# Talk:2008 Georgia Imperial Sugar refinery explosion

This review is transcluded from Talk:2008 Georgia sugar refinery explosion/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Either expand the paragraphs in the lead or merge them so there are two paragraphs, because they are very short right now.
 Done Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 10:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
"The sugar refinery in question was" → "The sugar refinery was"
 Done Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 10:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
"it was the town of 3,500's main employer prior to the disaster." – really needs to be reworded, as it isn't immediately obvious that "town of 3,500" is a phrase on its own
 Done Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 10:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
When you use measurements, like in "160 acre site and was spread across 872,000 square feet", use the {{convert}} template so that alt. measurements are shown.
 Done Except for hundredweight, two reasons: 1) I don't know if the source meant short or long cwt, and 2) in any event, the template doesn't seem to support it properly, as Template:Convert/list of units/mass lists them, but doesn't suggest anything that it can be converted to. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 11:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
"Explosion and emergency response" is made up of far too many small paragraphs; I recommend improving the flow and expanding or merging paragraphs appropriately.
 Done I think, I have tried to restructure but let me know if more is needed. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 10:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Gary King (talk) 06:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
There are some short paragraphs in " Aftermath". Perhaps they can be merged? For instance, "Port Wentworth saw an" and "In the first quarter of 2008" both discuss economics issues; they could be merged, perhaps. Gary King (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Again, I have restructured the section. I tried to group like topics together - demolition/reconstruction, economics and legal work. The exception was the emergency shutdown and fine; I stuck that with the first lot. Look OK? Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 21:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
This article reaches GA criteria and has therefore been passed. Gary King (talk) 21:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)  (Contribs) 21:26, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Added the outdated tag just because of the last paragraph of the intro section and the 'Aftermath' section of the article. Squalk25 (talk) 17:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Still outdated. For the last section, "The plan is for the plant to return to sugar refining by the end of 2008.[2][13] Demolition of the sugar silos was conducted on June 24, 2008 with a wrecking ball. Demolition is set to continue from that date for a week of the area at the center of the explosion. A replacement packaging building and new sugar silos are intended to be completed by Summer 2009." It's three years later, yet there is no information on status of rebuilding, if the plant ever was rebuilt, if so, is it operational.Wzrd1 (talk) 02:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Names of the dead. 172.222.189.111 (talk) 18:14, 21 July 2022 (UTC)