Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of wind farm projects in Romania/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by GimmeBot 02:16, 4 March 2009 [1].

List of wind farm projects in Romania

edit
  • I think that this is a featurable list on Wiki. Mario1987 09:04, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Restarted on 00:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Image review needed

  • That map doesn't sit right with me. It claims to be creative commons licensed, but the website it is sourced from says: "©2007 www.ibcoenerg.ro Webmaster Valentin Vieru". It also looks like a scan from a book. If it is, the site is violating the copyright of the book too. It should also be translated into English if it is being hosted and used on en.wiki. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 21:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs) The prose needs going over by someone new to the text.

  • There is some severe overlinking in the lead. Words should only be linked on their first appearance, and dates (2009) should not be linked.
  • "In 2009, Romania will add to its installed wind capacity another 1,200 MW from two wind farms complete in the summer of 2009" Very confusing and wordy. Try: "In the summer of 2009, Romania will add another 1,200 MW from two wind farms to its installed wind capacity. Don't use seasons, use months.
  • Spell out abbreviations such as MW and TW on their first appearance.
  • "US$ 84 million" No space between the dollar sign and the amount.
  • "The Romanian company Blue Investment will invest US$ 84 million in Baia, Tulcea County in a 35 MW wind farm, that will have 14 Nordex N90 turbines of 2.5 MW each, that will be delivered at the end of 2009." Run-on sentence with just too many ideas.
  • "Homever" Not sure if this a word. If this is supposed to be "However", what is its purpose here?
  • "Romania has a high wind power potential of around 14,000 MW[4] and a power generating capacity of 23 TW[4], but until 2007 there were no significant wind farms in operation." Two entirely separate ideas that should not be connected with but. These should be separate sentences.
  • Since the "Owner" column is sortable, every instance of the owner should be linked.
  • Why is there a "Commisioned" column if nothing has been commisioned? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dab link needs to be fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

  • Note: The majority of the article's sources are in Romanian, and therefore I cannot check their reliability.
  • Why are the news article's titles repeated in the "work" field of the citation template? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:44, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok i resolved the overlinking problem, i spelled out what i had to spell and solved the reference problem. And for the "majority of the article's sources are in Romanian" what can i do if almost all of the sources are published by Romanian newspapers/magazines etc. I searched for English refs but i found only for the CEZ Wind Farm and some projects of Eolica. Mario1987 10:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I understand the foreign language thing, that's not what I am opposing over. I am more concerned about the writing. Do you know any native English speakers who can quickly proofread the lead for you. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My issues have been resolved, but I want to wait for more opinions before supporting. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Comments from Truco (talk · contribs)

General comment
  • Add a {{future}} template, since this explains a lot about future events.--TRUCO 01:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Mario1987 09:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • The first stage of, producing 347.5 MW, will comprise 139 General Electric 2.5xl turbines with a 100-metre (330 ft) hub height and 99-metre (320 ft) rotor diameters and a 2.5-MW capacity and will be operational by December 2009. -- (1)Remove the first and second comma (2)Remove the second and and replace it with a comma.
  • Romania has a high wind power potential of around 14,000 MW[4] and a power-generating capacity of 23 terawatts. -- Comma before and
  • Cofra Group has plans for two wind farms, one that will produce 700 MW in Dobrogea and one of 400 MW in Moldova with total investments of US$1.65 billion. -- Comma before with
  • Iberdrola recently bought 50 wind farm projects that produce a total of 1,600 MW of power from a Swiss and a Romanian company for a cost of US$450 million. --- Delink Swiss per WP:LINKS
  • The Hungarian company Sinus Holding will build five wind farms in the Northern Moldavia region with a nominal output of 700 MW and a capital investment of US$800 million. -- Delink Hungarian, its a pretty common geographical term if you ask me.
Done. Mario1987 09:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead really doesn't say much about the list itself, its says more about the future projects. The lead doesn't mention a lot about the other projects that were there before 2009.
Because almost all of the projects are started since 2009. Before, Romania only had single turbines located in different regions of the country. Mario1987 09:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, but the lead mentions that since 2007 which implies that there must be some older ones. --TRUCO 21:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)--TRUCO 21:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it says as of 2007 but like i told you already there were only single turbines not wind farms. Mario1987 09:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wind farm projects
  • This puzzles me: These are some of the most important wind farm projects in Romania (larger than 10 MW), totaling 5,256 MW: -- Some? This means that the list is incomplete and therefore not featured material, unless I'm interpreting this wrong.
Fixed that. Mario1987 09:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the table, I would make the county column unsortable because more than one entry is in each column, so its no really representative of sorting.--TRUCO 21:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has this been done?--TRUCO 23:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Mario1987 13:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- This is the first of this type of lists here at FLC (well from my review-stand-point), and I didn't know what to expect. But I feel that the previous issues raised have been resolved to meet WP:WIAFL standards. Please keep the article up-to-date, however, don't just let it be promoted to FL status and not update it ;)--TRUCO 21:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Please remove the future tag. I find all of those very annoying. Nearly all lists will have things added to them in the future, and I would expect the reader to be able to tell. No event regarding the list is scheduled or future, just the farms itself.
    • That is why a future tag is needed because the projects themselves will be launched later in 2009 (the future). Since this is a short list, it goes at the top, but for lists like List of tallest buildings in Baltimore has that tag in the future buildings section.--TRUCO 23:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm really confused. If above the table it says they total 5,256 MW, why does the first sentence say Romania has a capacity for only seven MW? Well, now that I look at the wind farms' articles I see that nearly all of them are under construction or are even only proposed. The lead should really emphasize that there's about nothing now but a lot has been started.
  • Per the above, a column should be added to the table that says when the projects will be completed. It really seems to imply that they already exist. Wind power in the United Kingdom#List of built and proposed onshore wind farms has a lot more info about dates completed and other specific information.
  • And I know it was discussed previously that the main article is an article not a list, but the two paragraphs of the lead are verbatim copies of Wind power in Romania. I really don't like this duplication. That is the only article that links to this one, so I really don't see the purpose of repeating the info.
    • Because of that I'm really opposed to having two separate articles, at least for now. I think they should be recombined and that article should either be considered a list to come here or it can be an article eventually at GA.
  • Wind power in the United States and other Wind power articles and lists have a lot more info that could be included.
  • Because of the problem with the duplication and the clear discrepancy of information that could be given in the article/list I will have to oppose for now. Reywas92Talk 21:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok. I tried to sort out all that you said above. How does it look now? Mario1987 09:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: I don't think this nomination is going to get any more feedback, and with one oppose and one support, we cannot say that consensus has been found either way. The default is to not promote. The nominator is encouraged to re-nominate at another time (though I'm intentionally not saying when that time would be). Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 07:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_wind_farm_projects_in_Romania/archive1&oldid=1138487846"