Talk:Laysan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Laysan was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: April 8, 2008
WikiProject Volcanoes

This article is part of WikiProject Volcanoes, a project to systematically present information on volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information), or join by visiting the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance to WikiProject Volcanoes on the project's importance scale.
Assessment comments.
Hawaii Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaiʻi, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Hawaiʻi. Please participate by editing the article Laysan, or visit the project page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments
This article is supported by the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands task force.

[edit] Name

I don't know whether this should be called Laysan Island instead. Web pages that I've seen seem to use either name interchangeably.

[edit] Reef

I note that Reef has a link to the currently nonexistent article Fringing reef. When that gets written, this article should probably link to there instead of to Reef. For now, linking to Reef is the most informative option. —Triskaideka 20:44, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

I'm afraid that this article isn't close to GA yet.

  1. The introduction does not come close to summarising the article
  2. Much is unreferenced, including most of the geology section
  3. References are a mess. Is Sinclair a ref or external link? - shouldn't be both Why are there footnote links in the reference section instead of incorporating the url? footnoteplacement in text doesn't always follow punctuation
  4. lack of clarity - Species section claims two mammals and a few birds - presumably no invertebrates, plants or bacteria?
  5. birds just a list - which breed and which are visitors?
  6. whole Ancient Hawaiian section is based on a newspaper article, needs a proper ref
  7. images, although good, correctly licensed and appropriate, are just dumped in a line. Try to integrate with appropriate sections, reducing size if necessary,
  8. article title shouldn't appear in headings (MOS)
  9. coordinates just an afterthought, why not integrate with the maps
  10. plenty of copy editing to do eg Pritchardia should be italicised, geology gives only imperial measurements

Sorry if this seems pretty negative, but there's a lot to be done. let me know if there's anything above that's unclear. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. I was mainly interested in finding out exactly what the article did need for GA, so thank you. SeanMD80talk | contribs 01:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)