Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sarnia/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 GrahamColm 10:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Sarnia edit

Sarnia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 17:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I have put probably 100 - 150 man hours into it and I have read London, Ontario and Lethbridge, Alberta, both featured articles, and feel that this article is at least as worthy as those articles There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 17:15, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Sorry, it does not seem as if this article has been polished for FAC. The following list, from the lead alone, does not inspire confidence:

  • "and is across the border east of Port Huron, Michigan." what border? The Canada–United States border?  Done
  • "45-ton Barque" why imperial units in an article written in Canadian English? At least provide a metric conversion (perhaps there's some Milhist standard that I don't known about for describing ships by weight like this; if so please ignore)  Done
  • "This was the first time anything other than a canoe,or other oar-powered vessel, sailed into Lake Huron." consider trying the sentence without commas  Done
  • "The Archaeological and Historic Sites Board of Ontario considers this voyage worthy of note as shown by the photo." 1st: avoid self-referencing; 2nd: isn't The Archaeological and Historic Sites Board of Ontario now known as the Ontario Heritage Trust? Is the fact that this organization considers it "of note" important enough to go in the lead? Done
Yes, the photo is necessary because someone wanted the Griffon's voyage substantiated, so I went down to the bridge and snapped the photo myself.There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Located in the aforementioned natural harbour," I'm under the impression that the word "aforementioned" is best saved for proposals or other legal document (also, self-referencing)  Done
  • is it so critically important to the encyclopaedic understanding of Sarnia that the fact that oceangoing ships are known as "salties" needs to be included in the lead (this nickname is not mentioned later in the article)
Yes, the difference between lake freighters and oceangoing ships is significant because lake freighters cannot venture onto the ocean.There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • are the links to the common words "grain, "petroleum", and "salt" necessary?
Removed.  Done
  • "Since Oil Springs was the first place in Canada and North America to drill commercially for oil, the knowledge that was acquired there led to oil drillers from Sarnia travelling the world teaching other nations how to drill for oil." this sentence does not strike me as an example of prose "of a professional standard"
 Done Readability score now grade level 16.3.There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • why link chemical companies but not refining?
The Oil Springs sentence contains History of the petroleum industry in Canada, and I did not want to double link.There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Forty-five percent of this comes from Chemical Valley,[13][14][15]" Why the triple citation? Is this a contentious fact? Is it not cited later in the article?
The triple citation contains the reference for Sarnia's air being among the worst, the fact that it is, indeed, 45 percent, and the contentious nature of the issue. It is referenced in another article "Environmental Impact ..."There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • reword one of the duplicate "comes from" in that sentence to make it sound less clunky  Done
  • "The Canada Wide Daily Standard for MP2.5 is 30 micrograms per cubic meter. This standard was exceeded on one day during 2011.[17]" what is MP2.5? Is this fact significant enough for such a prominent placement (final sentence) in the lead?
Yes, it is very significant. In 2011, the fact that it was only one day was a massive improvement over previous years. Also added additional citations.  Done There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the following subsection (History#Name), I see six(!) duplicate links, unnecessary links to common locations (England and France), and linked words in a quote (see WP:MOSQUOTE  Done
  • quotes should not be italicized; also check usage of ellipses per MOS:ELLIPSES  Done
  • double hyphens should not be used in the place of an emdash (MOS:DASH) Done
  • a completely unsourced paragraph and unsourced final sentence (2nd paragraph)
Found source. Sorry I forgot one! There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC) Done[reply]
  • what's the rationale for having all of the images left-justified? It pushes in all of the headers and looks awkward compared to the usual right-justified or alternating image placement.
The images being left justified is necessary for people viewing the material on smartphones or tablets with smaller screens. Someone noted to me on the Talk page that it was not displaying correctly, and I changed it. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are helpful for making further improvements, and will reconsider my oppose if the entire article can be fine-tuned for MOS compliance. Sasata (talk) 05:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you, Sasata. I appreciate the help in fine tuning the article. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 20:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'm afraid that I also think that this falls significantly short of the FA standards at present, though it's clear that lots of work has gone into the article. I have the following comments:

  • A significant amount of material through the article is not referenced
What material? Please provide examples. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Working on adding the cites that are probably needed. Almost done. Interesting to note that my article on Sarnia has 50 more citations and references than Lethbridge, which is a featured article. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 20:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, if you can't spot unreferenced material you really shouldn't have nominated this for FA status. I am not going to trawl through the article identifying unreferenced material given that it's very easy to spot. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Nick-D, I do not take this "with respect." Your condescension is palpable. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 14:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reason for including many of the verbatim quotes from news stories doesn't seem clear to me
  • Some of the article has a rather 'boosterism' style tone - for instance, "Combined with several smaller shopping centres, major discount stores, dollar stores, convenient stores, and a collection of antique and specialty stores, they offer a wide range of shopping experiences",
Rewrote.  Done

"Sarnia has much to offer in the arts",

Rewrote and sourced  Done

"Sarnia's world famous fresh cut fries are another popular tourist attraction".

They are an integral part of both Sarnia's identity and, in the sourced opinion of Canadian author Ian Chadwick, Canada's identity, as well. Therefore, the section should stay. I did, however, remove the quote italics and cleaned up the grammar per previous suggestions.  Done There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of the article's sections only cover the recent status of their topic, and provide little history
Please give examples. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 20:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No - this is a wide problem. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Again with the no examples. If I should not have submitted this for consideration because of all the errors, you should not be allowed to judge it without giving examples of what to fix. I have been polite to you, Nick-D, and you have been nothing but condescending to me. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 14:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first two paragraphs of the 'Name' section are not really relevant to this topic - the city was named after the latin word for Guernsey, and there's no need to discuss the evolution of the time as applied to the island
How can the etymology of the name of the city be irrelevant? Also, if you state that I do not include enough references, which you did by saying "A significant amount of material through the article is not referenced," how can you now say that I used too much referencing material? There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "First Nations peoples have lived, hunted, and traveled across the area for as many as six-thousand years as shown by archaeological evidence on Walpole Island. These peoples were drawn from an amalgamation of Ojibwa, Ottawa, and Potowatami, clans, forming the Three Fires Confederacy, also called the Council of Three Fires." - did this arrangement really last for 6,000 years as this implies?
Rewrote and sourced  Done There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Because of Sarnia's importance in this industry, it became one of the primary targets of the Soviet Union's Anti-Energy strike strategy during the Cold War" - this does not appear to be supported by the reference provided (though a page number isn't included, making it hard to check). The only mention of the city is on page 132 where it's identified as one of dozens of cities which could potentially be targeted in such an attack. Note also that this is a US government study from 1987, and this is a hypothetical target list drawn up only for planning purposes - the US Government obviously didn't have access to the USSR's nuclear target list.
Rewrote.  Done There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Still wrong I'm afraid: you've confused an internal study with something move substantive. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the same article, Mayor Mike Bradley jokes that he'll attract new developers by giving them a ride in his vintage Mustang and providing them with a plate of Sarnia's world famous fresh cut fries under the Bluewater Bridge." - doesn't seem relevant.
It is relevant, but I removed it in the interests of time. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the extent of work which is needed here, I'd suggest that this nomination be withdrawn. Nick-D (talk) 07:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest it not be withdrawn because I just fixed everything you said to fix. Thank you for your input and help. I appreciate it. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No you didn't. Your strategy of only addressing the precise problems which are posted here is not at all appropriate for a FAC, especially given that wide-ranging issues have been identified. Given this, I'd suggest that the FA delegates close this nomination as I don't think that it's likely to be successful. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are being disingenuous, Nick-D. You say "fix everything" and then offer nothing but meager criticism and "will not trawl through the article because I should know everything you mean without you telling me." Then, you condescendingly patronize me by saying "a lot of work went into this article." You leave out the "but, you don't know what you're doing" you really think of me. I will give you the benefit of the doubt, however, because of AGF. When this article finally receives the FA status it deserves, I will have the last laugh. There can be only one...TheKurgan (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sarnia/archive1&oldid=561337478"