Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jeita Grotto/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 17:32, 22 September 2009 [1].

---

Jeita Grotto

Nominator(s): Eli+ 11:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• Featured article candidates/Jeita Grotto/archive1

I am nominating this for featured article because it ha already passed GA review and i think it meets the FA criteria; it is a stable article, no hx of warring and features important info abt Jeita grotto Thank you for you suggestions and feedback Eli+ 11:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose based on sources.
• Refs 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, 16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 29, and 33 are missing crucial author/publisher information
• http://www.new7wonders.com/nature/en/liveranking/ and http://www.moe.gov.lb/NR/rdonlyres/705C346C-CE5A-4900-9C6D-2AAECA2EED69/0/Chap10Biodiversity.pdf are dead-links
• Since when is Geocities reliable?
• Other issues with reliability: [2], [3], to name a couple

–Juliancolton | ^Talk 12:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Images need alt text as per WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment Hold your horses Mr Colton

1. references without authors/ publishers > fixed
2. new 7 wonders link was moved, link was fixed
3. geocities removed
4. tripsfinder removed
5. reference number 1 displays no authors, its info is corroborated by reference number 2
6. SpeleoCub of Lebanon is a very VERY respectable scientific institution in Lebanon, so i'll skip on this one
7. will fix the pic when i read more abt ALTernative text.

Anything else mates ? Eli+ 23:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comment there is clearly double standards! how come other "Featured articles"'s pictures do not have alternative text??. example Typhoon Paka,Redwood National and State Parks, Wind, Typhoon Tip Eli+ 14:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Alt text is a new MOS requirement (within the last few months). Older FAs may not have the alt text yet. Karanacs (talk) 15:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• Comments -
• Per the MOS, link titles in the references shouldn't be in all capitals, even when they are in the original
• Ref 1 is still lacking a publisher.
• What makes the following reliable?
  • http://archnet.org/lobby/
  • http://www.showcaves.com
  • http://www.tourism-lebanon.com/Jeita.asp
  • http://www.atlastours.net/lebanon/jeita.html
  • http://www.buzzle.com/articles/lebanons-jeita-grotto.html
• Sources that are in languages other than English need to have that language noted in the reference

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:01, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

• Reply
  • Archnet is a community of scholars based in MIT's School of architecture and planning [4]
  • Jochen Duckeck is a professional geologist and a member of the German national speleology society
  • The article referred to from Tourism-Lebanon is taken from the Lebanese ministry of Tourism,
  • Buzzle is dispensable
  • Atlas tours, well you are right ill fix it, there has to be a more reliable source corroborating the data
  • will fix non English sources and source N 1 Eli+ 21:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
• Image review:
  • File:3133 (7)Jeita.JPG is probably a copyright violation, as there is no freedom of panorama in the Lebanon.
  • File:Jeita stamp.jpg is questionable fair use; why do readers need to see an image of the stamp to understand this article about the cave?
  • Having both File:Jeitag2.jpg and File:Jeitag3.jpg is questionable fair use per WP:NFCC#3a.
• I'll be back in a few days to revise my opinion based on this. Stifle (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• Reply

Usage of both Jeita pictures is fully justified :

• • there is no No free equivalent.
  • does not jeopardize the commercial opportunities ,
  • Minimal usage. is assured, each picture shows a different gallery and one picture cannot substitute for the ** ** Minimal extent of use very low resolution used
  • Previous publication. already publicly displayed outside Wikipedia, in much bigger resolution too.
  • Content. Non-free content meets general Wikipedia content standards and is encyclopedic.
  • Media-specific policy. tag and required fields are complete
  • One-article minimum. point me
  • Contextual significance. read the article
  • Restrictions on location. met
  • Image description page. as said earlier tags are filled.

Guardian of time pic, we will work on that Eli+ 15:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

• comment it appears guardian of time pic nomination is not justified as per Lebanese copyright law, note that the Jeita premises are owned by the Lebanese Republic and are public grounds Eli+ 15:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Doesn't matter; as I explained to you on my talk page, the image can only be used by "the media" or for educational use, which is not free enough. Stifle (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose, fails WP:WIAFA#3 as the images do not meet image use policy. Stifle (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.