Jump to content

Talk:Hull Creek (Lackawanna River tributary)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHull Creek (Lackawanna River tributary) has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 1, 2017Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 13, 2015.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that even though Hull Creek is impaired by habitat alteration, its habitat assessment score is in the "optimal" range?"


GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Hull Creek (Lackawanna River)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Icebob99 (talk · contribs) 19:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. I'll start by checking it against the immediate failure criteria, and then move on to the GA criteria and cover them one by one. I am aware that this user is retired from Wikipedia, but that's no reason not to review. Icebob99 (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Going through the immediate failure criteria: No copyvios, no cleanup banners, no edit warring.

Going through the six GA criteria: Prose is a little short and choppy, but clear, concise, and good enough for GA, so (1a) is met. Meets criteria for lead (I hid a reference by using <!-- --> format, because it was listed in the main body of the article. Meets layout, with see also section at the end, followed by references and finally an external links section. The only slightly peacocky word in the article is "picturesque", but I will let that slide because it is put in quotes and presumably comes from the source. (I did a ctrl+F on the source to see if I could find it, but the format of the document doesn't let that shortcut find any word). No fiction or list incorporation to worry about, thus this meets (1b). (2a) is met with a reflist. All sources are reliable (mostly USGS info). Lots of statistics but they come from the surveys. No BLP material or controversial statements, so (2b) is met. Everything goes back to an inline citation, so no original research and thus it meets (2c). No copyvios as mentioned above, so the article meets (2d). Broad coverage is detailed and covers all aspects of the creek, 12kB readable prose, stays focused and only discusses technical material that is wholly relevant to the topic, so it meets (3a) and (3b). Neutrality is good, so it meets (4). Stability is good with only minor improvements and no edit warring, so it meets (5). No images so (6) does not concern this review, but I'll add an image later on (with appropriate licensing and caption), just to have one.

Suggestions that are optional for GA but may be useful later on:

This article meets all the good article criteria and thus passes as a good article.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hull Creek (Lackawanna River). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hull Creek (Lackawanna River). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hull_Creek_(Lackawanna_River_tributary)&oldid=1202836875"