Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Howrah Bridge/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Howrah Bridge

edit
Nominator(s): Cupidvogel (talk) 23:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Howrah Bridge. I think it is suitable for being a featured article because it contains a very detailed description of its history, proposal, construction, and traffic. Almost all the information are derived from credible sources (much from the official website), and the rather detailed description of the construction and structural details are derived from civil engineering text books with this bridge as case study. There are a good number of authentic images as well, and the writing style is overall decent. Cupidvogel (talk) 23:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There has obviously been a lot of work put into the article, but there are enough issues with it that you can't expect it to be promoted. For one, here are numerous uncited passages. For another, the list of films the bridge has been in is both uncited and way beyond excessive—honestly, you should probably delete the whole list. I'd recommend withdrawing the article for now and have some more eyes on it before bringing it back—such as at the Guild of Copyeditors and Peer Review. It's also a good idea to have it pass as a Good Article before bringing it back to FAC—it's not a requirement, but most FACs go through a GA review first. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Very much agree with Curly Turkey's points above. A few other notes:
  • Is there a reason why some of the costs in Indian Rupees are sometimes converted to British Pounds, but other times not, and that Rs. is used in some cases in stead of the symbol for INR (in the Plans for a new bridge section?)
  • Some capitalization issues are scattered throughout, such as how aluminium and zinc are capitalized in the middle of a sentence.
  • Some prose is likely to be confusing to readers: The bridge was considerably damaged by the great cyclone on 20 March 1874. What great cyclone? It hasn't been mentioned in text yet nor is there any wikilink to provide context about this weather event.
I, JethroBT drop me a line 09:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you point out some uncited passages? I went through the article right now, I couldn't find but one, which I promptly added.
  • Some costs are given in British pounds, because at the time of construction, the money was provided by the British empire, and they kept their records in British pounds. Post independence, this was no longer the case, hence it is not used in the article (however in some cases equivalent dollar value is given to give non-Indian users an estimate of the amount)
  • As for the errors regarding capitalization and rupees symbols, they are now corrected.
  • The movie list is given because most other articles about architectural topics carry a cultural significance section, which mention a list of books and cinemas where they have been show. Look at the articles for Brooklyn Bridge and Golden Gate Bridge. A citation doesn't make sense here, the movie's name itself is the citation, the viewer can watch the movie to see if it indeed shows up there.

- Cupidvogel (talk)

  • Uncited bits:
    • The bridge was not built.
    • empowering the Lieutenant-Governor to have the bridge constructed with Government capital under the aegis of the Port Commissioners.
    • As the bridge could not handle the rapidly increasing load, the Port Commissioners started planning in 1905 for a new improved bridge.
    • While muck was being cleared, numerous varieties of objects were brought up, including anchors, grappling irons, cannons, cannonballs, brass vessels, and coins dating back to the East India Company.
    • The work on the foundation was completed on November 1938.
    • The road is flanked by footpaths of width 15 feet, and they swarm with pedestrians.
    • The list of films.
  • Neither Brooklyn Bridge nor Golden Gate Bridge are FAs (nor even GAs), and neither of them has a long uncited list like the one in this article. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 14:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is not uncited, clearly the link no. ref 15 is there after the sentence "He reported on 29 March with large-scale drawings and estimates that"..
    • It is not uncited as well, see the ref no. 16 just after " in the year 1871 under the Bengal Act IX of 1871"..
    • Trying to track the citation.
    • It is cited as well, in the reference link no. 24 following the sentence "although it was subsequently rebuilt."...
    • Trying to find citation.
    • Provided the citation. The cited article has already been cited many times before, hence I think the original editor did not bother providing it again.

Alright, I will reduce the number of films, and cite the ones that remain. Cupidvogel (talk)

  • By "uncited", I mean there are no inline citations following those passages. How are we to know where that information came from so we can verify it? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:26, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Surely the article has a lot of potential, but is not up to the mark for FA yet. As the previous comments have highlighted, there are shortage of appropriate citations.
The second paragraph in the lead says, "The bridge is one of two on the Hooghly River and is a famous symbol of Kolkat aand West Bengal. The other bridges are the Vidyasagar Setu (popularly called the Second Hooghly Bridge), the Vivekananda Setu, and the newly built Nivedita Setu"; so, first it is mentioned that the bridge is one of two, but the very next sentence enumerates 3 more.
It would be beneficial if the article undergoes a good article nomination first, and if needed a peer review. Thanks,--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Howrah_Bridge/archive1&oldid=1141923350"