Talk:Palace of Westminster/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Palace of Westminster/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'm sorry to inform the editors of this article that I am quickfailing it due to lack of in-line citations. Here are some things to fix before renomination: Good luck with improving the article. Nikki 311  04:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There are entire sections and paragraphs without in-line citations. Please provide them to increase verifiability.
 * All the pictures are located on the right-hand side of the article. Can't some of them be moved to the left, so it looks more balanced?
 * There are several one or two sentence paragraphs. Merge these with the surrounding paragraphs or expand them.
 * The citations in the references need to be formatted with Template:cite web.
 * Format all numbers + words with &amp;nbsp;. Ex: 70 meters


 * Are you sure you do not accept, urm... gifts? Perhaps we could discuss it and reach a profitable agreement... :-D
 * Anyway, I shall not comment on the citations, as they are far outside my field. On the other points:
 * I have staggered the images, making sure not to sandwich any text between a pair of them and not to put any left-aligned images right below headings. I have also removed the last image, which didn't really fit, either visually or contextually—it also depicted a dusk scene, as does the first image, rendering it partly redundant.
 * I realise that paragraphs which are too small are undesirable, but they seem to be unavoidable in some contexts and in most cases there is little information to help us expand them. For instance, look at the "Towers" section (one paragraph for each tower), and the "Other traditions" section, where the various items do not match well with one another. Could you please elaborate on this matter, and perhaps give us some advice?
 * The guideline on hard spaces appeared to instruct editors to insert them between every number-and-word compound; that was excessive and did not reflect the actual consensus creating the guideline, nor common sense, publishing practices, and the examples given in that same guideline. For this reason, I made a clarification on 21 May, yet to be contested, that hard spaces should be used for measurements (e.g. 4.8 kilometres), but not other compounds (e.g. 1,200 rooms or six allegorical frescoes). Any day now the style monthly updates will be published; the change will be registered there. (By the way, "nowiki" tags do not work with HTML; you should use &amp;amp;nbsp; for showing the code. I have taken the liberty to correct this in your review.)
 * In any event, thank you for your trouble. We shall do whatever we can to rectify the problems, and return for a re-nomination. I suppose you shall be conducting that review as well? (I want to be sure I'll get my money's worth. ;-D) Waltham, The Duke of 22:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)