Wikipedia:Peer review/Lethbridge/archive2

Lethbridge

I was reading through the Wikipedia:Featured article criteria page and noticed Lethbridge may meet most if not all of the criteria. Granted I've done a lot of work on the article, so my view may be subjective. I would be interested in others' comments. Currently, the article has GA status. --Kmsiever 20:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated Peer Review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 130 miles, use 130 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 130 miles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km², and pounds -> lb.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: neighbour (B) (American: neighbor), metre (B) (American: meter), organise (B) (American: organize), recognize (A) (British: recognise), ization (A) (British: isation).
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Davnel03 14:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Response

• I believe the lead section adequately describes the article, and follows the guidelines outlined in WP:LEAD. I am open to further suggestions if anything is missing though.

• According to the "Autoformatting and linking" section of WP:DATE, it states that full dates should be linked in order to format them for date preferences of registered users. I could not find any days of the week or any months (outside of full dates) int eh article that were linked. If you find find some, let me know.

• Done.

• The image captions appear to be concise. Are there specific ones that should be modified?

• Edited conversions so a non-breaking spaces separates number and unit. Also made sure unit in main text was spelled out. Hopefully didn't miss anything.

• See above.

• Edited dates in "Weather averages" table to match formatting for date preferences of registered users. I double checked for other unformatted full dates.

• It is difficult to make the spelling of a Canadian article consistent with either American or British spelling. Canadian English uses British spellings for some words (like colour, metre, etc), but uses American spellings for others (like tire, curb, etc). Some words are acceptable in either spelling (realise, realize, etc). If there are some blatant inconsistencies, please let me know, and I'll be happy to address them.

• Fixed any instances I could find of the footnote being inside a punctuation mark.

• I have done some copyediting myself, but I will see what else I can do to have others look at it.

I would be interested in other suggestions. --Kmsiever 21:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)