Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Grand Canyon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Grand Canyon
My previous 2 nominations failed, but this is a better article. When I found this, it already had pictures, and was very well written. I reformated it, and organzied the pictures. I think it looks great now and meets all the requirements for a featured article. Tobyk777 23:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. Sorry, but it has to have references. Deltabeignet 00:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment -- brilliant photos. How do you feel about the redlinks? (Not that that's a formal criterion, but I'm still wondering if we could fix them.) Also, the "Activities" head seems off somehow, as though the canyon were engaging in activities. BYT 01:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Response I formatted the photos to the way they are and spent hours on it. (After I descovered how to add pics I deicded to perfect my skills by perfecting an article picture wise.) The pictures, and the way they are layed out is the main reason for this nomination. I think that this is as good as wikipedia picture work and layout gets. The only way we could fix red links are to write more articles. Those don't concern the article nominated, so I don't think they are relavent. Yet, if the links should not be there then it may be a valid point. The Canyon doesn't engage in activities. The people in the Canyon do. If you want you could change the section heading to something like "Tourist acivites" or "Visitor activities" but I think it's fine how it is. Tobyk777 02:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Object -- nice photos, but there needs to be more content. The history section should be written entirely in prose, and describe each of the different things listed. Also, references and inline citations need to be added. --Spangineeres (háblame) 03:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment -- "It is believed that the use of postage stamps to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to the subject of the stamp) on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. " deeptrivia (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Object. The first thing that strikes me as wrong is the placement of the images, though this is not a reason to object - The human history section is a bunch of lists and then very short subsections with a lot of red links. There are no references or footnotes - these would be great and references are a must. I think more context is needed and I think less images would be preferable. Refer to peer review. — Wackymacs 21:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- Object. The text came as an afterthought to the great images, did it? Needs more substance. Becomes fragmented towards the end (esp. Geology). Use m dashes—not space/hyphen/space—to set off subsidiary clauses. Some metric units are abbreviated, some are not (use abbreviations, I'd say, and you need a non-breaking space between the value and the unit). Tony 03:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment What is the emphasis of this article as compared to Grand Canyon National Park?--MONGO 04:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose I think the article has overdone it with pictures — many of which deviate from general Wikipedia guidelines for images. Images should be set as "thumbs" (I tried to fix that but Tobyk777, reverted it). Users can then go to "my preferences" -> "files", and choose what size they want pictures when they view articles — we should leave the decision to users. Furthermore, in the Image guidelines, it says "Most pictures are between 100 and 400 pixels wide. Generally, pictures should not be wider than that." One of the reasons for that is Wikipedia is intended for a broad range of users and platforms (e.g. PDAs and various size screens). Also, some users are connected via dial-up. I disagree with the decision to override user preferences by specifying a particular image size. As for the "The Grand Canyon at Sunset" image, it doesn't line up properly and leaves a lot of white space on the right side of the screen. ---Aude 23:34, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
