Talk:Monett, Missouri/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 05:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments

 * Lead
 * The lead is quite short. The history section should be summarized by a paragraph or two.
 * The coordinates in the lead need to use coord
 * No citation given for the demonym, which isn't repeated in the body
 * First sentence uses "in" too many times
 * Being the 83rd most populous city in a state isn't really worth mentioning in the lead
 * Merge the population sentences
 * Use the un-abbreviated form of I-44 during its first mention


 * History
 * Several paragraphs are completely uncited
 * There is no caption for the church image
 * The WPA image isn't necessary, as it's hard to see at thumbnail size
 * "would build a branch going off" is rather wordy. And where did the branch terminate?
 * Link to postmaster (which is one word)
 * Break up the quadruple citation at the end of the first paragraph
 * "very much noted" by who and for what purpose? I don't think this is necessary.
 * Citation for the Fruit Growers building's listing on the NRHP. A year for the listing itself would also be nice.
 * Historic buildings should probably be split off into a different subsection, as they don't seem to be from the same eras.
 * Is there a more specific date for the start of the race riot?
 * No citation for the 2000 population
 * The 20th century section seems very thin compared to the previous one. It needs more content.
 * No citation for the first paragraph in the 21st century section, which also reads like an advertisement.
 * Two sentences beginning with "In 2018", one of which should be removed to avoid repetition.


 * Geography
 * The communities map should be converted to prose or removed entirely
 * The section is missing a lot of potential information. What is the town's geological setting like? Are there hills, lakes, rivers, or other prominent landmarks? Where do the city limits begin and end?
 * Is the climate data based on information supplied by an actual weather station? Weatherbase is not as reliable of a source as Weather.gov or another government provider.


 * Demographics
 * Paragraphs need in-line citations, even if they are just repeating the census links.
 * A description of the population's history, most predominant ethnicity, or other statistics is needed.


 * Economy
 * Citations?
 * Please describe the shopping center in a manner that doesn't elevate the Lowe's above any other retailers, or remove the sentence entirely.
 * Describe what the "rapid growth" is.
 * Link the company names and describe their industries.


 * Transportation
 * The inline highway shields are inappropriate. Spell out the full name of the highways before abbreviating them.
 * No citation for the highways section. Even the state map would be fine.
 * Describe more about the highways and the airport.
 * No citation for the trains section, which should be retitled to "Railroads"
 * The train image is missing a caption and is not particularly relevant


 * Education
 * Please describe the school district in a non-list format. Not every school needs to be mentioned by name, but data on pupils, funding, and a founding date would all be nice.
 * Same goes for the university and library. When were they built/founded?


 * Culture
 * None of the information here is cited, and it should be rewritten in a non-list format
 * Any information on parks, unique festivals, local holidays, and other traditions? This section seems rather thin.


 * Media
 * Please add prose descriptions instead of lists, along with citations


 * Notable people
 * Each entry in this section must be cited with a reliable source.
 * Entries without articles (e.g. Jack Henry) do not belong in the list.


 * Images
 * File:Downtown Monett.jpg is missing evidence of permission.


 * References
 * References 13 and 14 do not need long quotes, as they are publicly accessible. The title is also missing from the latter.
 * References 3, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 21 are missing publisher, date, and accessdate fields.
 * Reference 25, which I presume is pointing to another Wikipedia entry, must be replaced.
 * Citation dates in the references need to be harmonized per MOS:DATEFORMAT.

I will get to the other sections later, but so far I don't think this article is anywhere close to GA quality, so I'll be putting it on hold. I highly suggest finding more sources and also requesting a copyedit from GOCE or a local expert. I also suggest looking at other city and town articles that have already passed GA, especially those with a clear structure.  Sounder Bruce  05:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please address the full set of issues listed above.  Sounder Bruce  05:26, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * and I have done some minor changes to the article to help fix some of the issues, but I agree with SounderBruce that this article is nowhere close to GA quality. It is poorly written, contains lists, and has no substantial information in all of its section. A ton of work is needed. AmericanAir88(talk)  02:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you both for your feed back ::, and. I understand there are immediate issues and not to the exact quality of a good article, however, it was my intention to draw attention to the page and for users to point out it's flaws. That has been accomplished. This is only a small hobby of mine and I will continue to work on these areas in time, but wanted to have clear direction in fixing this article. User talk:Cvanlue25 08:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If you can't commit to fixing these issues in a timely manner, then this nomination will have to be closed. You can re-nominate the article once you are ready.  Sounder Bruce  00:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your honesty. I appreciate that. Do not be discouraged from this article, it has potential. As Bruce said, you can renominate this. Thank you. AmericanAir88(talk) 01:28, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of substantial progress after nearly a month, I'm closing this review. Feel free to re-nominate the article once you have addressed the issues laid out in the GA criteria.  Sounder Bruce  21:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)