Talk:Chain Island

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 10:26, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that when the government wanted to remove Chain Island as a navigational obstacle in 1903, a group of "California capitalists" offered to do it for free, recouping expenses by mining it for gold? Source: "Where Would They Put The Sand?". Independent-Herald. Yuba City, California. 1903-06-11. p. 2.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Berknet

5x expanded by JPxG (talk). Self-nominated at 12:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC).

• Article has been expanded recently enough. It is long enough, properly cited and has no copyvio. Good to go. GreatLakesShips (talk) 13:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P4

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Chain Island. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kavyansh.Singh (talk · contribs) 07:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Nominator: JPxG (talk · contribs) at 12:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

Prose

• Can add a sentence or two in the lead

Done. jp×g 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• Chain Island's coordinates are 38°04′11″N 121°51′11″W. —

Fixed. jp×g 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• The United States Geological Survey gave Chain Island's elevation as 0 ft (0 m) in 1981 — do we really need to convert 0 ft?

No. Fixed. jp×g 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• although it is designated by the State of California — why not just "California"?

Well, "California" would be fairly vague (random people in California? the land itself?) whereas "State of California" refers to its government. jp×g 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• As of 2014, sturgeon fishing at Chain Island was still good. — what is "still good" supposed to mean? bit vague ...
• on an 1850 expedition — should be "during an 1850 expedition"
• War Department — should be linked to United States Department of War
• by State of California engineers — why not just "California"?

As above (the state government specifically employed them; they weren't just normal engineers who happened to be from California). jp×g 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

• Could link capitalists

Sure. It seems that this phrase is being used in a very different sense than the modern meaning (i.e. a proponent of capitalism), here it is being used to mean something like what we'd now call a "venture capitalist". jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• California's gold rush — should be "California gold rush"

Done. jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Sacramento–San Joaquin river system — I'm not sure, but should 'R' bu capitalized?

I'm not sure either, but I think this capitalization is correct -- it's a "Sacramento–San Joaquin" "river system", not a "Sacramento–San Joaquin River" "system". jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• by the United States Geological Survey — I'd remove 'United States'

United States Geological Survey is a proper name, so it has to be given in full. jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• The value in inflation template is "as of 2020", not 2022. Using the {{CURRENTYEAR}} would be wrong.

Fixed. jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Anything after 1959 to add in the article?

Sadly, none that I could find. jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Images

• Images can take ALT text

Done. jp×g 04:38, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

References

• Ref#1 — bare URL? format it.

Fixed. jp×g 06:42, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Don't mix {{citation}} with other cite-family templates (cite web, cite newspaper)

Fixed. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Ref#4 — missing publisher

I don't see which you are talking about. Reference #4 currently has | publisher = Sacramento Local Agency Formation Commission, and I don't see any other references without publishers. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Retrieved 24 February 2021 v. 1994-11-03 — inconsistent date format.

Fixed. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• The Los Angeles Times should just be Los Angeles Times

Fixed. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Various of cite-newspaper templates should be cite-news, but thats fine if you wish to keep it as it is.

Fixed. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

• Most of the newspaper citations need "|via=Newspapers.com"

Fixed. jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

That is it. Putting on hold. Consider removing the stub tag. It is a start-class article. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

All right, here we go. jp×g 02:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Do ping me when everything is done. I am willing to keep it open as long as you wish, given that changes would be made. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kavyansh.Singh: What do you think of it now? jp×g 06:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@JPxG, I see "Cite error: A list-defined reference named "aaa99" is not used in the content (see the help page)." – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kavyansh.Singh: Fixed. jp×g 04:38, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

---

Promoting! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)