Talk:Tay Bridge/GA1

GA Reassessment

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

There has been a request for citation in this article since March 2008.

Large sections are completely without citations. For instance, the first two paragraphs of The first Tay Bridge, and almost the entire Official enquiry sections.

This sentence: "Tay Bridge" was also the codename for the funeral plans for Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother." appears at the end of a section called A second bridge. Why?

Section names should not begin with definite or indefinite articles. For instance; Second Bridge, not A second bridge, Tay Bridge Disaster, not The Tay Bridge Disaster.

Section names should not (usually) repeat or include the article name. For instance, First bridge, not The first Tay Bridge.

The article uses imperial and metric units inconsistently. One or the other should always be given first, with a conversion to the other.

Authors are listed as lastname, firstname in Notes, but firstname, lastname in Bibliography. Should be consistently one or the other, preferably lastname, firstname.

Only one of the books cited gives the page numbers where the information being relied on can be found. Page number(s) need to be given for each citation of a book.

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The use of units depends on the source. If the source is in metric, then that's what's used. If it's in Imperial, ditto. I can't argue with the rest. - Denimadept (talk) 03:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not the case. Units must be used consistently throughout the article. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 03:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As these issues remain outstanding, this article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question: I've assumed that the "tonnes" used in the article are Metric Tons. Can anyone verify this? - Denimadept (talk) 08:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]