Talk:Spring Creek Dam/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Feedback:

   • I say this on almost every US review I do, and I say it again: Americans are not the only people on the earth. Quite contrary, two-thirds of the world's English speakers are not from the US, and most of them (as well as many Americans) have a very bad understanding of US geography. So, please, always remember to specify the country. (fixed)
   • Need to convert acre feet to metric.
   • Remember to use a minus sign (−) instead of a hyphen for negative values. (fixed)
   • There are very strict rules for when italics can be used (see WP:Italics). They do not include use as in "storage expansion".
   • Avoid terms like "as previously mentioned". (fixed)
   • US dollars should be in the format USD X or US$X, not $X USD. (fixed)
   • Try to avoid using boldface outside the lead. (fixed)
   • Believe it or not, but people in the US want electricity production in horsepower, at least according to the MoS (unless you have read anywhere that it is except). Also, it should be 180 megawatt, not 180,000 kilowatt.
   • Remember that kilo is always abbreviated with a small-cap "k" (i.e. kW).
   • The "see also" section should be as short as possible (ideally non-existent), and avoid repeating links in the main body. (fixed)
   • There area a lot of external links. See WP:EL for an elaboration around this. In general, external links should be kept at a minimum.
   • Add a {{commonscat}} link to the dam at the Commons. Please copy the images to the Commons, so they can be used in other-language articles as well. Also consider adding an Energy Portal link. {{kml}} is not needed, as there is only one coordinate.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   • Abbreviations like "EPA" and "CA" need to be spelled out.
   • Even if the source uses them, do not use all-caps, since it is a typographical, not grammatical choice.
   • Does ref 13 cover the whole "storage expansion" section. If so, could you add an additional ref at the end of the first paragraph.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   • For accessibility reasons, please do not force the image sizes.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The article is nearly there, but there are a few small things that need to be tweaked. Arsenikk ^|(talk)]] 21:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments from second reviewer

User:Arsenikk appears to have been inactive since 24 May 2009, so I'm reviewing this article with a view to concluding the GAN.Pyrotec (talk) 10:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

The 'problems' raised by the first reviewer appear to have been successfully addressed.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   well illustrated.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 11:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)