Talk:Meteora

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Meteora was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: Error: invalid time

Contents

[edit] Delete last paragraph

I visited Meteora for three days just over a year ago and plan to completely revamp this entry from publications I purchased, including posting my pictures. Having said that, the last paragraph now is out of place and if no objection, I plan to delete it. GeoTraveller 01:52, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger

I really think List of monasteries at Meteora needs to be put in this article. I don't believe the list is so big that it should be on its own.--Rastabilly 22:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, go on. On second thought, I'll do it. Cheers!! -Zacharycrimsonwolf 12:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trecherous

I visited Rousanou/St. Barbara and St. Stephen. They were both easy to get to though St. Stephen had a drop off from it's (railed) "moat" bridge that horrified some fellow travelers. Student7 02:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

That's interesting. Perhaps, if you took some photographs, you can upload them for the article. --Zacharycrimsonwolf 16:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA failed

I have failed this GA.

  • POV in lead “built on spectactular...” The pop culture reference to Bond frankly seems like undue weight.
  • Overview:Unsourced. Can these be added? Also POV “immense rocks”. Some of the later sentences are very short and need to be merged.
  • The overview is basically the article so it is strange to be listed in this way. There is very little to the article apart from list (a list of monstaries”). I think more can be said about the individual monasteries. It is also mostly unsourced
  • References need to be formatted properly and with full information.
  • Generally needs more information. Since it is a UNESCO heritage site, there should be a lot written about it. Also, the UNESCO listing is usally a big deal, so the process of it being selected should also be mentioned.
  • Should there be a mention of the tourism at the site?

The main reasons are comprehensiveness and references. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's a bummer. I'll have to do more, then. Thank you for the review, I really needed someone to tell me where to start from. Cheers, Zacharycrimsonwolf 14:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need help

This article needs help! If anyone is interested, please leave me a message. Cheers! --Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)