Talk:2016 Fort McMurray wildfire/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ribbet32 (talk · contribs) 23:26, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Well-written:

1a Lede: "Personnel..." sentence needs attention; if there's a second list for just firefighters, there should be an "and" in front of RCMP; also, obviously Alberta firefighters took part; you mean from around different parts of Alberta. "It continued to spread"- coming from the last sentence, this reads as "The contamination continued to spread". Also, "the oil sands is the costliest disaster in Canadian history." Generally, let's cut down on "It "s in the lede.
Fire progression: "Government officials would also examine the potential for evacuations via Highway 63 during a flyover"- did they? "The fire was anticipated to double in size"- by who?
Aid response: "The Government of Alberta declared a provincial state of emergency"- when? "fifteen"- other uses of double digit numbers in the article simply use the digits.
Oil sands: "The wildfire also halted oil sands"- why open up a new section with "also"?

 Done, see edits. --Natural R_X 15:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

1b Article seems to start in the middle of the story. The Cause section is buried- I know full well news on this came last (and we're still waiting) but this is a history article and historians start with the beginning.

 Done, see edits and edits. --Natural R_X 17:07, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Natural RX Thanks, I still think the Causes section would go before Fire progression. Ribbet32 (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Ribbet32 You mean as a second level (==...==) header as opposed to third level? --Natural R_X 13:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Probably a good idea, but I actually missed how you moved up causes, so I won't push a petty point over the second vs. third level. Ribbet32 (talk) 15:20, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Verifiable with no original research

2a Ref 4 is completely unformatted; ref 12 doesn't use Template:Cite tweet. "Royal Canadian Mounted Police coordinated and provided the bulk of the security response with assistance from both Alberta Fish and Wildlife and the Alberta Sheriffs Branch."- unref'd. 2b Generally good sources, but RENTCafé is a real head-scratcher. 2c. Full source review pending 2d. Earwig turns up common phrases and lists of place names (no big deal); Full source review pending

 Done, see edits. --Natural R_X 15:34, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

3a. Rachel Notley is only mentioned once and there's nothing about the provincial government delaying declaring an emergency, which was a big controversy at the time (though overblown; there was no tangible benefit to declaring an emergency). Trudeau also controversially delayed a visit ("now's not the time for a photo opp). There's various controversies addressed in this invaluable article, including why it was not beneficial to accept Russian water bombers. Also, though it may appear trivial, the name "The Beast" only appears in the reference section. This source and this source can be used. On reconstruction- a more updated source

I'm hesitant to further expand upon the emergency declaration, I do not want to give additional weight to these things relative to the fire itself. In fact, I have moved the Cause and contributing factors section up to the front of the progression section. The article you linked is definitely interesting as a roundup of myths, but I do not believe it or any controversies such as Notley's declaration of the state of emergency are notable to the article. I also believe the fact that "The Beast" is trivial is reason enough to leave it out; it was more of a descriptor than a formal name, and having the two official names is sufficient. --Natural R_X 17:07, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Natural RX You're probably right that a "Myth" section is inappropriate (though we do have a Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting conspiracy theories along with a Stoneman Douglas conspiracy section), but I'm completely sure a subsection on "Political impact" would count as a main aspect under 3a. As well, "Names" sections are common in Wikipedia, and note the article references the alternative name Horse River fire already. Ribbet32 (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Ribbet32  Done, see edits, but I still disagree on the name issue. --Natural R_X 17:49, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

3b. Not a lot off-topic.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

4. Best reviewed after 3a addressed.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

5. No edit wars.

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio

6. Well illustrated with free images

Aug. 11 followup

User:Natural RX apologies again for the delay; work and a bit of a natural disaster at home (not on the scale of this fire!) has slowed me down. The 2b-2d is all I have left to review; Will try to get this done Sunday. In the meantime, RENTCafé still doesn't seem to be any type of news/secondary source and I'd suggest replacing it. Ribbet32 (talk) 20:34, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Criteria 2c review

Resolved

Spread: Ref 28 is dead but an archive is available. [1]  Done Spread: A source called "ire evacuees" [sic] is used throughout these sections, but it does not reflect the title of the actual article: [2]  Done Aid: [3] is dead. (Archive is available at [4] )  Done Aid: [5] is dead. Archived at [6]  Done Communities and infra: [7] is dead. Archived at [8]  Done Communities and infra: [9] is dead. Archived at [10] Had to rewrite with some new info. Oil sands: [11] is dead. Archived at [12]  Done Re-entry: More WP:LINKROT at [13] . Archived at [14]  Done Re-entry: Page number (p. 16) needed for PDF source [15]  Done Re-entry: Page number (p. 38) needed for PDF source [16]  Done

OUTSTANDING

• Infobox: The 3,244 buildings figure is not included in the news article. If it is in the PDF source, a page number is needed.
  • The two sources provided outline 2,579 from the main PDF, and another 665 from Blacksand Lodge from the second source. I have added the page number for the PDF.
    • The first source references page 13, not 16. Also, the second source doesn't include a PDF or anything about the fire. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
• Causes: Who are the "Some" and "others"? (The other is Slate journalist Eric Holthaus [17])
• Spread: No mention of Beacon Hill, Abasand and Waterways in [18]
• Spread: No mention of Hercules in [19]
• Spread: [20] states 1,110 firefighters, 145 helicopters, not 1,100 personnel, 45 helicopters.
• Spread: No mention of 156,000 hectares in [21] (title is wrong as well)
• Aid: No mention of Ontario in [22] (title is wrong as well)
• Oil sands: "removing 4,800 employees" not mentioned in [23]
• Re-entry: "still ongoing" this is a more updated source for the statement
• Re-entry: [24] doesn't seem to indicate the Regional Muncipality had policies for fire-proof materials or flooding.

Thank you User:Natural RX for your hard work and patience Ribbet32 (talk) 23:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience as well, I have been very busy in personal life. I've taken a first sweep of changes, more to come. --Natural R_X 14:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Reaching homestretch User:Natural RX, awaiting further promised edits Ribbet32 (talk) 00:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Made the last round of edits here, here and here Ribbet32. Thanks for your patience. --Natural R_X 20:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)