Talk:Mallee Cliffs National Park/GA1

GA Review

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

This is a decent article, but it needs a little bit more work before being passed:

It needs a general copyedit - there's a few grammatical errors around the place
The "Geography" section isn't great
It could do with something on the history; a sentence in the lead and a sentence under "flora" looks a little bit odd
It's a little bit brief - is there anything more that could be said about the park's flora and fauna? Rebecca (talk) 05:14, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As it stands this article does not have a real lead (see WP:LEAD). It should summarise the article and there should not be things in the lead that are not mentioned in the rest of the article.--Grahame (talk) 01:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the article needs a history as well as geography section (see also Grahamec's comment); the geography section lacks location and area information. The reader does not know what the "Foundation for National Parks & Wildlife" is - it sounds like a private conservation fund, but is in fact a partnership organisation, and the land is under public management. The geography section also needs more on landforms etc. I think the GAN should be failed at this point, but that is up to Rebecca. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think is time to close this nomination, it is on hold since more than two months, which is far more than "a week or so" indicated in the GA review guidelines. --Elekhh (talk) 01:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with hamiltonstone et al, and see further issues, such as the lack of accessdates on references. As a result I'm failing this article; it can be renominated when everything's fixed. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:34, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]