Talk:Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument/GA1

GA Review

Hi Viriditas. I will be reviewing this article. Off the bat I see a few things:

Using the deprecated cquote instead of quote.
- Done. You fixed this. Viriditas (talk) 11:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some use of the passive voice when it is not necessary.
- Please specify (if it hasn't already been fixed). Viriditas (talk) 08:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do all those red links need to be there? (Are articles planned for them?)
- Done. Removed. Viriditas (talk) 13:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go through the article for anything else. Overall, it looks good. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who actually said the quote? I put "Moderated by..." but that is not satisfactory.
- Done. Quote belongs to Reichert as indicated by preceding attrib; moderator Jeffrey Brown moved to ref. Viriditas (talk) 11:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could some of the paragraphs be combined to reduce choppiness?
- Yes. In progress... Viriditas (talk) 13:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial bottomfish and pelagic fishing - could this be explained?
- I'll try. Viriditas (talk) 08:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"It was proclaimed by President George W. Bush..." I am not clear what President Bush proclaimed.
- Done. Viriditas (talk) 11:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All references need publishers.;
- Done. Viriditas (talk) 11:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of comments from another user

The second image (Image:NOAA_system_map.gif) seems poorly captioned. What is the "NOAA system" mentioned in the caption? What is the significance of the other places labeled in the image? The caption should either answer that, or the image should be changed.
- Done. Updated image and copied caption. Viriditas (talk) 11:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We have a lot of comments about the effects of the creation of the monument, but to some extent the people making the comments are talking past each other. Perhaps the section could be reorganized, so that opinions on the same subject are placed together? Right now it just seems a bit disorganized. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 22:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you fix it? Viriditas (talk) 23:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was looking at the 2nd- and 3rd-to-last paragraphs and I think I have a way of fixing the problem. However, I also noticed that those paragraphs don't have citations. I'll try to rework it, but you're the expert here, so maybe you could take a look when I'm done. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 22:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Update: Two of the sentences were cited. I can't find a reference for the third one and have labeled it "citation needed" on the assumption that something is out there. If not, that sentence could really be removed without hurting anything too much. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 23:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Removed pending citation. Viriditas (talk) 02:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Concerns have been raised about Hawaii having to import these fish from other areas of the Pacific that do not have the resources to manage and monitor their fisheries effectively. Viriditas (talk) 02:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still having trouble with this sentence. Could it be something like "President George W. Bush on June 15, 2006 proclaimed that the area be protected under the 1906 Antiquities Act." Does that fit what actually happened? —Mattisse (Talk) 18:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. See above section. Viriditas (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is this sentence from 2006 necessary (are the details clear now)? "Other environmental officials such as Stephanie Fried of Environmental Defense expressed "tremendous concern" that commercial activity, including eco-tourism and commercial fishing, could take place in the reserve, but details on the rules were not immediately available."
- Changed the sentence. The details are indeed clear. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 23:06, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - But what were the details and was the "tremendous concern" necessary? This sentence appears unattached to anything else. Could it not just be removed?
    - I think you're right. My reasoning for keeping it in made sense only in my head. --N Shar (talk · contribs) 20:25, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In general, under History and establishment there seem to be many statements that were true in 2006 but the status in 2008 is unclear. And why have details about the African Burial Ground National Monument in Manhattan?
- This is important because the Antiquities Act was only used twice by President Bush: once for this monument, and previously for the burial ground. However, the current link doesn't support it, so I'm adding a ref to the NYT. Viriditas (talk) 12:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way of placing that last picture so that it does not interfere with the references?
- Done. Viriditas (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is a citation needed tag.
- Done. Content removed to talk. See above section. Viriditas (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have addressed my concerns. The article passes GA. —Mattisse (Talk) 18:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]