Talk:Bailey, Iowa

Bailey, Iowa has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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: October 6, 2021. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles United States: Iowa Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Iowa (assessed as Low-importance).

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Bailey, Iowa/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 20:13, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• In general the article feels like it's suffering from proseline, lots of choppy, short (sometimes single-sentence) paragraphs. This could be tidied up which would benefit the flow and appearance of the article.

Thanks for the detailed review. I have merged some paragraphs together. I will continue to merge where appropriate.

• " whistle stop" link?

Now linked.

• "known as Wapsie, but should not be confused with another community in northeastern Iowa named Wapsie." I would create a redirect at Wapsie, Iowa and then have a hat-note here using the {{distinguish}} template.

I have added the {{distinguish}} template at the top of this page. I'll do something similar at Wapsie, Iowa. Bailey was only known as Wapsie for a few years in the 1800s, while Wapsie has been known as Wapsie for over 100 years.

• So in the lead we have "community"/"unincorporated community" and "incorporated town"/town, all used to describe Bailey. Be consistent.

I was attempting to summarize the article in the lead, per

WP:LEAD

, as Bailey was first unincorporated, then incorporated, and then back to unincorporated.

• "A shared use nature trail lies" what's one of those?

I've linked

shared use path

in the lead.

• "The community lies just ..." tense issues, or is it still a "community" but not still a "town"?

There's not much of a town there, now. Bailey still appears on county maps, but there are only a few scattered farms.

• "The plat map of Bailey." fragment, no full stop.

I've adjusted to full sentence

• "who settled that section" repetitive.

Adjusted, thanks.

• "death in 1882. In 1856" repetitive.
• "Leroy Foot. Foot opened" repetitive.

Adjusted, thanks.

• "home of Leroy Foot, beginning" no need to repeat first name unless just using surname is ambiguous.

Okay, adjusted

• "in Spring 1856" avoid seasons, and why is that capitalised?

Changed to lower-case. The source says "spring" and I don't want to invent a month.

• "of the Chicago Great Western Railway) through " overlinked.

Removed wikilink, thanks.

• "post office, historically the second post office" repetitive.
• "an incorporated town in " why isn't this linked in the lead as well?

It now is; thanks.

• "in 1902.[11] In 1911, the" repetitive.
• "These were Bailey's peak years." in population sense?

Yeah.

• "balked at this expenditure" which was?

The source, unfortunately, doesn't say. They just didn't want to pay for the graveling.

• " to unincorporated community" shouldn't this be linked here?

It now is. Thanks.

• "One major loss was the post office. Open since 1887, Bailey's post office closed on January 31, " first sentence is POV and these two can be merged to avoid quick repetition of "post office".

Adjusted.

• "through Second Grade" is that normally capitalised?

Changed to lower-case.

• "its rail lines.[17] The rail line was removed in 1982,[18] and the line " line-tastic.

Adjusted. That's why these reviews are so helpful. I never would have noticed the redundancy.

• The shared use thing isn't mentioned in the article itself, just the lead.

The nature trail mentioned in the body of the article is a

shared use path

. I've adjusted the text so it's more clear the shared-use path in the lead is the same as the nature trail in the body of the article.

• Refs 2, 4 and 8 have spaced hyphens, should be en-dash.

Adjusted, thanks.

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, The Rambling Man. I've made some adjustments based on your feedback, and will continue to refine. What do you think so far? Better? Worse? Firsfron of Ronchester 17:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It still feels very choppy. Lots of very small paras. And the sentence starting "The community was just north..." is unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firsfron any progress? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following up, The Rambling Man. I had a death in the family and have been preoccupied; I didn't know this would happen when I nominated the article for GA in July. Sorry for the delayed response. Per your observations, I have combined several paragraphs and added a few sources for the river location and length. Firsfron of Ronchester 20:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firsfron sorry for your loss, and of course that takes priority over everything else, especially Wikipedia. I only have one real issue remaining, that of the bare demographic section which just contains a table. It may be worth left-aligning that and adding it into the previous section. Also, "Cram's Modern Atlas,[11]" no need for that comma, and I would imagine Cram's Modern Atlas to be a work thus in italics. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 07:33, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your patience, The Rambling Man. I've gone ahead and made your above suggested changes. I think the table looks better incorporated into the text, so that was a most excellent suggestion. Firsfron of Ronchester 22:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]