Talk:Rainham, London/GA2

GA Review (2nd nom)

I have unfortunately had to fail this article. From the look of the above, it has improved over the last nomination. Unfortunately, the article has referencing issues that I cannot overlook. The history section is almost entirely unreferenced. Please see WP:CITE and WP:ATT and WP:CITET for more information and help in fixing this problem. If these issues can be fixed, this article can and should be renominated, as it passes all other aspects of Good Article Criteria as listed at WP:WIAGA. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 04:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Some additional help in citing the history section. Since the history section is cited from a single source, here is how I would recommend you cite it. Using the citation template {{cite book}} found at WP:CITET cite each paragraph or fact you wish to cite to the appropriate pages of the book in question. Thus, your text would look something like this:

Rainham is the coolest place in the world. <ref>{{cite book | last = Smith | first = John | title = Rainham, a History | publisher = Jane Doe Publishers, LLC. | date = 2000 | location = London | pages = 12-13 | ISBN =123456789X}}</ref> It was founded in 123 AD by monks. <ref>{{cite book | last = Smith | first = John | title = Rainham, a History | publisher = Jane Doe Publishers, LLC. | date = 2000 | location = London | pages = 27 | ISBN =123456789X}}</ref> In 1997, it held a really large party attended by the Queen. <ref>{{cite book | last = Smith | first = John | title = Rainham, a History | publisher = Jane Doe Publishers, LLC. | date = 2000 | location = London | pages = 275 | ISBN =123456789X}}</ref>

See, you cite the book for each fact (once at the end of each paragraph is fine) that way we know that each paragraph is in fact referenced to an appropriate source. Since it is a book, you can make each reference unique by citing the page numbers. The problem with NOT referencing each paragraph is it is impossible to tell whether the information is in the prior source, the last source, or entirely unsourced. An alternate way to do it is to use the ref name= tag, which will group the references into the same footnote. That would work like this:

Rainham is the coolest place in the world. <ref name=rainham>{{cite book | last = Smith | first = John | title = Rainham, a History | publisher = Jane Doe Publishers, LLC. | date = 2000 | location = London | ISBN =123456789X}}</ref> It was founded in 123 AD by monks. <ref name=rainham/>In 1997, it held a really large party attended by the Queen. <ref name=rainham/>

What that will do is put multiple references to the same footnote. Notice that I left off the pages since we are now simply referencing the whole book in multiple places. A third option is to direct footnote the websites and harvard reference (in footnote style with ref tags) the book. Look at today's featured article Cricket World Cup which does this VERY well. Any of those 3 options would work very well. Once that is done, renominate it again, and someone (me even, if you let me know) will review it again. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 22:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]