Wikipedia:Peer review/Elcor, Minnesota/archive1

Elcor, Minnesota edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because…I have edited this article as much as possible. It is well-sourced, but occasionally I've added an additional source if it provides relevance to the article (which can be tough if you're writing about a ghost town). I know there is some "fluff" which could be re-worded or perhaps eliminated, but I think its beyond a "C" article at this point.

Thanks, DrGregMN (talk) 17:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This review has been closed as suitable for a direct nomination. Your request has been reviewed and is considered suitable for direct nomination. No issues have been identified that couldn't be ironed out during the nomination process. Good luck!

Further comments

A fascinating, well-written and engaging article. I suggest you try state for good article status and even featured article status in the future. Really interesting. Great use of images, very easy to read. One suggestion is that there are sometimes a few too many sources. I would suggest trimming citations down to (at most) 1-2 per sentence, rather than the mammoth 3-5 as currently. Other than that, I suggest give it a shot. Sorry for your long wait, DrGregMN --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the author strays just a bit from Wiki's encyclopedic tone but it certainly gives the article some zest and makes it more interesting to read; e.g., the stubborn smokestack. Overkill on the citations agreed.--Eagledj (talk) 02:22, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Tom (LT) and Eagledj. I did directly nominate the article as a GA candidate; it never even crossed my mind to seek FA status. Thanks for planting the seed. That being said, I have made changes to the article. I am somewhat reticent to remove sources; in my experience, it is always nice to have corroborating evidence from many different sources. I have not seen anything specific to Wikipedia as to how many sources can be cited, but if sources need to be removed, I am open to suggestion. What I have done is examined other FAs (including the four current FAs about ghost towns). I have added a sources section to the article, in addition to a book for further reading (which does not specifically talk about Elcor, but does talk about why some Iron Range towns became prosperous cities while others became ghost towns). I also added external links to the Iron Range Historical Society, since manuscripts of the interviews, other sources and photographs for this article are archived there, as well as to the song "This Town (Ghost Town)" by Rich Mattson and the Northstars since a passing mention of Sparta is made in this article. There is also a website maintained by a Dan Turner of Zenith City Online with an article about Elcor that contains a lot of misinformation. I have emailed him twice suggesting that he re-examine the sources for his information and have never received a response, so I'm combatting that by adding some additional sources to refute his information (the erroneous spelling of "Elcore" and his contention that the mines were owned by the Oliver Mining Company). Please feel free to have a second look. DrGregMN (talk) 00:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps time to close? Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Eddie891! I do not know what it takes to close the article for peer review since I was the person requesting it. Per the comments from peer review, I nominated the article for GA review. It's status is on hold pending acceptance of my edit for the rationale of one of the Wikimedia uploads. DrGregMN (talk) 17:02, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]