Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Plymouth/archive1

Plymouth
This city article has developed very well and fulfils the criteria of a featured article. Although not my personal article it is one I have contributed to and advanced along with others. It has been on peer review for two weeks and has some good positive feedback. Any further suggestions for modification and expansion will be welcome. Plymouthguy 00:13, 4 March 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Shouldn't this be Plymouth, England? Even Chicago is Chicago, Illinois, and Plymouth has such a large and varied disambiguation page. 119 00:29, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * No. US places use, for reasons i have not looked into, special convention of X, Y even if there is no other place called X in the world.  Meanwhile, the rest of the wikipedia uses normal disambiguation only when collisions happen.  I remember checking and discovering that 99% of the links to Plymouth were about the English city - this is usually sufficient to allow it to trump the disambiguation page.
 * Weak Object The article is very good already, but 1) Cite your sources and 2) I would like to see a short description of why the people listed were included in this list (I only recognized a couple of the names).  One quick comment about the page title, my first thought when I read the name was the automobile manufacturer, followed by Plymouth colony, but that's just me being a crazy 'Merkan. slambo 02:29, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * With the prominent people list moved to another article, that objection is now moot for this article (but it would still be nice on the breakout article). In looking again, my only objection now is that the Education, Sport and Media sections have a lot of one-sentence paragraphs. Can these be expanded?  slambo 14:35, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * Object there is mention of transport in the lead section, but no section for it in the article. as a major port, this deserves a long section.  there is also no section for politics or demographics. Morwen - Talk 07:51, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Section on Transport added.
 * Object 1) References are a basic requirement for a featured article. Please, don't nominate articles without them. 2) Two sections consisting only of lists near the end. It would be better to split them off to separate articles. 3) Several sections appear to be prose, but are only lists, such as "Schools" and "Sport". Several other sections have very little content. Jeronimo 14:30, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * References added and lists of places and people moved to separate pages.
 * Responses: 1) I'd suggest (not obligatory) to format the references according to the style outlined at: Cite sources, especially the links. 2) Yes, this OK. I would not keep them as sections though, but only as "See also". If you really want sections, they need some content; you can wite a little prose on a few very famous persons/places in that case. 3) No changes. Jeronimo 18:18, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Created a See also section. I'm afraid I'm not entirely sure what it is I need to do to modify the references to the required standard, could anyone please advise?
 * Exact (suggested) formatting rules are explained at the above link. In particular, adding ISBNs where available, and adding a date of retrieval for web references is common practice. But, as I said, this is suggested, not obligatory. Jeronimo 07:56, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Would be nice to have government, geography, and maybe demographics (altho' it might be a little pointless if all that can be said is 'over 98% are WASP Anglicans') and/or climate sections. WikiProject_Cities is pretty US-centric, but the template at the bottom has some pretty generic suggested headings. For other ideas of topics that could be covered, see this table that lists topics covered in the current city FAs. Niteowlneils 03:05, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 98% WASP Anglicans is a very fair description of Plymouth's population. A section on Government would be equally pointless as it would only repeat what is in the politics section of the pink table.
 * Huh? "Leader & cabinet" is meaningless to me (probably because I'm not in the UK). How many people on the cabinet? How often (if ever) elected? At-large, or by district? What other city offices are elected? The pink table doesn't begin to cover the topic. And for geography, what latitude/longitude? Daylight saving time varience? Elevation variance? I'll give a bye on the demographics, but I still think some of the other topics are under-covered. What about crime/courts/jails? Neighborhoods and climate? City in literature? Libraries? Anyone nominating/supporting an FAC has two choices: address comments/objections, or argue against them. In my experience, choosing the latter is not effective. Niteowlneils 19:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. At least some of the people should probably me mentioned in the article. Also position of the Island photograph seems out of place (day-shot under section headed "nightlife"). 2020 section needs work.