Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London/archive4


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 05:06, 10 June 2008.

London

 * previous FAC withdrawn
 * previous FAC 2
 * previous FAC 1

Self Nomination Hi there, I've been working on this article for some time now, and also have had it gone through Peer Review, located here. I think it meets the FA criteria, and would be happy to make changes to it if you don't agree. The  Helpful   One  (Review) 21:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments


 * Capping comments. I made some minor fixes, also. Gary King ( talk ) 00:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Support: perfect article --Andrea 93 04:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * While I think all my concerns (except perhaps the disorder in the universities part of the education section) have been addressed, I think the referencing/sourcing problems mentioned by others are too bad to merit a support, so I must regretfully oppose. I might have a look at fixing the referencing myself at some point if nobody else does it, but I can only really do that properly when I'm back in the UK, which won't be for a couple of months. Adacore (talk) 06:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * Double check that all web site references (including pdfs) give a last access date and publisher - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 22:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Double check that all book references give page numbers and any other bibliographical details, including author, publisher, and ISBN when known. - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 21:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Double check that all website references give a title for the web link, not just a number - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 21:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Linck checker tool shows a few dead links. - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 21:30, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * When that's all double checked, I'll come back and check the sources for reliability. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Link checker tool still shows broken links. Budding Journalist 13:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed now, one link will work tommorow AFAIK, when the server comes back online. The   Helpful   One  (Review) 14:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Further comments about sources and references:


 * What makes the following reliable sources:
 * http://world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?men=home&lng=en&des=wg&srt=pnan&col=adhoq&msz=1500&geo=0
 * http://www.demographia.com/index.html
 * http://www.citymayors.com/index.html
 * http://east_west_dialogue.tripod.com/europe/id5.html
 * http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/index.html
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20070121122958/www.y-axis.com/
 * http://www.cilt.org.uk/infos/cilt_infos.htm
 * http://gatekeepkey.org/
 * http://www.etymonline.com/index.php
 * http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/guide/resources/history.html This is a tourist site, why would you use it for history?
 * http://www.londononline.co.uk/factfile/historical/ (it's also lacking a publisher)
 * http://www.gatewaysmoving.com/about_moving_to_london_england_uk.htm (it's a moving company?) Why would you use this for history? Also lacking a publisher
 * http://gouk.about.com/od/englandtravel/ss/SDWay_STay_2.htm About.com is not considered a reliable source
 * http://www.britannia.com/history/
 * http://www.emersonkent.com/index.htm
 * http://library.thinkquest.org/20176/armada.htm
 * http://www.elizabethi.org/us/
 * http://www.historic-uk.com/index.shtml (hint, it's a 'historic accomidations site)
 * http://www.luminarium.org/encyclopedia/index.html
 * http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa011201a.htm About.com again
 * http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/ITlondon.htm
 * http://www.yellins.com/transporthistory/index.html
 * http://missbanana.blogspot.com/2006/12/rise-of-modern-london.html (Lacking publisher too (current ref 51)
 * http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/homefront/index.html
 * http://www.ngw.nl/sitemap.htm
 * http://www.civitas.org.uk/
 * http://www.portowebbo.co.uk/nottinghilltv/revealed8.htm
 * http://londonarchitecture.co.uk/
 * http://www.ukwebstart.com/greaterlondon-codes.html
 * http://www.theworldinphotos.info/7-0-0-info-london.html
 * http://www.great-britain.co.uk/london.htm (tourist site?)
 * http://projectbritain.com/
 * http://www.hill-bagging.co.uk/LondonBoroughs.php (Why here and not say.. the Ordinance Maps?)
 * http://www.experiencefestival.com/a/London_-_Geography_and_climate/id/5558757
 * http://www.mech.uwa.edu.au/~kamy/Thames%20Barrier.htm
 * http://www.gardenweb.com/zones/europe/hze1.html
 * http://www.krysstal.com/londname.html
 * http://www.areasoflondon.com/
 * http://www.eef.org.uk/south/whatwedo/businessimprovement/features/regional/Where_next_for_London_manufacturing.htm
 * http://www.canarywharf.com/mainfrm1.asp (developer site)
 * http://www.viewlondon.co.uk/whatson/soho-london-feature-1710.html
 * http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/London:+architecture (subscriber only also) Also lacking publisher
 * http://www.GreatBuildings.com/gbc.html
 * http://www.skyscrapernews.com/
 * http://www.londontown.com/
 * http://www.primrosehill.com/
 * http://www.londonlogue.com/places-to-go/guide-to-englands-music-history.html
 * http://www.cbrd.co.uk/
 * http://www.londonhigher.ac.uk/about_ls.htm
 * http://travel.webshots.com/album/558147499WXOGaf?start=12
 * Current ref 11 is lacking a publisher and page number (Mills, A. "A Dictionary of London Place Names"
 * http://www.sacred-texts.com/neu/eng/gem/index.htm doesn't say a thing about London.
 * Current ref 34 http://www.parliament.uk/about/history/building.cfm is lacking a publisher - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 16:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 35 http://www.parliament.uk/parliament/guide/palace.htm is lacking a publisher - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 16:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 43 "Pepys S. The Diary of Samuel Pepys... is lacking a page number
 * Current ref 46 "the Reguilding of London after the great fire" is actually a google excerpt from a book Please format like a book. Also, using a google books search like this doesn't give you the full context of the work. It's always better to get the entire book and make sure you are correctly interpreting the authors viewpoint.
 * Current ref 53 http://www.london.diplo.de/Vertretung/london/en/02/An__Embassy__in__Belgrave__Square/Churches__in__London__Seite.html is lacking a publisher - Done
 * Current ref 57 is a journal article, not a website. http://joeg.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/2/4/433 You're citing the abstract?
 * What does OPSI stand for?
 * Current ref 79 is a reprint of a journal article, format it like a journal. - Done The   Helpful   One  (Review) 16:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 80 Collins English Dictionary is lacking a page number
 * Current ref 81 Oxford English Reference dictionary is lacking a page number
 * http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=M9qvtYYhRtAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR11&dq=thames+%22iron+age%22+london+wide+geography+shallow+marsh&ots=wVDtRsVF-V&sig=GFqR9QKs45u-ggfYI0dcCA3GUzc#PPA10,M1 Current ref 88. Once again, a google books excerpt. See above about using this.
 * Current ref 129 Sassen Saskia The Global City is lacking a page number
 * Current ref 131 "London's place in the UK economy is lacking a publisher - Done. -- The  Helpful   One  (Review) 17:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 132 is going to another wikipedia article. (See list of metroploitan areas in the European Union by GRP)
 * http://www.efinancialcareers.de/ CUrrent ref 137 is in German? And I'm not sure that there is information there
 * http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-13529 football dead linked
 * Current ref 215 http://www.londonblackcabs.co.uk/ is lacking a publisher - Done. -- The  Helpful   One  (Review) 17:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 217 BAA Heathrow Official website is lackign a publisher - Done. -- The  Helpful   One  (Review) 17:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 223 London City Airport Corporate Infomration is lacking a publisher - Done. The   Helpful   One  (Review) 17:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Current ref 237 "Why 4/10 is a great score for Britain's Universities" is lacking a publisher - Done. -- The  Helpful   One  (Review) 17:08, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out the HEAVY reliance of this article on online sources, to the exclusion of much more reliable printed works. There are a number of printed histories of London that should have been used in preference to some of the websites for the history section. There is no requirement that everything be available online. We want reliable sources, and often times that means they need to be printed. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose based on the sourcing. I don't think I've ever done this. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: please see the instructions at WP:FAC, remove the graphics, and refrain from breaking up or adding to someone else's post.  Thanks, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments Support looks like a great article from where I'm standing --Thanks, Hadseys 11:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The second paragraph in Districts is more economy based. Some of this should be moved into the economy section. 78.86.18.55 (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose I skimmed through some of the sources used, and what I found in my few minutes of looking is rather troubling.
 * http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Places/Place/324436 Reliable?
 * Done, http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/english/ bsrboy (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.historyonthenet.com/Chronology/timelineroman.htm Reliable?
 * Done, http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/guide/resources/history.html and http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/timeline/romanbritain_timeline_noflash.shtml bsrboy (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.britannia.com/history/saxontime3.html Reliable?
 * Done, http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/English/EventsExhibitions/Permanent/medieval/Themes/1033/1035/default.htm bsrboy (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.gatewaysmoving.com/about_moving_to_london_england_uk.htm Reliable? Surely, on such an important topic, we can find better sources than a moving company?
 * This reference is used 16 times, bsrboy (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/English/EventsExhibitions/Past/MissingLink/Themes/TML_themes_Lundenwic.htm
 * http://www.museumoflondon.org.uk/English/Collections/Onlineresources/RWWC/themes/1295/1288
 * http://www.krysstal.com/londname.html Reliable?
 * I'm having trouble locating this within the article. Could you point me in the right direction? bsrboy (talk) 17:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, the Districts section, first section, first sentence, directly after: "London's vast urban area is often described using a set of district names (e.g. Bloomsbury, Knightsbridge, Mayfair, Whitechapel, Fitzrovia)." The   Helpful   One  (Review) 17:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The reference gives a long list of places and their translations, so it doesn't really back up what the sentence says. Seeing as a reference is very difficult to find for this I propose we change it to "London's vast urban area has districts that are not technicaly districts in the England district system, but have special characteristics or are very well known." Something like that perhaps, although I question the need for this sentence in the first place. bsrboy (talk) 17:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.londona2z.co.uk/id-123/Story%20of%20London A mirror (exact copy) of the Wikipedia page! So, we're citing ourselves!?
 * Done, http://www.gardenweb.com/zones/europe/hze1.html. The  Helpful   One  (Review) 16:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How is a random unsourced map from a gardening website a reliable source? Budding Journalist 19:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "London is a major centre for international business and commerce and is one of three "command centres" for the world economy (along with New York City and Tokyo)." Lacks page number. Sassen's classification is up for scholarly debate. Many would argue there are more than three "command centres" for the world economy.
 * "According to the dictionary definition[78] of 'the seat of government', London is not the capital of England, as England does not have its own government, however according to the wider dictionary definition[79] of, 'the most important town...' and many other authorities[80][81] London is properly considered the capital of England.[82]" So many problems in this odd and confusing sentence. The dictionary definition? Comma splice. And I'm sure a junior high school's web page is a great authority on this subject. - Done, made clearer and changed the reference to http://www.great-britain.co.uk/london.htm The   Helpful   One  (Review) 18:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Uncited statistics in the Demography section. - Done Cited. The   Helpful   One  (Review) 18:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC) Budding Journalist 12:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Too many problems with this article. Below are a small sampling of them. Fixing these alone will not bring the article up to standard. This is a large, complex subject that will require lots of effort and time to clean up. Since FAC is not a peer review, I'd suggest withdrawing this article for now and working with a bunch of interested editors to bring this up to standard. Go through line-by-line, examining prose and sources.
 * In general, far too much reliance on dubious, unreliable sources (including online travel guides, moving companies [ this site is still used 14 times as a source!] junior high school websites, etc.). There are plenty of reliable academic sources that can be used for this article; why not use them?
 * Many of the references are improperly or inconsistently formatted.
 * "The earliest etymological explanation can be attributed to Geoffrey of Monmouth in Historia Regum Britanniae." Does not match given source. Given source is just a link to the given text, not a claim that this is the earliest explanation.
 * http://gatekeepkey.org/Llud_58bc.htm How is this reliable?
 * "Few modern sources support this theory." Source does not match this generic statement.
 * "Legend of London's Origin. Cultural Heritage Resources. Retrieved on May 6, 2008." Citation is missing author, publication details/date.
 * "Proto-Indo-European *p was regularly lost..." Unclear whether this is Coates' opinion or the article stating this as fact.
 * http://www.londonnet.co.uk/ln/guide/resources/history.html Reliable?
 * http://www.londononline.co.uk/factfile/historical/ Reliable? Citation format missing details. Also, the claims in the article ("The next, heavily-planned incarnation ... was largely abandoned.")do not match any information in this source.
 * "approximately 1,000 yards (1 km) upstream" Does not match source
 * http://gouk.about.com/od/englandtravel/ss/SDWay_STay_2.htm Reliable?
 * http://www.emersonkent.com/wars_and_battles_in_history/first_and_second_barons_war.htm Reliable?
 * http://library.thinkquest.org/20176/armada.htm Reliable?
 * http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/England-History/GreatPlague.htm Reliable?
 * "it became the world's largest city from about 1831 to 1925." Became...from...to? Budding Journalist 19:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Ealdgyth and BuddingJournalist; too many reliable sources issues at this stage (and the prose could do with more work too). giggy (O) 01:43, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

How long are FAC's allowed to be open for? I know there is this sourcing issue, but how long are we allowed to keep the FAC open for to fix the problems?? The  Helpful   One  (Review) 16:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.