Talk:Finn River (County Fermanagh and County Monaghan)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Xx78900 (talk · contribs) 15:24, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'll review this article for you.Xx78900 (talk) 15:24, 26 September 2021 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   lede: "the northern province" -> "the northernmost province" note: I stopped checking this after noting the grievous issues with citation, not because the rest is necessarily fine.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   layout: Images should be on the side of the page per MOS:LAYIM course:Don't use "meanders".MOS:WTW

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   I am not at all convinced that this article even remotely approaches satisfying this criterion. Sources 3,4,6,7,9,10,11,12,17,18,,23,26,29,32,33,38,43,57,60, and 69 are just maps. Source 13 does not verify its preceding sentence's claim. Sources 16 + 24 verify the existence of 2 houses, but not their places near the river. Source 19 verifies the existence of the river and two bridges that it isn't supporting. Source 20, also just a map, has deprecated without being archived. Source 21 mentions the existence of the castle its supporting on an OS map, but nothing else. Also, here the OS map is not also given as a source. Source 29 does not mention an island. For what it's worth, Tracking the course of a river using a map as a source is valid imo, but I think this is a serious overreliance and over repetition.

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

   "Other nearby bridges"section, whilst interesting, is completely irrelevant to this river. "Ulster Canal" section seems like it could be relevant, but definitely needs to explain why. Drummully Church, Graveyard and Monastic Site section should definitely be its own article. A mention would be fine, if that mention stipulated that monks settled by the river for a source of water, for example.

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This article needs to lose a substantial amount of bloat before re-nomination, and is way too over-reliant on maps. A lot of the sources are either extraneous or don't support the material. The boxes marked with question marks are because I saw that the other issues were too large to justify putting this article on hold for a week, and I've instead decided to fail it outright, and as a result I didn't finish examining those areas. I'd recommend starting an article on Drumully Church instead of just deleting the info, as what you've written is quite good.Xx78900 (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)