Jump to content

Talk:Brooke Street Pier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 05:08, 12 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 1 WikiProject template. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Australia}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

References

[edit]

Just using this as a notepad..

-- Chuq (talk) 05:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

-- Chuq (talk) 22:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

-- Chuq (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

-- Chuq (talk) 02:56, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Brooke Street Pier/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Curly Turkey (talk · contribs) 21:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 21:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to revert any of my copyedits or to disagree with any of my comments.

Prose

[edit]
Thanks for this list User:Curly Turkey - I'm at work at the moment but will go through these issue tonight in detail (approx 12 hours from this edit). -- Chuq (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Remind me never to promise a specific time! Apologies - hopefully tomorrow night. -- Chuq (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Finally got to it! Notes made above. Will make the mentioned changes now. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]
  • The images all look appropriate and properly licenced.

Sources

[edit]
  • Ref#19: I wouldn't use the official website as a source, espcially when you're already using third-party sources.
  • There don't appear to be any plagiarism or close paraphrasing issues in the sources.

Overall

[edit]
  • Aside from the minor comments I have above, my only concern is that the article may date quickly—it's only just been finished and the text itself still talks about things that will happen in the near future ("will include services such as"). Is there some reason the article should be nominated now, rather than after things have settled into business as usual? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

The most recent edit to this page and substantive edit to the article were both on April 26, over five weeks ago. Is there any reason why this review can't be concluded now? Curly Turkey, what remains to be done by Chuq? BlueMoonset (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brooke Street Pier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]