Talk:Convict era of Western Australia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Convict era of Western Australia has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
January 3, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
Flag
Portal
 Convict era of Western Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] Delisted GA

This article did not go through the current GA nomination process. Looking at the article as is, it fails on criteria 2b of the GA quality standards. Although references are provided, the citation of sources is essential for verifiability. Most Good Articles use inline citations. I would recommend that this be fixed, to reexamine the article against the GA quality standards, and to submit the article through the nomination process. --RelHistBuff 10:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

What am I missing? 2b says: the citation of its sources is essential, and the use of inline citations is desirable, although not mandatory. (my emphasis) The article has properly formatted citations. Inline citations are not going to be appropriate for every article. -- I@n 10:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if I did not give enough details. The article has sources or references. In my opinion it is a great article and worthy of GA status. However, the citation of those sources is missing and it is considered essential (inline or not). The level of detail is variable, of course, but it is worth the effort to provide the details for purposes of verifiability and avoiding original research. For example, the sentence "Few historians chose to study the era, and some historians actively avoided it." This should be cited (who said that and why?), otherwise it looks like a POV. With the citations, the article should have no problems in passing. RelHistBuff 08:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Forgive me, but I'm still a bit confused. The example you gave is a statement of fact rather than a POV. Few historians chose to study the era which is evidenced by the lack of studies of it. How is it possible to reference that? The very next sentence gives an example of an important reference source which has that glaring ommision - is that not a reasonable validation of the claim? Perhaps you would be kind enough to tag the areas that you feel need inline citations with {{fact}} tags. -- I@n 08:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Renominated, I didn`t quite understand the GA process the first time, and listed instead of nominated, whoops.Ghostieguide 00:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GAC

I evaluated the article based on 7 criteria:

  1. Well-written: Neutral
  2. Factually accurate: Pass
  3. Broad: Pass
  4. Neutrally written: Pass
  5. Stable: Pass
  6. Well-referenced: Fail
  7. Images: Pass

There are a lot of red links, which, if they were for specific things, would be fine, but for convict ship? Only a neutral for that though, not enough to fail it. Referrences are though. As you said above, in-line cites arent' required. Almost every GA article there is uses them, but they're not required. You still have to cite things though. Just saying that such and such a book is a referrence isn't enough- what page is it on? What information did you use from that book? In-line cites not being required is an aesthetic issue, not a content issue- you still need all of that information, even if you choose to display it in a different way. If you're willing to cite the article correctly, even if you want to do it in a different manner than in-line, send me a message on my talk page- I'll re-evaluate the article immediately, rather than waiting for it to go through GAC again. (Especially since it took almost a month this last time.) --PresN 23:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou for your assesment and thoughtful feedback. It is most appreciated. -- I@n 01:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Useful information

check the documents on this site out including this one on convicts in WA http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/item.asp?sdID=11 Gnangarra 12:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA on hold

on hold for 7 days, lead does not summarize the article and need more refs and refs need consistent formatting.Sumoeagle179 15:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

3-day extension, lead still doesn't summarize article.Sumoeagle179 21:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • (copied from Ghostieguide talkpage) You're almost there. What a lead should do is summarize each major section of the artilce. Currently, the lead is way too skimpy. A rule of thumb is that at least one sentence, more if needed, on each section should be in the lead. Since you have 5 text sections, there should be at least 5 sentences in the lead and you only have 2. So far nice work, and thanks for improving wiki articles.Sumoeagle179 12:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC).... Ghostieguide 23:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA status

Passed. Good start. More refs and detail would further improve it. Suggest using cite fmt for refs.Sumoeagle179 11:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The wikiproject has this as A-class. No way.Sumoeagle179 11:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Status and proposal

I've started inlining the references that I used when I originally wrote the article. This will take a while, and in the meantime there will be some {{fact}} tags floating around.

In a few places where I have superior references to hand, I have temporarily replaced the inferior references by {{fact}} tags. Apologies for the temporary loss of refs.

I've also rewritten the first paragraph of the intro. The intro needs another paragraph that summarises what it was like to be a convict in Western Australia.

I propose to move this article to Convict era of Western Australia. Hesperian 11:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Support ... move to Convict era of Western Australia. A neutral description.

[edit] Lead para

  • "... many years until the colony ceased to have any convicts in its care(?) ..." could perhaps do with a bit of rewriting. Caution in articles POV, generally, regarding gov't & colonial bias in source documents, etc. A good art getting better. Fred 05:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catalpa Rescue

Deleted my contributions to this article as I discovered that the Catalpa Rescue already has it's own article, so I bunged it in as a "see also" instead. petedavo 10:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

As you wish. It does get a mention in the "End to transportation" section. Hesperian 10:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)