Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Penticton Regional Airport/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Penticton Regional Airport edit

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to promote this article to featured article status. It has already passed as a good article, and I would appreciate further feedback.

Thanks very much, TBrandley 16:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review - Hey Brandley, let's give it a shot :)

  • Why are we using "nautical miles"?
    • It's what is given in the source and tends to be the standard throughout the world. A lot of airports are sourced from the Aeronautical Information Publication and only a few give a distance from town in kilometres. For example Australia, United States and Norway. For some airports you can find another source, such as the airport website, that will give you the distance in kilometres. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 11:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Not done per Cambridge. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Aviation standards use Nautical Miles (NM), makes sense to me. --Sweboi (talk) 20:37, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • that is part of the Okanagan region -> I think this comes off as repetitive. You already told us it was 1.8 NT from Penticton, I think that's good enough.
    • I disagree, it notes that is part of the Okanagan region in Canada as a whole. I told that it is 1.8 NT from Penticton, but that doesn't make it repetive because Okanagan isn't noted at all in there. Not done. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • serving the South Okanagan, Similkameen and West Kootenay -> regions
    • Done. I added "areas", as "region" is already mentioned above, and I would personally like a variety of words. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The facility maintains a restaurant, Sky High Diner, as well as medical facility, accommodation areas and administrative buildings; food and snacks are also offered. -> Especially the way the sentence starts off, this part is quite ambiguous. They offer snacks on board the planes? In the accommodation areas?
  • Initial examination for constructing an airport in Penticton began in 1937 -> I think this reads awkwardly. I think Initial construction examinations for the airport began in 1937 would be better.
    • What's the reasoning for that? It sounds perfectly fine right now in my opinion, and your suggested way fails grammar. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The proposed locations -> Why locations?
    • Because there is more than one location, that's why that is stated. It is expanded upon in the history section per WP:LEDE. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rights for temporary public use of the Penticton Regional Airport was conducted in 1945 -> I don't think rights can be conducted (searches or inspections are).
    • What would you suggest? Not exactly sure. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • garnering approximately -> I don't think garnering is the best choice here. You garner recognition, awards, not passengers.
    • Done, I change "garnering" to "obtaining". Cheers, TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • with two accidents or incidents having occurred at it -> You mean on it? Also, why "accidents or incidents"? Just leave it at incidents.
    • It makes sense like it is, and you can't just say "incidents" because one of them was an actual "accident". See accidents and incidents section. Regards, TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • three scheduled flights every day -> daily
  • which is operated by Jazz Air -> I think this is again a bit too detailed.
    • You'd think that, but on the airplanes themselves it says "Air Canada Jazz", and therefore is related significantly to the airline. Air Canada Express is the same company (Air Canada) as "Air Canada Jazz". It's important to the airline, so not really over detailed. It's that "Air Canada Express" is operated by them only in this case, as Air Canada Express has a number of "operations" of planes, such as "Jazz" in this case. Not done for now. Thanks for reading my rambling. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There have been campaigns -> Unsuccessful campaigns?
    • No, it is not "unsuccessful", it is ongoing still, if you read further news in the sectors of the article, you will see that some references were published just last week. It is "ongoing", and those words aren't suppose to be used, as per WP:RELTIME. It's fine like this, in my opinion. In fact, further down it says it is scheduled for start in "2013", per WP:LEDE. Not done. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • as well as the expansion of services provided by Air Canada Express at the airport; David Allen is credited as airport manager -> The purpose of this sentence isn't very clear to me as an un-involved third-party reader. Also, the latter part of the sentence doesn't quite fit in properly. It reads like it's just thrown in there.
  • As a general point, I'm not 100% clear on the connection between the airport and Air Canada Express. It is only used for flights to Vancouver? (text: to the Vancouver International Airport provided by Air Canada Express).
    • Right now, yes. What would you like me to do? Not sure. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kelowna International Airport has had an impact on traffic at this airport, with over 50 percent of the local community choosing the former over the latter -> I think this needs tightening. I find it redundant to tell us that it had an impact when they've accumulated 50% of the population's business. Also, I think "former over the latter" could be improved, like the sentence in general.
    • Yes, it has. The "former" is Kelowna Airport, while the "latter" is Penticton Airport. It has had a impact because over 50 percent are choosing the Kelowna Airport, over the Penticton Airport. It certainly has. Not done. TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • These are just comments from the lead. I will come back and add to this list until we complete every section :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 06:37, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Most of them weren't problems that actually needed addressing, in my opinion so I would appreciate a look at actual sectors please. Thanks for reviewing. I hope we can figure out our "differences". Thanks again and regards, TBrandley 17:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, you need to understand that this isn't a FAC. I'm not only listing definite problems. In order to give you the best peer review I can, I'm listing all issues. They don't necessarily have to be applied, they are only personal suggestions. You will notice that many are opinionated. I will try and get to the next section later tonight.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • No, I understand that, that's certainly fine. Thanks very much, TBrandley 00:07, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments on the lead and history section:
    • In the lead: "...southwest of Penticton, a city in British Columbia, Canada that is part of the Okanagan region." That seems wordy. Couldn't you just say "southwest of Penticton, British Columbia, in the Okanagan region of Canada."?
    • "The proposed locations were owned by the Penticton Indian Band, and was thus expropriated in 1949." The verb doesn't seem to match. "Locations were... and were" is correct, unless I'm misunderstanding the sentence.
    • "It has a 6,000 by 148 ft (1,829 by 45 m) runway numbered 16–34, obtaining approximately 80,000 passengers in 2011, with two accidents or incidents having occurred at it." That sentence sounds awkward. Maybe rewrite the last clause to something like "with two accidents in its history."
    • "There have been campaigns for the airline WestJet to operate its services at the airport, as well as the expansion of services provided by Air Canada Express at the airport; David Allen is credited as airport manager." Why are those two independent clauses joined by a semicolon? They seem unrelated.
    • The order that information is presented in the lead does not match the order it is presented in the article's body.
    • "The proposed areas—west of Penticton's city centre and north of the Skaha Lake—were owned by the Penticton Indian Band, and was therefore expropriated in 1949..." This has the same mixed singular/plural problem as the lead. Emphasis added.
    • "Rights for a temporary public use airport was conducted in 1945 for an operation of 24 hours." Another mixed singular/plural usage.
      • I don't understand, sorry. What's the problem? TBrandley 06:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • "In 1956, Penticton Regional Airport was promoted to a permanent license, replacing the temporary permit." Could you go into a little detail here explaining what the license change means for the airport?
    • "In 1968, Canadian Pacific Air Lines extended its services for the airport, scheduling two daily flights, only to be taken over by Pacific Western Airlines the following year.[4] However, in 1988, Canadian Airlines ended this.[4] This was replaced by Time Air and Air BC airlines; both airlines are no longer existent.[4]" This whole part is confusing. CPAL was running two flights a day. PWA "took over". Does that mean they bought out CPAL, or replaced them as an airline at the airport, or both? CA ended "this"? What is "this"? The flights, or the airline providing them? "This" was replaced by TA and ABC. In what way? They took over flight service? Seems like a lot of detail is missing explaining exactly what happened here.
    • "Later, a helicopter flight and training club was introduced to Penticton Regional Airport." Later is vague; you also probably don't need to rewrite the entire airport name there. It seems out of place.
    • General note I'm seeing at this point: it's probably best to name the airport the first time it's specifically mentioned in a paragraph, then call it "the airport" or similar until the next paragraph. Right now it's a bit random when it's called Penticton and when it's called "the airport".
    • "During this time, the airport obtained 22,000 more customers than it would have done without that airline operating at it.[5]" Maybe just say the airline provided an additional 22,000 customers to the airport, simpler phrasing.
    • The second to last paragraph in the history section doesn't really seem to be about the history. It's more a description of the airport's capabilities. Not sure if it should be moved into another section like facilities, or made into a separate section, but it's not quite working as is.
      • Not sure. What would you suggest? I don't think it would work in the facilities section, because that is regarding what services the airport offers, that's not really a service. Some of that paragraph I do believe some of that paragraph is about its history. TBrandley 06:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The facility has been recognized as a certified airport by the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation.[9]" What does that mean? Can you add more information here, since there's no wikilink for certified airport?
    • "It has been identified that the air travel market of the local area consists of 210,000 passengers yearly.[12]" Awkward phrasing. Maybe "it has been noted" or something like that?
    • "However, in 1990, it was considered to be the area's main airport, hence why some questioned the need of expanding the Kelowna International Airport at that time, when its runway was in the process of expansion.[13]" Another awkwardly phrased sentence. Also, it's a bit weaselly. We don't know who the "some" are, since the source uses practically the same phrase: "In 1990, when the runway underwent an extension to 7,200 feet, some questioned the need to spend the money as Penticton’s airport was the main airport for the Valley at that time." In fact, you'd probably need to rewrite that anyway as a bit too close paraphrasing.
—Torchiest talkedits 04:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the two points you commented on above:
    • "Rights... was conducted"; I would think it should be "Rights... were conducted", but it's also not clear what that means. Maybe you want to say "Rights... were secured"? —Torchiest talkedits 13:42, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe you could have a "Layout" or "Physical characteristics" section? I'm not familiar with airport article structure though. "An aircraft at this airport can handle no more than 30 passengers.[1]" and "The facility has been recognized as a certified airport by the British Columbia Ministry of Transportation.[9] Transport Canada categorizes a certified airport as a process that ensures it meets the safety criteria for airports, and provides flights to other destinations.[10]" Those sentences seem like they could comfortably fit into a facilities section. Maybe there's more information at WP:AIRPORT. —Torchiest talkedits 13:42, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing (History)

  • with the preliminary development of the airfield completing in 1941. -> completed
  • In 1946, more land was acquired from the Penticton Indian Band for use at the airport to help maintain it. -> I don't understand how acquiring more land helps maintain the airport. Also, I think the second part of the sentence could be written a bit better with some punctuation etc.
  • However, in 1988, Canadian Airlines ended this. -> Could be a bit confusing, perhaps a bit more elaboration? Also, try to avoid short and choppy sentences.
  • That was replaced by Time Air and Air BC airlines; both airlines are no longer existent. -> Again, take what you will from this, but IMO I think active would be better suited than "existent".
  • Pacific Coastal Airlines offered its services at the Penticton Regional Airport for twelve months, ending in 2009. -> Again, I'm a bit confused. So they stopped services in 1988 and then re-instated for 12 months in 2008-09?
  • During this time, the airline provided an additional 22,000 customers to the airport. -> I think accommodated and passengers are better
  • The facility has been classified as an airport of entry by Nav Canada, and is staffed by the Canada Border Services Agency.[1] An aircraft at this airport can handle no more than 30 passengers. -> Just making sure. The facility is Penticton? Also, they only support aircraft that hold up to 30 passengers?
  • Nav Canada has noted that most of the aircraft wind at the Penticton Regional Airport -> wind at the?
  • aimed at the north and south directions. -> Maybe "Northern and southern directions"?
  • to fly to the Vancouver International Airport and Calgary International Airport -> TO make it a bit cleaner, what do you think about to fly to the Vancouver and Calgary International Airport.
    • Not done in order to clarify its specific airport (these places have quite a few airports), also that may lead to confusion. TBrandley 05:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 79,475 people -> I personally find it an odd read to begin a sentence with a number like that.

Facilities

  • to the airport; the airport's -> I know it can be tough, but wording used in such close proximity take away from the read
  • 247 employees work for the Penticton Regional Airport. -> Again here
  • Food and snacks are available at this airport -> This airport sounds a bit awkward. Also, are we talking about food on-flight or in-terminal?
    • Mostly done, although "this" is just a different word to use. TBrandley 05:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Spencer Aviation, which is located at it; -> at it?
    • What's the problem with that? "At it" means it is located at the airport's facility. TBrandley 05:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Airlines and destinations

  • that an additional daily flights -> flight
  • the airport garnered 34,946 aircraft movements -> Do you think aircraft movements is best? Or garnered?
    • Yes, "aircraft movements" is actually the type used on typical articles of relation to aviation, while "garnered" is just a word, I don't see the problem there. TBrandley 05:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • so that they can perform a presentation -> could
  • Calgary International Airport and Edmonton International Airport. -> Again here
    • Please accept all my comments in good faith. You've done a great job and I tried to pin-point any possible problematic areas I could find. Feel free to include my recommendations :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:09, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the comments. TBrandley 05:49, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Penticton_Regional_Airport/archive1&oldid=1136084807"