Talk:Horton Plains National Park/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Shyamal (talk) 09:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

Comments

This is a very interesting region that seems to be an extension of the Sholas of southern India. At first glance, the article seems to cover most of the key aspects required for articles covering biomes. Some comments as I go through the article.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is overall looking good, needs some tightening of prose and some slight restructuring. Should not be too much work before it is a Good Article if the sources are available.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Good luck with improving this article! Additional comments below.

Specific suggestions

• Perhaps the history of changes in its protection status should be moved out of the lead. Current status alone in lead, lead can avoid inline references with their usage best left in the main sections.

 Done Removed in line citation from lead.

• "park is contiguous with the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary in the west" - can be slightly confusing, which one is on which side?

 Done Clarified now.

• "supports the most extensive area of cloud forest" - support ? perhaps some other verb. Does this mean there are other areas with cloud forest.

 Done Replaced with "contains". Of course there are some cloud forests. Eg. Hakgala Strict Nature Reserve and Sri Lanka montane rain forests (the entire ecoregion)

• The altitude is mentioned in the second paragraph of the lead. Perhaps it would be good to move it up and explain that although called "Plains" that these are highlands.

 Done by Shyamal. Thanks

• Physical features - can a climate chart be included ?

I am afraid. Those charts are rare for even cities such as Kandy.

Not a problem, just that it would be a quick summary. Shyamal (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

• References - could you also use a book reference such as a Gazetteer http://www.archive.org/details/agazetteercentr00lawrgoog , http://www.archive.org/details/ceylongazetteer00chitgoog - there are more recent versions too. In general web sites from unknown publishers are rarely considered as reliable as printed journals or books, see WP:RS
  • Some of the journals are lacking volume, issue and page numbers (Reviewer may have fixed some of these since)

Thanks for refs. Is iwmi.org the concern? Oh no, That's very reliable. They even has given refs in the articles. I checked those books. Sorry no mention of HP. Lawrie's gazetteer and Casie Chitty's book are really history books. aren't they?

Not a problem. My concern was a non-English source that was not easily verifiable. Gazetteers usually include more than history, geography, geology, flora&fauna, population etc. Not sure about the mentioned though. Shyamal (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah It would be better to have all-English sources. But do not worry Senaratna's book published by a leading publishers in Sri Lanka (if not the biggest). Here is their web. The title of the book Sri Lankawe Jathika Vanodhyana means "National Parks of Sri Lanka" in Sinhala. Although this not descriptive as the Green's I found it very useful. I have another book called Sri Lankawe vananthara (Forests of Sri Lanka). ISBN 955-573-401-1. by same author.

• Some sources on the web suggest that the place was named by "Thomas Farr" - who (re)"discovered" it at least for the European settlers. Do you have a WP:RS for that ?

I have read that Thomas Farr is a planter. The story is two army officers found this plains when they were on hunting and named after the governor of that time.

• Some citation needed tags and inline clarification tags are added.

 Done

• Would suggest merging of the sections within Fauna, the "Fish and crustacea" stand out as being somewhat loose. Also overall this is too vertebrate centric

 Done Merged. Yeah it would be nice if I was able to mention some butterflies.

• Keep your eyes peeled for a new species of mouse deer http://www.flickr.com/photos/8586609@N04/2351394601/ - right now there is no WP:RS (it is said to jump into water to escape http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2009.05.007 !)

I found this and bit reluctant to mention it. I have a book authored by that Gehan de Silva Wijeratne. But I wasn't all convinced about his manner of writing. It better fit as a travel guide not as an academic literature.

• One pending item, there are three rivers mentioned in the lead but at the end of the physical features section, a cited mention of only one is provided.

 Done added a source. There were a couple of sections ending without source citations including the fauna section on endemic birds. I have moved some references which I believe cover these.

• Web links OK

http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Horton_Plains_National_Park

• Readability - just for fun

http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/readability1.4.py?page=Horton_Plains_National_Park

• 3 links going to redirects (not a real problem)

http://toolserver.org/~byrial/linkcount.php?sub=en&domain=wiki&page=Horton+Plains+National+Park&redir=yes&disambig=yes

Addional comments

• Why is there a comma in the first sentence?

 Done by shyamal

• National park should not be capitalized in the lead or the History section

 Done

• Why is there a comma in the last sentence of the lead?

That is serial comma. I don't know what is the relevant Mos Guideline regarding this. So grateful if you could point out and am willing to change it.

Only two places are listed. The serial comma is only used for three or more.

Fixed now

• "The peaks of Kirigalpotta 2,389 metres..." is not clear. The hights are just stuck in there without punctuation or other words.

 Done

• "Horton Plains was designated as a wildlife sanctuary on 5 December 1969,[1] and because of its biodiversity value, was elevated to a National park on 18 March 1988." is listed twice in the History.

 Done

• "A total 744 plant species" -> "A total 744 ofplant species"

 Done

Have changed it further, does not have to be that accurate. Feel free to improve on it. Shyamal (talk) 09:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant "A total of 744 plant species". You are welcome to be accurate.

• Why are there so many italicized scientific names? Those are meaningless to most readers. Use common names or cut back on the number of them.

Searched every species with binomial name for common names. Changed some. Some of them are simply don't have common names yet.

I see, but I'm sure you understand that one scientific name after another does help a casual reader, so perhaps only list the most important.

• Why is there a comma in "Species such as Gordonia, and Rhododendron arboreum have spread"?

See above

Serial comma is only for three or more items.

• Why is there a comma in "include shrubs such as the endemic, Rhodomyrtus tomentosa"

See above

Fixed now

Serial comma is only for three or more items.

Fixed now

• "about 1500 individuals of Sri Lankan Sambar Deer" -> "about 1500 Sri Lankan Sambar Deer"

 Done

• You can remove the main article link for the Attractions section.

 Done

Fantastic article overall! Reywas92^Talk 00:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks very much for the review. Extremely sorry for some what late response. I had lectures yesterday and working on your comments. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 05:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I have fixed almost every concerns. So grateful If you could have a look and inform me if there are anything needs to be tightened up. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
    • I have clarified. Thanks for the informative article! Reywas92^Talk 01:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
      • Thanks very much Reywas92 for kind and encouraging words. Hope to write a few like this. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 08:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)