Talk:Alberta and Great Waterways Railway scandal: Difference between revisions
MajavahBot (talk | contribs) m Bot: Fill missing DYK blurb |
Merge old peer review into article history |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{oldpeerreview|archive=2}} |
|||
{{ArticleHistory |
{{ArticleHistory |
||
|action1=GAN |
|action1=GAN |
||
Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
|action1result=listed |
|action1result=listed |
||
|action1oldid=257842563 |
|action1oldid=257842563 |
||
|action2=PR |
|action2=PR |
||
|action2date=01:35, 14 January 2009 |
|action2date=01:35, 14 January 2009 |
||
Line 12: | Line 10: | ||
|action2result=reviewed |
|action2result=reviewed |
||
|action2oldid=263132234 |
|action2oldid=263132234 |
||
⚫ | |||
|dykentry=... that the '''[[Alberta and Great Waterways Railway Scandal]]''' forced the resignation of [[Alberta]]'s first Premier, [[Alexander Cameron Rutherford]]? |
|dykentry=... that the '''[[Alberta and Great Waterways Railway Scandal]]''' forced the resignation of [[Alberta]]'s first Premier, [[Alexander Cameron Rutherford]]? |
||
|dykdate=5 December 2008 |
|dykdate=5 December 2008 |
||
|action3=PR |
|||
|action3date=10:30:14 09 October 2013 (UTC) |
|||
|action3link=Wikipedia:Peer review/Alberta and Great Waterways Railway scandal/archive2 |
|||
|action3oldid=1014766174 |
|||
|action3result=reviewed |
|||
|currentstatus=GA |
|currentstatus=GA |
||
⚫ | |||
}} |
}} |
||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
Revision as of 06:38, 25 May 2021
Alberta and Great Waterways Railway scandal has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Detagging
Regarding the removal of the {{story}} tag: I'm ok with your having removed the tag, but there are still issues in the article that I believe need to be addressed. The way the article is written now, a detailed step-by-step recounting of the events of the scandal, is not typical for an encyclopaedia and not reader-friendly; it's written in a way that the only reason to understand the article well is to sit down and read it start-to-finish, paying close attention the whole way. While this is, of course, the best way to read, one [unwritten] goal of articles on WP, as far as I know, is to be written in such a way that readers can jump around, or can skip down to the part they're interested in, or otherwise grab bits and pieces of information here and there; in other words, it shouldn't be necessary to read the article from start to finish. Perhaps {{story}} was not the most appropriate tag to use, but I do think the article needs cleanup and that that should be reflected somehow, through a tag, until the cleanup is completed. —Politizer talk/contribs 00:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Wikipedia Did you know articles that are good articles
- GA-Class Canada-related articles
- Low-importance Canada-related articles
- GA-Class Alberta articles
- Low-importance Alberta articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages
- GA-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- GA-Class rail transport articles
- Low-importance rail transport articles
- All WikiProject Trains pages