Talk:HalloWeekends/GA1
Add topicLatest comment: 13 years ago by Wizardman in topic GA Review
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 03:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman 03:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Here are the issues I found:
- "HalloWeekends debuted in 1997 and was only open for three weekends. The event is held on Friday nights, Saturdays and Sundays during seven weekends in September and October. " Hard to explain, but this is an abrupt jump from past to present tense and it feels quite jarring. Is there a way to make the two sentences flow better?
- How does that look?-- Astros4477 (Talk) 04:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- "The Monster Midway Invasion Celebration Parade parade," The second parade probably isnt needed.
- Fixed.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 04:36, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- I can't count Ref #14 (blogspot) as a reliable source; can a better one be found?
- In the 81 photo of this ref, it shows info about the 2000 addition. I'm afraid I haven't been able to find anything else for the others. If I do a Google News Archive search, the short summary preview will say stuff about the attraction opening that year but you have to pay for the full article. That can't be used, can it?-- Astros4477 (Talk) 05:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- From what I can see, a source which requires payment or subscription can still be used; however, URLs should probably not be included. You just need to include as much of the publisher information as possible so someone could track down the source themselves (see WP:PAYWALL/WP:SOURCELINKS). Themeparkgc Talk 06:10, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- In the 81 photo of this ref, it shows info about the 2000 addition. I'm afraid I haven't been able to find anything else for the others. If I do a Google News Archive search, the short summary preview will say stuff about the attraction opening that year but you have to pay for the full article. That can't be used, can it?-- Astros4477 (Talk) 05:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Article's on hold, will pass when issues are fixed. Wizardman 03:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Wording looks better. As for the ref, it can still be used, as long as the pertinent information is available (i.e. title, date, page if possible), just don't worry about the url. Wizardman 06:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- I have added a couple refs.-- Astros4477 (Talk) 16:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- That works, article now passes. Wizardman 21:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)