Talk:Montmartre Funicular/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

This appears to be quite a good article, as a whole well referenced and well illustrated. However, as a potential GA, its virtually unreferenced in places: sufficient references seem to be available within the article, they just aren't be used as citations in some sections. I will undoubtedly return to this point later.

I'm now going to review the article in depth section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last. At this point I'm mostly concentrating on "problems", so if a section is good or OK, I may not mention it until the final part of this review. Pyrotec (talk) 21:15, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Current funicular -

Y Pyrotec (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC) - This section is unreferenced.[reply]
Y Pyrotec (talk) 20:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC) - I would certainly expect to see citations for named designers and named companies.[reply]

Early part of History and its subsection Chronology -

These two section/subsection are unreferenced.
I suspect that this summarises information provided elsewhere in the article, so there could be scope for reusing existing citations.

- Origins -

- Looks OK apart from the last paragraph which is uncited. I suspect that the information came from an existing citation - so it needs to be appended to the last paragraph.

- First renovation, 1931 -

- Looks OK apart from the first paragraph which is uncited. I suspect that the information came from an existing citation - so it needs to be appended to the first paragraph.

...to be continued. 21:28, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

- Second renovation, 1991 -
- Generally looks OK. The first and third paragraphs aught to have uncitations.

The rest of the article looks fine. At this point I'm putting the review On Hold for the above comments to be attended to. Pyrotec (talk) 19:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a couple weeks, so at this point I would fail since these unreferenced areas still exist. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 01:52, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've been on holiday, so I've not been active; but yes, I'm failing it. Pyrotec (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've been taking an extended and unexpected Wikibreak, had I known I would not have submitted this at the time I did. So sorry for that; I'll try to address your comments then resubmit it. (I was riding on it two days ago and got a few new pictures, especially one of the interior which may be worth adding, though it's not particularly interesting as a picture in itself). Sorry for not being around. Si Trew (talk) 17:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]