Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Moncton/archive2


 * 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 01:51, 19 May 2008.

Moncton
previous FAC (23:46, 23 February 2008)

Self-nominator - This article was a FAC in February, it failed to get enough support, however I felt all the issues brought up were resolved. I have since added more info, better sources, and footnotes aswell. I have changed the images around (notibly the head image was improved vastly). I have also done some general cleanup and grammar and spelling improvements. I feel that the article is now featured article material. Thanks in advance! :) Stu pendousmat (talk) 00:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments


 * Support &mdash; Well sourced, images re-arranged, pronunciation added, and prose has been improved. Good work! --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Was going to leave it at comments, but have to make it an Oppose without even a really detailed read:
 * The "architecture" section is nothing but "tallest buildings in Moncton". What are its landmarks? What about its urban planning? What architectural styles are typical of older buildings or tied to historical events? What are the city's main neighborhoods? etc. etc.
 * Moncton doesnt have any named neighbourhoods besides a few local names, like "west end" just because its on the west side of town...and Ive searched to see if there is a list anywhere and there is not. As far as landmarks there arent really any "landmark" buildings that I know of...besides two really old buildings, that are only "landmarks" because they are super old...besides that there isnt really any famous or signifigant buildings, thats why the section is mainly about the most prominent buildings in the cities skyline, its far from a list of tallest buildings, if you want to see what that looks like go here: List of tallest buildings in Moncton. The issue here is that Moncton is a fairly modern city, it only becan to develop a lot during the mid to late 20th century...so the few old buildings in the city arent really that amazing.
 * In that case, I'd drop the entire section (a list of tallest building does not an "architecture" section make), move "list of tallest buildings" to "see also", if you really want to keep a link, and integrate "city park" into the preceding geography section. Circeus (talk) 02:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There is serious red link fear here. Red links are not bad, they are essential to a wiki to indicate articles that ought to exist. I added one link for the city of Coverdale, New Brunswick that was a ridiculous omission amongst a number of existing articles, and other examples are easy to find, verging on undue weight: all Anglophones high school are linked, but the Francophone ones were conspicuously delinked, implying that articles are not even worth writing, see also under "Media".
 * I doubt there is any "fear" of redlinks, merely a lack of enthusiasm for adding them. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 05:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I call it "fear" because such an absolute absence of them in an article that long can only mean that they have systematically removed at some point. 06:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Red links are ugly, but I guess I could just make some stubs and link them. Stu pendousmat (talk) 17:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I added in several more wikilinks, including the Francophone high schools. Stu pendousmat (talk) 01:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Several short paragraph or sections ("health facilities", "transportation"), and prose could be improved in quite a few places.
 * Health facilities is large enough to describe the two hospitals in Moncton I feel, prose was just improoved, should I take the article to the copyedit place so they can do more? Cause Im no good at copyediting really.
 * One-paragrapoh sections: "tidal bore" (is that worthy of an entire section? I think a briefs mention when describing theriver is enough, keep the lengthy stuff for the river article), "Nearby natural features" (wouldn't that do better a tourism section?), "railways" and "highways". One-sentence paragraphs in "architecture", "urban parks", "economy" and "Health facilities". Over halfhave 2-sentence paragraphs thatcould be easily combinedtogether or to other paragraphs. Circeus (talk) 02:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * General doublecheck to avoid other goofs like this one might be a good idea.
 * The gallery is really not necessary. The images are not that good or showing important features, and if they were, they could replace other, less good images in the article.
 * To be honest, I added the image gallery after removing less-than-relevant images from the main article. Therefore, I agree that they are unnecessary. But a simple link to a Commons gallery will fix this problem. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 05:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed the gallery, there is already a link to a commons page (which I made a long time ago)...so thats fine. Stu pendousmat (talk) 01:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One more thing: The intro feels unbalanced. It's possibly just me,but it seems to concentrate a bit too much on the city's economic recovery. I'll freely admit I'm not very good at intro-writing myself, but I'd think it could be improved a bit.
 * Circeus (talk) 05:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Moni3

I don't know if this is the same Moncton mentioned in "Ramblin' Man" by Lemon Jelly, but I like that song, so I read the article.
 * Not sure about that haha, never really heard the song. Thanks for the review though, Ill work on it! Stu pendousmat (talk) 20:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it would help readers to split the History section into parts with subheadings.
 * We used to have it like that but when it was put through GA we reached a concensus that it was too bulky looking...see New York City (FA) for reference.
 * Am I correct that Acadians from this region ended up in Louisiana, making them Cajuns? Do you think it's worth it to mention that, even briefly?
 * I dont think this is something very notable to the article, I believe that would be covered in the "history of the acadians" article of the article covering the deportation, which is wikilinked...at any rate I would never find a source stating that information. Stu pendousmat (talk) 20:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not nuts about the list format in the Architecture section, and I think you could connect the paragraphs in Urban parks.
 * Done, fixed that stuff Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In Demography, is it proper to have a semicolon then "additionally"? I think that's redundant.
 * Done, removed that Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph in Economy needs a copy edit. I think "employing" reads better as "employ" and one of your sentences begins with 1.4 million.
 * I fixed that section. Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you could connect a lot of these small paragraphs in Economy with some work on segues between them. Actually, anywhere there are small paragraphs, please consider connecting them with larger ones. The article reads much more smoothly that way.
 * I fixed those small paragraphs. Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In Arts & Culture, I'd like to see if there are specialties with the theaters and museums. Because - clearly something unique should be shown at a theater named Live Bait Theatre (sounds like the back of a bait shop), and I would like to know if the museums and galleries focus on any particular style of art or exhibition.
 * Is it only my perception that the importance and size of Canadian cities should be explained in the number of Tim Horton's within them? Ok, maybe just me...
 * Funny that you mention that, little known fact about Moncton, the city actually has 33 Tims locations...the most Tim Hortons per capita of any city! haha...we love our coffee. Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * What's U de M in the Sports section?
 * Thats the Université de Moncton...I fixed that. Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm also not crazy about the list in Entertainment and shopping.
 * Is sq ft a measurement commonly used in Canada? Is there a reason why most of the article features metric measurements, then sq ft is used in the Entertainment section?
 * sq/ft is still the common usage in Canada for floor space, for malls and office buildings etc. Stu pendousmat (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Generally, I think the prose is bare and too basic now for a featured article. I'm not sure how to explain this, but basic prose reminds me of getting up in the morning sore and stove up, while after you've got all the kinks and pops out and have stretched out a bit, it flows better. Keep stretching it. Connect your paragraphs better, and include topic sentences at the beginning of sections that the information within the section will support. Short paragraphs make the reader jump from one subject to the next. Having them too often makes the article read as if it's ADD. This may be difficult to do in a mid-size city, but try to hammer away at this.
 * Please contact my talk page if you have questions. Good luck. --Moni3 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.