Talk:Land
Latest comment: 2 months ago by ForksForks in topic What still ought to be done?
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Land article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3655 days  |
 | Land was nominated as a Geography and places good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (May 1, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This  level-2 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
Useful resources include National Geographic's education resources, as well as Tarbuck & Ludgens's Earth: an introduction to physical geology (Pearson) for physical science topics. For discussions on sections to add, see this, this and this. Pathfinders: A Global History of Exploration by Felipe Fernández-Armesto is a good resource for the history of exploration section; those changes should also be made in the Exploration article. |
| This topic is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. The section or sections that need attention may be noted in a message below. |
What still ought to be done?
editIt seems like it's been quite a while since any work has been done on this article; but it seems like it was relatively close to hitting the GA criteria as of the review last year. I added a new set of images to the article, which was a prominent issue raised in the review - what sections should be focused on to help take this up to GA quality? The to-do list in this section seems to be a bit outdated and at least partially implemented. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:16, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @Generalissima: here is how I see it, summarizing the GA review comments and my own thoughts:
- 'Features' section needs rewriting.
- 'Etymology' in my opinion needs to be A) sourced B) chopped up to just be the relevant bits.
- 'Terrain' needs to be rewritten to use prose instead of definitions.
- We need a strong lead that is MOS compliant. Leads seem to attract miscellaneous facts over time.
- Need a better ecology section
- Needs a look over the entire article for focus and clarity
- A source review is needed. We are at 200 sources, do we need this many? Maybe we do.
- We need to comb through the revisions since May of last year to find any poor quality contributions and remove them.
- I have given a couple articles a similar treatment, but I think this one luckily does not require a full rewrite, so it won't be hard to take care of this. I'll consider making this my next project. ForksForks (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ForksForks: This is super helpful and thorough! Seems like you're the one to do it with your experience on Island. If you'd like to work together on this, I'd love to help out! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:27, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Please knock out as much as you like. Many hands make light work. ForksForks (talk) 00:47, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- First paragraph of the terrain section does not seem to actually be sourced. For some reason I'm having trouble using OED on the computer I'm on right now. Just flagging this for now. ForksForks (talk) 13:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- [1] Can someone provide feedback on if this is an acceptable source for the ecology of terrestrial animals? I'm worried this may be a tertiary source but it reads more like a journal article with direct citations to papers. ForksForks (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @ForksForks: This is super helpful and thorough! Seems like you're the one to do it with your experience on Island. If you'd like to work together on this, I'd love to help out! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 00:27, 5 August 2024 (UTC)