Talk:Geography of Saskatchewan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Geography of Saskatchewan article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Geography of Saskatchewan was a nominee for Geography and places good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
January 27, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Canada / Geography / Saskatchewan (Rated B-Class) Canada Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. This article is part of the Geography of Canada WikiProject (Discuss/Join). Saskatchewan Portal This article is part of the Saskatchewan WikiProject (Discuss/Join). WikiProject Geography Geography Portal This article is supported by the Geography WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage on Geography and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Geography, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] GA Review

The article does not meet the Good article criteria at the present time, and cannot be listed. The article suffers from poor organization, too many pictures, images, and tables, and not enough text. Although, contrary to that, the intro section is a bit too long-worded (paragraphs are too long), and doesn't exactly summarize the article. I also see numerous manual of style issues; 'see also' links are not at the top of sections, but rather scattered just about everywhere, and some sections have 4 & 5 'see also' links and very little content. There are some subsection headers that are internal wikilinks, also a MOS violation. The sources provided for some of the tables don't seem to follow any sort of pattern or consistent formatting.

The 'Historical geography and politics' is only cited by a single, answers.com reference. I find it rather humorous that the text in this reference that is cited, appears to be text that was copied by answers.com from the wikipedia article on Saskatchewan, which is a circular reference and should be avoided (Wikipedia articles should not cite other wikipedia articles). There should also be more than a single source cited as well for this material, for more than one point of view.

The 'additional information' section is just a bulleted list of random items, most of which actually probably belong in other areas of this article, or in the Saskatchewan article.

The 'see also' section is also getting quite long. Links to articles that already appear in article text can be removed to help reduce this a bit.

Also, I am unable to find any evidence on this talk page or elsewhere that the League of Copyeditors did anything to this article, as the nominator suggested in the nomination. Usually, when articles are copyedited by the League, they leave a tag on the talk page indicated that the copyedit was done.

Sorry to be so blunt here, folks, but the article is a long way from GA status. Hope this points editors in the right direction. Cheers! Dr. Cash (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)