Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bjørnøya/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Bjørnøya

Self-nomination. Peer review request, points listed there and on talk page have mostly been addressed. The article is perhaps a little short, but it's been difficult to find useful resources; I think I have taken the best out of what I could find, so IMO there's not much left to add. I am aware of two more problems: the copyright status of some of the images seems unclear (I have contacted the uploader by e-mail and on his talk page), and the style of writing may be quite uneven. Being no native speaker of English, I can't help much with the latter, so if the style needs improving, please give specific suggestions. Thanks. Kosebamse 12:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Conditional support - It is a very well done article about an obscure subject, however it still needs some last minute touches. The history section should be made the first subsections, along with general Wiki standards. The Bjørnnøya Today section needs to be incorporated into the history section, and the miscellaneous section needs to be incorporated as well. The image gallery should be integrated into the article or moved off to commons, but it should not be there. Will fully support after these are met. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 16:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

  Thanks. I have moved the history section and incorporated the "today" section; however I just don't know where to leave the "misc" stuff (frankly I could live without it, but since somebody else included the facts...). Will look after the gallery images (but note the copyright problems mentioned above). Kosebamse 17:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

  A map can be found here, a historical image here and here, a photo of the meterological station [1] here, and the person who took that image can be contacted here, this is also of the weather station and is from the Norwegian government, so therefore uncopyrightable. This map of Bjørnøya is from the Svalbard sysselman. If I found this many images in 5 minutes of search, it would appear there are quite a few more to be had. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 19:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

  I think that the images that we have are fine, only the copyright question needs to be resolved. I am quite sure the uploader would license them GFDL, but he's an infrequent user and I wonder whether he has received my request at all. WRT your links, I am not convinced that they are helpful, because I am not sure about their copyright status (those that are obviously old enough to have any copyright expired do not seem to show Bjørnøya, and I am not sure why Norwegian government's works should be uncopyrightable.) Will do some more research however. The map of Bjørnøya has long been linked from the article, but not included because of copyright uncertainties. A Google search for images relevant images yielded several hundred but none with usable licences. Kosebamse

• Object - echo Pall's comments.
  • ==Bjørnnøya Today== needs to be merged with the =history= section.

    Already done.Kosebamse

  • =Geography and nature= should be split into =Geography= and =Flora and fauna=.

    Done.Kosebamse

  • Please resolve the image copyrights. Till you get the necessary approval, please remove them.
  • Manual of Style not followed for units> Please use the non breaking space:   for all units eg. 15 °C; 20 metres etc. Also use − for sub zero values.
  • The word Bjørnøya not being native to the English alphabet needs an IPA rendering to allow a reader know how it is pronounced.
  • A map which depicts the exact location with respect to Norway is desperately needed

    If there were one. Advice welcome. Kosebamse

    The Svalbard location map will suffice. If both the maps could be merged into one, that would be even better

    I am not too happy with the Svalbard location map, but I'll ask our expert for a better one. Kosebamse 16:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

  Done. Kosebamse

  • Please wikify the dates.

    I am generally not convinced that is a good idea, so more opinions would be helpful. Kosebamse

    I just had a discussion with someone about that. I like it, that way the dates will show april 1 or 1 april depending on one's preferences. Garion96 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

    I think that too many links are ugly and distracting, but if the "april 1" vs. "1 april" thing depends on a proper way of linking, it would of course make sense. Kosebamse

  • Single/Double sentence paragraphs shoulf be merged with larger ones.

    There's only one left and I don't know what to do with it. Sorry, confused that with sections. Kosebamse

  • Copyediting needed by a copyeditor.

    Would be grateful if somebody volunteered.Kosebamse

  • The gallery is unwanted. If the image copyrights are resolved, please embed the best images in the text like all other articles. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Addenda by Nichalp:
  • 74.5°N 19.0°E should be linked as 74.5° N 19° E
  • =Strategic location= should be merged with the =history=. Avoid fragmenting the history by using subheadings.

    It might fit into geography as well, but I am not convinced that it should be merged. I have deliberately made it a section of its own because it seems relevant enough (BTW the idea came from the Norwegian article on Bjørnøya which is longer overall but IMO unneccessarily talkative). Kosebamse

    The matter does not say why it is so strategic. It will flow better in the =History= =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:02, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

    Agree with that. Done.Kosebamse

  • A paragraph should have an ideal length of 8-12 sentences. =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

    I've fixed some of these. -- ALoan (Talk) 02:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

user:Denelson83 can provide you with the IPA. The article cannot be featured unless the images are appropriately licenced. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:17, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the hint. I am very well aware of the copyright problem. As I said, I am quite certain that the person who made and uploaded the images is willing to give them the appropriate license, but he's difficult to contact, I'll try again. Kosebamse

• Object. Please delink all of the trivial chronological links (plain years, decades and centuries). Retain those that include day and month. See WP’s policy on this at Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context; see other information at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Internal links, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Date formatting and Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates_linking_convention_currently_ludicrous. Tony 02:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)