Talk:Seven Gates of Hell/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum 15:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear as to what this article is supposed to be about. As it was listed in the Geography section I assume that it's meant to about a place, but I've got no clear idea where this place is. What about some co-ordinates? Are there no pictures of the area? Is there actually a place called the Seven Gates of Hell, or is that just a name given to this legend?
- The legend is that if you go through seven gates at a particular location, you go to hell. The location exists, the legend is fake. I added coordinates and hopefully clarified this point. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I understand that, but I'm still unclear what this article is about; the lead starts off "The Seven Gates of Hell is a local legend". So is this an article about the legend? Malleus Fatuorum 22:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I changed the opening part to "The Seven Gates of Hell is a legendary place in the York, Pennsylvania area. Two versions of the legend exist..." Hopefully this satisfies all concerns. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well no, it doesn't. "Legendary place" implies that the place doesn't exist at all. Is there a place called Seven Gates of Hell or not? Malleus Fatuorum 00:23, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        How about "The Seven Gates of Hell is a location in the York, Pennsylvania area of which legends have been told." It sounds a bit corny, but it does grab the reader's attention. I don't know how else to phrase it. There is an actual location, on private property, where urban legends flourish and obnoxious tourists annoy neighbors. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Is that place called the Seven Gates of Hell? If it isn't, what is it called? Malleus Fatuorum 00:33, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        It's on private property; it likely does not have a name. The Seven Gates of Hell is the only reason the area is notable. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be titled based on their common name. We would never create an article entitled "Tract of Land between Trout Run Road and..." So yes, the wooded location is known as the Seven Gates of Hell even though there are not seven gates and, due to the laws of physics, you would not land in hell. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's recap. Right now this article is failing on at least GA criteria 3b. From what you've said it seems that you consider this to be an article on the legend of the Seven Gates of Hell, which I think it ought to be, so why you listed it as a geography article is somewhat beyond me. Why not start off by making the topic clear? Something like "The Seven Gates of Hell" is a legend surrounding a wooded area in Hellam Township, Pennsylvania, said to contain seven gates that lead to Hell. Malleus Fatuorum 13:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Or we could just keep it simple: "The Seven Gates of Hell is a legend originating in the York, Pennsylvania area." I only listed it in the geography section because I couldn't think of a better place to put it. Perhaps miscellaneous would have been better. 22:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
  - OK. Now we've agreed that the article is about the legend, not the place, then we can begin. I'll restart this review below. Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"The location in question never housed an institution; the doctor only constructed one gate." Which doctor? Who is this doctor? A gate to what?
- Changed to "The location in question never housed an institution; the aforementioned doctor only constructed one gate, to keep out tresspassers." I'm sorry, I cannot find anything mentioning his name. Reliable sources on this topic are extremely limited, while there are a million blog posts out there. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think we're going to struggle a bit trying to get this through GAN. Let me ask you honestly. Do you believe that this article meets the GA criteria? Or could be made to meet them over the next few days? Malleus Fatuorum 00:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, I honestly think it does. The only criteria it may struggle with is breadth, since this is obviously quite short. It has all the major elements, considering little is available. The prose might need a touch-up, but I think it is generally up to par. If this fails, I wouldn't be too surprised, although in my biased opinion I think it should pass. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but you're going to have to think about this article and its structure again. It's very far from meeting the GA criteria in my opinion. Malleus Fatuorum 02:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.