This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is an historical federal electoral district that had 2 elections. I nominated it for FL but it was not promoted (
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Surrey Central/archive1). It's kind of stuck in limbo—it didn't pass the FL review but I don't know what else to do with it. I'm looking for ideas (creative or technical) on how to improve such an article (electoral district articles). Thanks,
maclean (
talk) 19:07, 14 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Comments hello again maclean. Sorry things didn't work out at FLC, but I'll add some further comments (and recommend you head to
WP:GAN in due course).
Is there a way of adding Imperial units into the infobox for the area of the district?
Consider merging the first three sentences, it starts quite choppy for me.
Rather than "Canadian House of Commons", I'd prefer to see the formal "House of Commons of Canada".
" formed the official opposition" followed by "forming the official opposition" is a little repetitive.
In 2000 it had "149,468 people" yet in 2001 (in the infobox) it had "179,158". Really? A leap of 30,000 in one year seems incredible to me, more so when you consider that's a 20% increase.
Any reason you couldn't put ref [3] at the end of the sentence?
Do the colours of the parties mean anything in the table?
In fact, what is the purpose of the table? It appears that you have a lll this information already in the prose.
Grewal served in "2003–2004" (according to the table) but the lead says this seat was abolished in 2003.
Avoid blank cells in tables, if it's not applicable, say it's n/a.
" Votes,[1] Totals,[5] and Expenditures.[16" these aren't proper nouns so decapitalise them all.
Clarified these are population estimates for 1991, 1996, 2001 census.
[3]
Needs further review. The only purpose of the citation is to provide the external link - it isn't really a reference, but more of a note. I'd prefer an in-text external link but I know that is frowned upon. I may just remove it.
They are colours are built into the template so I cannot change it. They are just for more intuitive identification (conservatives worldwide are generally associated with blue, liberals red) so they are not explained specifically in this article.
Yes, it is a summary table that has evolved from these electoral district articles. Presents the same information in a different way, hopefully easier to understand, just like the lead section and infobox do.
maclean (
talk) 06:36, 22 April 2012 (UTC)reply
I have fixed and clarifying the article regarding the last three points
[4]maclean (
talk) 03:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)reply