Wikipedia:Peer review/Cranford, New Jersey/archive1

Cranford, New Jersey

Article (Edit|History) • Article talk (Edit|History) • Watch article • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because there is quite a bit of information in the article and im not quite sure how to manage all of it. I'd also like feedback on areas that need further research and/or pictures.

Thanks,

Mystache (talk) 06:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 00:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably assess this article at the Start or early B classes on the assessment scale. There's some information starting to be collected here, but organization and structure is lacking, so it's not quite there yet. Inline citations are used, but not nearly enough to pass the Good article criteria (much less the [[WP:WIAFA}Featured article criteria]]).

Other issues include:

Lack of a 'history' section. This should be the first section listed, and should contain a historical description of events in the city, starting with initial settlement and going through the present.

The second major section should be 'geography', which is there. In addition to a basic description of the topography of the landscape, include information on weather & climate, possibly as a subsection. A 'cityscape' subsection should also be found here, with info on the various neighborhoods and parts of town, and how they are connected.

'Demographics' should be next; the information that's there now was added several years ago by an automated bot that put 2000 census data into Wikipedia. It's minimally acceptable, but it would be nice to go into additional details on the different ethnic groups that settled, and what neighborhoods they settled in. Maybe include some data on the average education levels of residents, and religious affiliations.

'Economy' should come next. Talk about the businesses and industry in the city.

After that, the order can vary a little bit. Rather than going step-by-step here, I'll direct you to the WP:CITIES guideline for US city articles, which you can find here. You might also want to take a look at WP:LEAD for tips on improving the lead section, which should be a summary of the article text itself (kind of like an abstract).

Also, try not to focus too much on popular culture reference (e.g. 'cranford in film and television'). Lots of people like to add this stuff to articles, but so much is of minimal importance, if at all. Sure, if a major film or TV show was filmed in the town, include it, but if your city was just mentioned in a single line in some sit-com, that's hardly worth noting. It's also better to actually write out things like this as prose, instead of bulleted lists, discussing how these popular culture references actually relate to the city itself. Bulleted lists seem to just motivate other pea-brained editors to just add more bullets; prose will actually provide something useful and meaningful.

Take a look at some other city articles that are current FA and GAs, including Minneapolis, Minnesota, Flagstaff, Arizona, and Richmond, Virginia, for some good examples.

Hope this points you in the right direction. Hope to see Cranford nominated for GA or FA soon! Cheers! Dr. Cash (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]