Talk:Little Applegate River/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: —out^offocus 00:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a good article. I've been busy so I might finish my comments in a day or two. —out^offocus 00:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

General

• There are a few red links; the article would look better if they had stubs. (not required)

• I might be able to create those in the near future... tomorrow at the earliest, but I'm not making any promises. :)

• File:Little Applegate River Watershed.png has a dead link in the image description

• Fixed.

Intro

• "For fish swimming upstream..." - is that really needed? You repeat the sentence later in the article, so I'd suggest removing the fish part from the intro to avoid sounding too repetitive.

• Removed.

Course

• Are McDonald Creek, Glade Creek, et cetera, notable enough to be redlinked in the article?

• Probably not... they're all less than ten miles long, and there's hardly any information on them individually. There are articles about smaller steams (one in particular that I can think of), but in this case I don't think it's feasible.

Watershed

• Is 'southern Oregon' a formally defined region? If so, 'southern' should probably be capitalized.

• I wouldn't call it 'formally defined', it's just the southwestern region of Oregon. Thoughts?

I only ask because there's an article on 'Southern Oregon', and it seems to imply that there's a specific group of counties which are included in 'Southern Oregon'. I could be very wrong though, so it's okay if you think it's fine as is.

Flora and fauna

• Why is cedar lowercase, while the other tree names are uppercase?

• Not sure why, maybe I couldn't figure out what species of cedar it was. Anyhow, it's fixed now.

• Also, cedar links to cedar wood, which comes from a variety of plants. Is there a specific taxon that it can be linked to instead?

• Yup, Incense-cedar, Calocedrus decurrens.

• What does it mean by "...another 134 are suspected"? Have these species never been seen in the region, or have they been seen, but not documented? The meaning of the word 'suspected' could be clarified.

• Not seen, but assumed (they have been spotted in places similar or close (or both) to the Little Applegate River watershed). Not sure how I could clarify this in the article... do you have any suggestions?

• I'm not sure what the best way to do that is, but I think it's okay for now.

• "...the Northern Spotted Owl, a vulnerable species" - the article on the Northern Spotted Owl says it's critically endangered, not vulnerable. If this is correct, it should be changed. If you mean to say that it is vulnerable in general, the wording needs to be clarified.

• Wow, it used to be vulnerable... must have gotten worse. :( Changed.

• "Seven other species..." - It might just be me, but this sentence confuses me. By 'the area', do you mean the 37 square miles designated for the owl, or the area around the river in general? When you mention the IUCN red list, do you mean just threatened species, or all the organisms on iucnredlist.org? If it is the former, why are do you include LC species? Also, Corynorhinus townsendii is least concern, not endangered.

• Changed 'the area' to 'the watershed'. I meant just threatened species, not sure why I included 'least concern' (removed). Townsend's Big-eared Bat changed on me as well! Anyway, I think everything's fixed now, thanks.

Hisory

• When you say that the mine devastated the landscape, to what extent has it recovered from this?

• I don't think it has recovered much, but I'll look into it.

Pollution

• You use a semicolon twice in the first 2 sentences of this section. It's a bit repetitive.

• Would changing the second semicolon to a colon help? I can't think of a good way to change them.

• I've changed the wording a bit, but if you can think of a better way to do it, great.

• Sounds good to me, thanks.

• It looks strange for 'sheep' to be capitalized. The article on sheep (a FA) does not capitalize it, so I'd consider putting it in lowercase.

• Lowercase-ified.

References

• Looks fine

• Thank you very much for the review, I really appreciate it. Sincerely, LittleMountain5 15:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
  • No problem! I won't officially put the article on hold, but once you take a look at my comments above I'll be happy to pass it. —out^offocus 17:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
    • Looks good; I am now happy to pass the article. —out^offocus 21:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
      • Thanks again. :) LittleMountain5 23:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

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.