Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Future of air transport in the United Kingdom/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 00:08, 31 January 2008.

---

Future of air transport in the United Kingdom

previous FAC

Check external links

Self-Nom. A FAC nomination for this article was previously withdrawn after it became clear that the title did not reflect the content. I have now re-worked it and would like to see if this version can stand the rigours of candidacy. --FactotEm (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment - I have fixed all of the dead links in the article, except for one for which I believe the server is temporarily down. No opinion on FA suitability.--Danaman5 (talk) 05:45, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your help on that. The final link reports that the server is due back online on 28th Jan. I'll check that one again then. --FactotEm (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Needs cleaning up throughout. For example, in the lead:

• "The Future of air transport in the United Kingdom is the Government's strategic framework for the development of United Kingdom (UK) airport capacity up to the year 2030." Now I'm confused: is this a formal title (some white paper?). If so, the opening "The" should be bold too, and "The" should start the article title. No need to spell out "United Kingdom" before the first abbreviation. Where is it referenced? What is the source of this "framework"?
• Unsure whether there's a rule in MOS about it, but "p17" is non-standard formatting. Can you dot and space throughout the references? ("p. 17"; "pp. 3–4")
• "550ppmv"—space after the value?
• MOS subpage on titles (or is it capitalisation?) says to use sentence case for titles, not title case. You might consider doing this.
• Check formatting through the refs; I see, for example, a full-stop squashed next to the subsequent character.
• "two—fold"—one word, and it would never be an em dash, anyway.
• "The industry is currently responsible for over 6 per cent of all UK carbon emissions,"—reference, even though it's in the lead, would be nice for a figure like this. Although I'm unsure: is this figure referenced later? Tony (talk) 09:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate your comments. In response...

• The white paper is indeed titled "The Future of Air Transport", but I perhaps mistakenly deferred to the WP:MOS and removed the leading "The". I also added "in the United Kingdom" to disambiguate the nationality. Having just consulted White paper, perhaps the correct title (including capitalisation) for the article should be "The Future of Air Transport White Paper". What do you think?
• I've addressed all the formatting issues I can find (page numbers etc) as you suggest.
• I don't understand your comment about sentence case for titles. All section headers conform to this standard, and I'm not sure where else the article might be at fault on this. Can you provide a specific example?
• WP:LEAD leaves the issue of citations in the lead to editorial concensus and personally I do not like them. The lead in this article introduces nothing that is not comprehensively cited in the body of the article. Is this acceptable for you? --FactotEm (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Follow up...

• I've looked at the WP:MOS sub-page on titles and capitalization and can't find anything that relates to this article, other than the possible capitalization of the word "Government", which I have now put into sentence case throughout. Was this all, or have I missed something? --FactotEm (talk) 10:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.