Talk:Givors canal

Givors canal has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology 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.
Review: January 8, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Givors canal appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 September 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Givors canal (Tartaras lock pictured) replaced 1,200 mules?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Givors canal.

Wikipedia

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Civil engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCivil engineering articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

units

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The units in the infobox render as feet-inches whereas these are rendered metres in the body of the article. This is due to the infobox used. Perhaps this infobox should be stripped as inappropriate for the subject, and the units aligned? -- Ohc ^¡digame!_{¿que pasa?} 02:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

Is there a better infobox template? This one is annoying, with its lack of support for metric units, which seems a bit archaic. If not, the other option is to request improvement of the template. Aymatth2 (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2013 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Givors canal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Soham (talk · contribs) 11:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am starting the GA review for the concerned article. Soham 11:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Lead

(French: Canal de Givors), IPA would be nice. Soham 17:12, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I am not confident with French IPA, and have no idea what the Franco-Provençal language IPA would be. I think this one has to wait for a native speaker. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Leave it, even some FA's don't have IPA. It's not a hard and fast requirement for a GA. Soham 15:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

~~What are Locks? Link.~~ Soham 15:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Plans

~~Ref #4 WP:DEADLINK.~~ Soham 17:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. Looks like the content was moved to a new, dedicated site. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

The rest looks fine, I'll read again and then give the verdict. Soham 14:55, 4 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Soham.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Does not contain peacock, weasel words along with other kinds of puffery.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
27 refs for an article on such a regional topic is commendable. Most sources are either magazines or books by noted authors, moreover there is no sign or original research. Good for me.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Neutral POV, no issues regarding that.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
No reversion of the primary author, no signs of WP:EW, article rock steady.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Well illustrated.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Good article passed, well done.

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Givors canal. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 04:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic