Wikipedia:Peer review/Biscayne Bay/archive1

Biscayne Bay

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate it for Featured Article status.

Thanks, Donald Albury 17:56, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

• @Donald Albury: This has been posted for over a month without comment. Are you still interested in receiving feedback, or can this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 16:10, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

  I am still interested in comments, as I hope to eventually take it to Featured Article quality. However, I am leaving on vacation in five days, and will have very limited access to WP for a couple of weeks. I will review and respond to any comments that have been made after I come back in about three weeks. I am in no particular hurry for a review. I've been contributing to the article off and on for almost 18 years, so I can wait a bit longer. Donald Albury 16:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

  @Donald Albury Just want to make sure you've seen my comments below. RoySmith (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

  @RoySmith: Yes, thank you. I'm sorry I didn't respond sooner. Personal/family concerns are demanding quite a bit more of my time right now than when I started this. All of your points are very helpful, and I will keep them in mind when I work on the article again, which I hope will be soon. Donald Albury 22:35, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

  OK, no problem. I'll just leave you with one more thought; WP:FACR includes "it neglects no major facts" and "it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". Biscayne Bay has the potential to be a very large topic; I would expect that at WP:FAC somebody will pop up with, "Are you sure you've found everything there is to know about this topic?" which you may need to counter with "It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail" :-) RoySmith (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

  Well, I sometimes find myself gathering more content from sources than can comfortably fit in a Wikipedia article. In any case, I rarely think an article is complete. Most articles can be improved, no matter how much work has been put into them. I will try to make the article as complete as possible without bloating it. Donald Albury 00:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

RoySmith

I don't have time to do a full review right now, but here's some comments.

Citations

Your style of citations is mostly to lump a bunch of sources at the end of a paragraph. While this conforms to WP:WTC, I suspect you will get pushback from most FAC reviewers who will insist on more detailed in-line citations to make it possible to verify the source-to-text integrity. I also see some paragraphs which have no citations at all (last one in "North Bay", all of "Central Bay", etc).

I don't have access to the books you cite, so I'm assuming the citations are correct. Just be aware that during the full FA review, people will dig deeper into that to be able to verify the citations.

Images in general

• Please provide alt texts for all images per WP:MOSALT.

Lead

• The lead says 'The part of the lagoon that is traditionally called "Biscayne Bay" is approximately 35 miles', which doesn't match the body's 'The lagoon is about 35 miles (56 km) long' statement. Where does the 'traditionally called' part come from?
• 'surface area of 221 square miles (570 km2)', in the body, you give the metric first. Pick which set of units you're going to primarily use and stick to those.
• You give the lat/long coordinates to the second, which is about +/- 100 ft. I'm not sure that's justified for a geographic feature that's 60 x 8 miles in size.

Etymology

• It's not clear what the antecedent of "called the Viscayno or Biscayno" is.
• "after being shipwrecked, and a 17th-century map shows", change "and" to a semicolon? I'd apply this transformation in other places as well. For example in "Juan Ponce de León called it Chequescha in 1513, and Pedro Menéndez de Avilés called it Tequesta in 1565."
• I'd get rid of the "Other names" sub-heading and just run it together with the previous section.

Geography

• In general, avoid repetition of words. So in "The lagoon is about 35 miles (56 km) long [...] if Card Sound and Barnes Sound are included in the lagoon.", cut the trailing "in the lagoon". And then the next sentence starts with "The lagoon...", so another repetition. You could just say, "It is about 35 miles..."
• "The ensuing Wisconsin glaciation" I usually think of "ensuing" as implying a causal relationship, so I find that confusing in this context, so perhaps find a different way to phrase that.
• "It makes a brief appearance..." I suspect some FAC reviewers will find that phrase excessively informal. It also implies a short amount of time, where you mean a short distance.
• "For purposes of discussion and analysis..." most FAC reviewers will probably object to a one-sentence paragraph.
• I don't think the marine charts add anything (and I say that as somebody who knows how to read marine charts). There's too much detailed information on that chart which is just clutter. Maybe find a single larger-scale chart that covers the entire area to give readers some context without all the clutter?

History

• "Juan Ponce de León visited Biscayne Bay in 1513," another one-sentence paragraph.

Causeways

• Use {{Inflation}} for cost figures.

Parks and marinas

Most of this is unsourced.

Query from Z1720

@Donald Albury: It's been a month since the last comment in this PR and even longer since you've had a chance to edit the article. Are you still working on this or can this PR be closed? Z1720 (talk) 05:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

This can be closed. Real life has limited my editing for a while, and I don't know when I will be able to edit the article again. Thanks for the time an d attention given to my request. Donald Albury 13:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)