Partial self-nom, on behalf of myself, EurekaLott and Beirne, who have both contributed significantly to improving this article. I think the article is fairly close based on the peer review comments. Feel free to comment, and I'll do my best to address any objections. Thanks! PacknCanes20:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Concern. There is only one sub-heading under Demographics (which makes the table of content look awkward). Also, there is an external link in the neighborhood section (there should not be any external links within the main body of the article, only in the external links section). Though this is not a major concern, but maybe you could add a short section on Cleveland's cityscape (under geography) if possible.Pentawing03:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Content looks good. Length of the article is a concern though, but hopefully it will not detract too much from the article's positive attributes. Weak supportPentawing05:29, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Object: It's good, but the prose needs work. I hope this candidate can be raised to FA status during the nomination period. Here are just a few examples from the lead to demonstrate the kind of editing that is required throughout.
Provide metric equivalents or insert a big sign at the top 'For US readers only'. Insert a non-breaking space between every number and its unit, e.g., '(96 km)' (see this edit box for the html insertion).
'because of access to transportation routes'—engage the readers by stating instead what these routes were (riverine and road transport?).
'33rd-largest'—in the same para you don't use a hyphen for this expression.
'2,148,143 people'—too precise to be credible; 'more than 2.1M people'? Same with county pop.
reference citation numbers: remove preceding space (looks better IMV), or insert a non-breaking space to avoid line overhang.
'Nevertheless, the city also faces some continuing challenges, notably from concentrated poverty in some neighborhoods and from difficulties in funding and delivering high-quality public education.' Get rid of 'also' and the first occurrence of 'some'; 'in particular,' would be better than 'notably'; 'in the funding and delivery of' would be more elegant. Tony06:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think I caught most of the metric equivalents, and did some copyediting to make the prose flow smoother. Also added a cityscape section, which should address (hopefully) the objections of MARussellPESE below. Probably not perfect, but I hope it's getting closer. PacknCanes | say something!18:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Object: Much improved over a month ago. Editing to date was thorough, but there are significant gaps. There are no references/links to the Zoo, Metroparks, Lakeside Park, Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath, etc. Items on the Zoo and Metroparks were added recently and immediately removed. Detroit's article includes discussion and links to her parks and zoo, even though the zoo is in Royal Oak. Both Detroit's and Ann Arbor's articles each have an entire section on their cityscapes, including discussion of their parks and architecture. I'm not sure if "Cityscape" is in the template, but as it reads now it's as if Clevelanders don't have any recreational opportunities, when I know from personal experience that these smack-down Detroit's and keep up with Chicago's. MARussellPESE12:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak object Good article, but some sections need a summary as the size is slightly on the higher side. 1) Summarise: ==Transportation==, ==Sports==, and ==Economy==. 2) convert those .gif files to .png 3) odd sentences such as He never visited the area again; 4) See alsos should always be after the section end and not at the section beginning. 5) avoid starting a section with a left aligned image. 6) 41°28′56″ North, 81°40′11″ should be wikified using the {{coor dms|}} template. =Nichalp«Talk»=07:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The size cannot be cut further without compromising significant parts of the article. I asked this on the FAC talk page last week and got no response, so I'll say it again here: larger cities necessarily need to have a higher size limit than the Ann Arbors of the world. There's just too much stuff to cover; where Ann Arbor could go into minute specifics at 40 KB, Cleveland simply scratches the surface using that much space (to say nothing of the 68 KB New York City article). I've already cut it down as far as it can go while covering everything that needs to be in the article; if I cut any more, I'd be hearing objections that essential sections are missing. Bottom line: I cannot justify cutting out significant portions of the article to meet an arbitrary size figure, and I'm sure that EurekaLott would agree with me. That said, I've fixed that one sentence in the history section (you're right, it didn't look quite right there), I moved the see alsos to the ends of the sections, the lat/lon has been wikified, and I'll get around to the gif files. PacknCanes | say something!08:18, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
size cannot be cut – are you saying you can't or will not? The size of the city does not matter. Take a look at Mumbai, obviously much larger than Cleveland. Secondly, just because I was inactive the past week does not mean I can't object now. I haven't asked you to prune it down to a specific size, please note this, I've asked you to summarise certain sections which are bulky. Since I have objected to many article on the size issue in the past, I believe I can spot bulky sections. I have noticed text which dwells on specifics rather than on the city. Now look what I've asked you to summarise: a) named after native Ohioan and former Senator John Glenn. no need for extra info. b) #1 heart hospital in the United States for eleven years running. It is also ranked #2 in urology and #14 exact rankings of institutions not needed. c) ...research campus to employ 7,000 as well... I have spotted three sentences which brief the reader on specific institutions rather than the city itself. d) CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett. Byrd-Bennett has announced her resignation as the system's CEO ; streets of downtown on September 1–4, 2005. Do you want me to list more such sentences? =Nichalp«Talk»=15:11, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was saying I can't, but now that I have some direction on exactly what you're referring to, I can (and will) go through and edit those sections down. If I came across as antagonistic, I apologize; I didn't intend to do so, and the comment about what I put on the talk page wasn't a jab at you (I promise!). I was simply saying that I really didn't have any guidance to go on, so I just crossed my fingers and hoped for the best. Anyway, EurekaLott and I have both done a bunch of copyediting, so take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks -- PacknCanes | say something!18:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support a summary is still possible, but its more or less ok now. I think you can add something on Courts. Pentawing can help you out there. Thank you for taking care of my objections. =Nichalp«Talk»=05:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you'd want to see something on the courts, since it would go against what you said above. :) Seriously, the only thing that the Cleveland municipal court does, for the most part, is serve as a small claims court and traffic court. Most courts of any significance in Ohio, starting with the common pleas courts (essentially district courts), are county courts that don't have much to do necessarily with the city itself, although the physical location of the court is in the city. I'll be honest: I don't know enough about exactly what the municipal court does to put it into the article; maybe someone else can help. Thanks, though, for your support. Much appreciated -- PacknCanes | say something!06:30, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
While the courthouse is tall and relatively new, I can think of several more significant cityscape-related topics I'd mention first, if there was room in the article. Examples include the impact of urban renewal and the Erieview Plan, the work of Walker and Weeks, the Rockefeller Building, the "Cleveland double" style of house, etc. - EurekaLott14:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
