Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ratanakiri Province/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Karanacs 18:43, 16 February 2010 [1].
- Nominator(s): Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because I think it's a well-written, comprehensive article about a part of the world not covered well on Wikipedia. The history of this area is somewhat tragic, and its future doesn't look particularly bright either. I think it's an interesting read that delves into issues facing many parts of the developing world. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- One note: I was holding off this nomination in the hope that the 2008 census data would become available. It's still not up on the govt website and I have no idea when it will be posted. Much of the data in the article is from the 1998 census, though I have provided updated stats where available. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Technical comments:
- Several dab links indicated in the tool, but I can't find them in the article, so presumably a case of server lag.
Please check the dead external links indicated in the link to the right.- Alt text is present, but needs work: Text such as "A photo of" is unnecessary. Alt text should not duplicate the caption. In the map, the roads are not indicated in the alt text (also, I'd call them orange, not red). In the photo of the lake, how can one see from the picture that the forests have been replaced by fields? The map of the districts should indicate the approximate location of each. Please check WP:ALT.
- Random comment: I think I just wrote an article on a shrew that occurs and was first found there. Ucucha 22:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah I fixed those dabs recently. The dead external links are just links to the original, where I have added a new archive link. (God, I have gone through hell trying to replace links that have gone dead. Clearly websites in developing countries don't last long.) The one where it says "Excessed redirect limit" works fine if clicked. I tried to fix the alt text. Hopefully it's better. I'm going to stick with red for the roads if you don't mind. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you want me to mention the roads in the alt text for the map, without duplicating the caption that already mentions them? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Re the forests replaced by fields - Clearly the natural state of the environment is forest. It has been replaced at some point with fields. Considering the problem of logging in Ratanakiri, it has probably been replaced relatively recently. I can remove this from the alt text if you want, but I don't think I'm drawing impermissible conclusions from the photo. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As for the deforestation, I think such info should belong in the caption. As for the roads, I think the caption merely says that the roads are indicated on the map, and the alt text should say where they are (to a certain extent).
- Thanks for the replies and fixes! Ucucha 23:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Re the forests replaced by fields - Clearly the natural state of the environment is forest. It has been replaced at some point with fields. Considering the problem of logging in Ratanakiri, it has probably been replaced relatively recently. I can remove this from the alt text if you want, but I don't think I'm drawing impermissible conclusions from the photo. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- How do you want me to mention the roads in the alt text for the map, without duplicating the caption that already mentions them? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments . Yep, that's a good point, it might be possible to write a new wildlife paragraph. Also I believe there is the problem of deforestation in that province and that needs to be addressed and how it interferes with the ecosystem and habitats too. I see you've briefly mentioned this but I have been led to believe the logging is a serious problem in the area and is perhaps worthy of a more detailed evaluation. Other than this I find this article very clear to read and I believe it addresses most of the main points without going into too much detail. A couple of other things. Perhaps you could use File:Cambodia location map.svg and create a better quality province locator highlighted in red. I am admittedly not a fan of the quality of the blue highlighter and blocky looking map. Also I'd recommend creating a montage to go in the main infobox, an assortment of photographs to try to give a balanced scenery of the province for aesthetic and information purposes. Dr. Blofeld White cat 22:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think there's enough information to write a new wildlife paragraph - there's really not much info out there more than what I wrote. I struggled with how to include the logging/deforestation issues. Currently there's some info in history about the land title problems, which come in part from logging, some info in the geography section about environmental degradation, and also some info in the economy section. Do you think it should be rearranged or expanded? I don't want to put unwarranted emphasis on it. I think I prefer a solid map, but I'm open to hearing what others think about a new locator map. The US one is solid and blocky and the India one is more complex, and I find the India one hard to use for someone with little sense of Indian geography. I used to have an image above the map in the infobox, but another editor removed it. I could put one back. None of the state FAs I have seen have photos in the infobox. Does anyone else have thoughts about this? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, actually I think for the main article you've pretty well summarised the main points about logging and wildlife. I'm not sure though whether it would be easier to dedicate a paragraph to say wildlife and environmental issues, if not that's OK. Dr. Blofeld White cat 22:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't I do this in the third and fourth paragraphs of the geography section? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes it is summarised, I meant a section on environment and wildlife. As for the map, what's wrong with something like the one for Chiang Mai Province. I prefer the quality of an svg locator... Dr. Blofeld White cat 22:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll see what I can do about making a map similar to Chiang Mai. It may be beyond my svg abilities... I don't think I should separate those paragraphs into a new section because it would be very small, and it would leave the remaining geography/climate section even smaller. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I got a new map made by the people at the Graphics Lab. See what you think. I also added a lead image, but at the moment it appears super-saturation-boosted. I'll have to tone it down later. I tried a collage earlier[2] and it looked ridiculous IMO. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll see what I can do about making a map similar to Chiang Mai. It may be beyond my svg abilities... I don't think I should separate those paragraphs into a new section because it would be very small, and it would leave the remaining geography/climate section even smaller. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes it is summarised, I meant a section on environment and wildlife. As for the map, what's wrong with something like the one for Chiang Mai Province. I prefer the quality of an svg locator... Dr. Blofeld White cat 22:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't I do this in the third and fourth paragraphs of the geography section? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:25, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a report on the fauna of Virachey here, and it appears the survey was carried out in the Ratanakiri part of Virachey. The map that is in the description of Crocidura phanluongi indicates that it was also caught in Ratanakiri. It's your call whether to include that in the article. Its information does appear to be more detailed than that (Desai and Vuthy 1996) currently in the article. Ucucha 22:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I added one sentence with a summary of that survey - thanks for the find. I don't think it warrants more than that, because it's specific to one national park rather than being an overview for the whole province. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The same goes for the other reference (Desai and Vuthy), though. Ucucha 23:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I know, and it only gets one sentence too. There's really not any information about which animals are most common throughout the province, etc, just some inventories from surveys of limited areas. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:26, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The same goes for the other reference (Desai and Vuthy), though. Ucucha 23:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I added one sentence with a summary of that survey - thanks for the find. I don't think it warrants more than that, because it's specific to one national park rather than being an overview for the whole province. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, actually I think for the main article you've pretty well summarised the main points about logging and wildlife. I'm not sure though whether it would be easier to dedicate a paragraph to say wildlife and environmental issues, if not that's OK. Dr. Blofeld White cat 22:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment.
This page contains invalid HTML, as reported by the W3C validator; can you please fix this?Eubulides (talk) 07:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what would cause this. Can anyone else help? Calliopejen1 (talk) 11:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Never mind, I fixed it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 19:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Never mind, I fixed it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support -now that those things have been fixed as I mentioned as Blofeld I think this is of featured quality. I think it is very clear to read and does a very good job of summarising the main points. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 16:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To be clear, before I nominated this I asked Blofeld (a frequent collaborator) whether there was anything I could fix, and then I let him know I had put it up for nomination. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Good to see such a nice article on a part of the world that certainly I knew very little about. I have only one comment, which is that gems seems to feature quite significantly in Ratanakiri's history and economy, but I've got no idea what gems we're talking about. Diamonds? Sapphires? Emeralds? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I did some new searches to investigate this - it hadn't really been addressed in the stuff I found so far. Ganoksin.com says, "Blue zircon has been coming out of the province for years, and the amount is increasing as the stone's demand increases. The mines in Ratanakiri also produce small amounts of amethyst, peridot, and black opal."[3] I'm not sure how reliable the site is though. Maybe I can put it on the reliable sources noticeboard or ask a wikiproject about mining or jewelry. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually it seems that this report was done by a trade magazine Colored Stone.[4] That looks pretty legit so I'll work it in. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Support meets FA, the alt text of the photo of Nixon pointing at the map made me chuckle. Dincher (talk) 22:13, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.