Talk:Powell Butte/GA1
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Argento Surfer in topic GA Review
GA Review
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Argento Surfer (talk · contribs) 14:25, 18 March 2019 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- The body lists three elevations - how did you choose which one to use in the infobox?
- Based on recency; that figure was calculated no earlier than 1991, whereas the others were from the 1980s (GNIS) and 1970s (Allen). I am totally open to changing if you think there's a better way, though! ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'm ok with it, just curious. I suspected it was either by date or because it was the middle figure.
- Based on recency; that figure was calculated no earlier than 1991, whereas the others were from the 1980s (GNIS) and 1970s (Allen). I am totally open to changing if you think there's a better way, though! ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Allen (1975) listed its elevation as 560" - who is Allen? If his(?) name is used in the body, I think he should be identified a little better.
- Fixed, I think. ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Powell Butte lies in front of the Boring Hills," - how do you determine where the front is? I think a cardinal direction might be better here, unless there's something I'm missing.
- Seems like I missed some of the detail here, so rewrote a bit. Reworded to "Powell Butte lies northwest of the Boring Hills, and the surrounding area includes (moving clockwise from the north) other volcanic centers like Green Mountain, Prune Hill, Chamberlain Hill, Devils Rest, Larch Mountain, Pepper Mountain, Kelly Butte, and Mount Tabor." ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- "Powell Butte is cool with short seasons" - what does "short seasons" mean? They can't all be brief, can they?
- Think I may have misinterpreted this, but still not totally sure what the source refers to. It says "Powell Butte and Klamath represent high elevation, cool, short season environments." So I changed to "creating a short growing season environment". Think that makes more sense, but let me know if not. ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think that's more clear. Based on the initial wording I thought it might meant short transitional seasons (spring & fall).
- Think I may have misinterpreted this, but still not totally sure what the source refers to. It says "Powell Butte and Klamath represent high elevation, cool, short season environments." So I changed to "creating a short growing season environment". Think that makes more sense, but let me know if not. ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- "farmer Henry Anderegg, who owned and operated the Meadowland Crest Dairy" - presumably the dairy was on the leased land? If not, this is tangential trivia.
- According to the source, yes; "Before the turn of the century, the large meadow area was cleared and an orchard planted by the first settlers. In 1925 the City of Portland purchased the land from George Wilson for future water reservoirs, but continued to lease the northeast portion of the property to Henry Anderegg, a farmer and owner of Meadowland Crest Dairy, until 1948 when the farming was discontinued." [1] ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- The body lists three elevations - how did you choose which one to use in the infobox?
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- no concern
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- no concern
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
- no concern
- C. It contains no original research:
- no concern
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- no concern per Earwig
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- I'm not an expert, but nothing obvious has been omitted.
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- no concern
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Not sure how an article like this could be biased...
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- no concern
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- no concern
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- no concern
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- A nicely done article that needs a few tweaks before I can pass it. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:48, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Argento Surfer: Thanks for the thorough review, Argento Surfer. I have enacted your suggestions except where I wanted you to check over my changes (replies are above). ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'm satisfied. Nice work on this one. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Argento Surfer: Thanks for the thorough review, Argento Surfer. I have enacted your suggestions except where I wanted you to check over my changes (replies are above). ceranthor 21:06, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- A nicely done article that needs a few tweaks before I can pass it. Argento Surfer (talk) 14:48, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.