Talk:Trabancos (river)

Trabancos (river) was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 8, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
October 6, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Spain Mid‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Hispania#Roman Hispania|late Roman period]] The anchor (#Roman Hispania) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Old comments

The article this was translated from, es:Trabancos, is a featured article on the Spanish language Wikipedia. I have translated a good portion and have polished the sections translated with piped links, etc. All passages that remain untranslated appear in the article in their proper places placed surrounding by blue-colored notes (imposible to miss). As all the formatting is in place, including images, a more fluent speaker should find easy to translate as they go. Some of the passages require an editor with sophistication in and cross language knowledge of specialized terms in geology/archeological/history, etc.

Note that the references section contains all of the footnotes contained in the original, which are also linked to their proper places in both the english text and untranslated portions. --Fuhghettaboutit 03:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to fixes to Cleanup

Thanks for fixing a few things I broke during Cleanup. I suggest that the names of Kings be given their English forms as this is customary for European Kings, with exceptions (e.g. Kings Alfonso of Spain are known as King Alphonse, but the current King is *not* known as "John Charles").

Twenex 21:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable to me; please feel free! If you didn't see my comment in the edit summary, again, thank you for the excellent cleanup (it needs quite a bit more; many awkward passages). At some point I think I'd like to take it to peer review but it's not ready yet.--Fuhghettaboutit 21:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the change from "up to" to "as far as" which you made, I reverted and you reverted back. I am not married to "up to," but "as far as" sounds very awkward to me.--Fuhghettaboutit 21:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment in the edit summary and My Talk pages and have been looking for the appropriate place to say "thankyou, you're very welcome." (I'm a Wikipedia novice). Here looks like as good a place as any!

I'm not married to "up to", either. I only changed it again because I thought that I must have imagined changing it the first time! Though to tell the truth, I'm not very happy with either phrase.

My version certainly isn't perfect, though I'm glad you think the changes I made to your excellent article are (mostly!) an improvement :-).

Twenex 22:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the few remaining changes to the names of the Kings which I hadn't made already, and a few more minor edits at the same time. The section on "The Middle Ages" is imo a bit long and could do with splitting in two. - Twenex 22:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed this page to make the discussion more readable per your help. Thanks! Twenex 23:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section requiring help

Can someone please take a look at the original of the passage that has been translated:

Entering into land in the municipality of Pollos, the stream stops to form river terraces, cutting traversely and lowering enough (between 40 and 60 meters) to meet the terrace deposits of the Duero River.

I would love to rearrange the wording for fluidity, grammar, etc. but I'm just not sure of exactly what the passage means (a few interpretaions are possible), and I'll only muck it up if I try to fix it when I don't understand well what is intended.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Trabancos River/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

The lead is too short to adequately summarise the article.

There is some translation required in the References section, for instance: "Pages 733 y cuadro 3".

Non-English sources should be flagged with the language they're written in.

There is only one citation in the ZEPA designation section, right at the start. Does that source all of the information in that section? If so, it should be placed at the end.

The Trabancos River today is too short for a subsection. Is there nothing else to say about it?

The three images at the end of the ZEPA designation secrion should either be integrated into the body of the text or removed.

References and notes should be tidied up so as to avoid the need to repeat the same sources. I'd suggest separating it into Notes and Bibliography, with the book details in Bibliography and references to particular pages in Notes.

--Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- As these issues remain outstanding, this article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 13:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style

The article is somewhat too technical for most readers... Shannon1 ^talk ^contribs 00:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]