in place.

Coverage of the riots was substantially pared back from this article, both to avoid duplication & content-forking from Broadwater Farm riot and to avoid the article focusing too heavily on a single event in the area's history, following a lengthy discussion; the discussion was spread across multiple talk pages, but the bulk of the discussion is here. This follows established Misplaced Pages precedent for places best known for a single event, and is the same model (dablink at the beginning to the main article on the event; single sentence summary of the event in the lead; brief coverage of the event in question in the article, with a link to the main article) used at Hiroshima, Hastings, Oświęcim, Watts, California, Dresden etc.

I've left the redlinks to "Utopia on Trial" in place, as a quick Google search on the title shows that it's still being widely mentioned by WP:RSs and so would warrant its own article. Although it's a double redlink, I've left both in place; it is linked at its first mention in the article as per Wiki protocol, and also linked in the section discussing the impact of the book itself, as this is the point at which most people would follow the link, were the article created. The same goes for the two named locations (both unquestionably WP:N and hence valid redlinks). I've de-linked Alice Coleman - as she's best known for the book, she would be unlikely to need an independent article. I've also de-linked without prejudice Clasford Sterling; although he'll pass WP:BIO as a former professional footballer, the link can be recreated if necessary as and when he gets his own article.

I'm not sure what you're referring to regarding violations of WP:NPOV as it seems balanced throughout, and I don't see how you can get "reads like a promotional piece" from it; the only parts that's aren't a straightforward (and sourced-and-cited) history are the lead and the "Services & Facilities" section. The former is IMO a straightforward brief summary of the article, whilst I don't see how you can possibly view the latter as promotional - the one positive claim ("the best designed nursery school") is backed by a link to the RIBA award for it, whilst the rest of the section discusses the lack of adequate facilities. All potentially controversial claims such as "there is a lengthy waiting list for housing" are sourced throughout. If you give me examples of what's causing concern, I'll try to sort them out. — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

• Former good article nominees
• B-Class London-related articles
• Low-importance London-related articles
• Unassessed Urban studies and planning articles
• Unknown-importance Urban studies and planning articles