Talk:Vauxhall Ellesmere Port
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Assessment[edit]
Start -An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and may require further reliable sources. It provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.
More detailed criteria
- The article has a usable amount of good content- but is not comprehensive
- The article must provide further sources to establish verifiability.
- The article is strong in many areas. But
- May only address one aspect of the topic
- May ramble and include superfluous material
Way forward to a C
- Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised.
- Using a similar article as a model, the article should be given a unifying structure
- Using a similar article as a model, the will also need substantial improvements in structure, content and extra data
Too much of the wrong kind of history[edit]
I've no idea who came up with this assessment (it's helpful to sign your contributions, possibly with very little effort by entering four of these tilde things ("~") in a line), but with all due respect (and then some) it seems to me to miss the obvious point.
The history of the site before it came into Vauxhall's hands is interesting for those interested, but what the entry desperately lacks is more information on how Vauxhall themselves turned it into a car plant, and what happened AFTER that, under Vauxhall's ownership/control. Does anyone have access to more on that, and time to share some of it here. And please?
Regards Charles01 (talk) 09:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Format/structure of the page[edit]
I'm simply wondering whether the current structure of the page (history, present, future) is really condusive to the ongoing nature of the subject. The factory is still in operation and how the page is currently laid out means a lot of the information under 'Future' and 'Present' is now outdated due to the labelling. I would propose consolidating these headings under History and simply having sub-headings for the relevant years that need to be emphasized. Best, TungstenLupus (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2021 (UTC)