Talk:St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 12:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 12:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank-you, can't wait! Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Well it will probably pass GA, but its quite a comprehensive/long article so it could take a couple of days to review; and I might make you do a bit of work before I pass it. But it is good to see your enthusiasm. Pyrotec (talk) 19:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Initial comments
At this stage I'm going to work my way through the article section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last, and highlight any problems. The article appears to be at or about GA-level, so I anticipate that any problems that I find with be minor (I may fix some trivial problems without bothering to list them and wait for some else to fix them). So if it don't find any problems in a particular section/subsection, I may not say much about it here.

It helps me if questions/objections/comments, etc, in respect of a particular "problem" are made immediately below the listing of the problem; but generally comments can be blocked together on the page, if you wish. Pyrotec (talk) 13:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * History -
 * Ref 4 appears to be a book, it has an ISBN, so the relevant page number or numbers should be quoted.
 * Ref 17 appears to be a book, it has an ISBN, so the relevant page number or numbers should be quoted.


 * Geography -
 * Climate -
 * "contrey" appears to be a typo, should it be "country"? - .... "The city is also one of the areas of the country most prone to tropical cyclone activity, as it is bordered by the Atlantic Ocean to the east, where tropical storms (and sometimes hurricanes) travel to this contrey.".


 * Cityscape -
 * Architecture -
 * ✅ Pyrotec (talk) 16:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC) - Ref 29 appears to be a book, it has an ISBN, so the relevant page number or numbers should be quoted.


 * Demographics -
 * The prose looks to generally OK, but the article has two tables. The first one, "Ethnic origins", gives percentages the add up to about 136%. The source quoted gives the reason for this, but the table does not - I think it aught to.
 * I'm not sure where to add that information, though I also think it's needed.Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 11:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't I much experience of creating tables. Adding this after the line for "Germany" works, but not too well: |- style="text-align:center;" ! colspan= "3" | Note: Percentages add up to more than 100%. Respondents reporting multiple ethnic origins are counted more than once.  The breaks   are need to stop the table being streched. Pyrotec (talk) 12:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I do have one comment on: "Many of the earliest settlers of St. John's came from the southwest of England, especially the West Country and Devon in particular, and southeast Ireland, primarily Waterford, Wexford and Kilkenny. These origins can still be detected in similarities between the original dialects of each of these regions and the traditional St. John's accent.". I think I understand what it is trying to say, but West Country (England) and southeast Ireland have different dialects, so I'm beginning to think that it might be the differences rather than similarities. There is no citation for this, so if it is likely to be contentious, then a citation(s) is/are needed.


 * Economy -
 * Timescale seems to be entirely missing from this section, so there seems to be a series of problems in respect of WP:Vagueness.
 * I'm just about willing to accept "The St. John's economy has been continuously connected both to its role as the provincial capital of Newfoundland and Labrador and to the ocean", but all the way back to say 1620? (Perhaps!).
 * "civil service ...... has been the key to the expansion of the city's labour force and to the stability of its economy, which supports a sizable retail, service and business sector". This does have a citation, but the figures only cover 2006 to 2010, so less there is more data to support it a caveat is needed: Since 2005, the civil service ........
 * "With the collapse of the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador ...". No time frame given, but the ref states 1992 for Cod fishing so that aught to be given.
 * "The economy is growing quickly,....". The referenced report is dated July 2010, so I suggest "As of 2010, the economy is growing quickly,...." or some similar device to add a time frame.
 * I seem to remember that Albright and Wilson, who I think had a office at St John's Newfoundland, built a phosphorus plant at Long Harbour/Harbor in the early 1970s and neglected to put in adequate effluent treatment plant and caused damage to the fishing industry (which cost them a lot of compensation), but that's not in this article.
 * Never heard about it. Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 11:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Possibly better known in Canada as ERCO - see "ERCO" - heritage.nf.ca. It's on a web site already used in this article. Pyrotec (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't really see what this would have too do with the economy of St. John's though. The company may have been based here but Long Harbour is far away from the city. Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 16:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well perhaps as it happened some 50 years ago and you had not heard of it, it is "unimportant". Sources I have suggest 80 kilometre separation between Long Harbour and St. John's, so I'm not suggesting that they are close by. The article originally stated: "The St. John's economy has been continuously connected both to its role as the provincial capital of Newfoundland and Labrador and to the ocean. .... With the collapse of the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador the role of the ocean is now tied to what lies beneath it ...". Fishing was stopped in Placentia Bay for some six weeks in 1969 and the government had to compensate the fisherman, although ERCO later paid compensation. When the site closed jobs were lost as well as revenue. I've never been to St. John's so if you state that it was unaffected I will have accept that. Pyrotec (talk) 09:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess I'll try and figure out how to write something up on it then. Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't really see what this would have too do with the economy of St. John's though. The company may have been based here but Long Harbour is far away from the city. Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 16:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well perhaps as it happened some 50 years ago and you had not heard of it, it is "unimportant". Sources I have suggest 80 kilometre separation between Long Harbour and St. John's, so I'm not suggesting that they are close by. The article originally stated: "The St. John's economy has been continuously connected both to its role as the provincial capital of Newfoundland and Labrador and to the ocean. .... With the collapse of the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador the role of the ocean is now tied to what lies beneath it ...". Fishing was stopped in Placentia Bay for some six weeks in 1969 and the government had to compensate the fisherman, although ERCO later paid compensation. When the site closed jobs were lost as well as revenue. I've never been to St. John's so if you state that it was unaffected I will have accept that. Pyrotec (talk) 09:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess I'll try and figure out how to write something up on it then. Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Arts and culture -
 * Stopping for now. To be continued...... Pyrotec (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The first two paragraphs are unreferenced. I'm not too worried about the first one, but the second contains the (contentious) claim "The street is believed to have the most pubs and bars per square foot of any street in North America", so a citation is needed.


 * WP:Lead -
 * This is intended to both introduce the article and summarise the main points. It does both, but it looks somewhat "thin" of an article of this length. Its probably just about acceptable, but ideally it could do with beefing up, by including just a bit more detail.
 * Any tips on what detail I could add? Newfoundlander&amp;Labradorian (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that it needs to be about twice as long (and it also has to provide a summary of the main points). So my suggestions for possibly additions are: possibly oldest city in North America and may date back to early 17th century; the source of the name is contested it may come from John Cabot, Portugal or Spain (Basque Country); city was fortified the 18th & 19th centuries and was variously captured by the Dutch, the French and the British and was used as a base in the Second World War. Marconi radio and transatlantic flights. If culture, sports, museums are important mention them (I don't know whether are are or not from a Newfoundland and Labrador viewpoint). Pyrotec (talk) 10:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that it needs to be about twice as long (and it also has to provide a summary of the main points). So my suggestions for possibly additions are: possibly oldest city in North America and may date back to early 17th century; the source of the name is contested it may come from John Cabot, Portugal or Spain (Basque Country); city was fortified the 18th & 19th centuries and was variously captured by the Dutch, the French and the British and was used as a base in the Second World War. Marconi radio and transatlantic flights. If culture, sports, museums are important mention them (I don't know whether are are or not from a Newfoundland and Labrador viewpoint). Pyrotec (talk) 10:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

At this point I'm putting the review On Hold for these points to be addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 09:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Closing the review

 * Reminder left at User talk:Newfoundlander&Labradorian on 16:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC). User still active, but no further work in article. Pyrotec (talk) 16:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm now closing this WP:GAN review. I wish the article well. The article is very close to being a GA. I would hope that someone is prepared to bring the article up to standard and renominate at WP:GAN at a future date. Pyrotec (talk) 16:35, 5 April 2011 (UTC)