Talk:South Bay Salt Works/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CorporateM (talk · contribs) 23:35, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've given it a fist lookover below. I'd also like to review some of the sources more closely, but I think it's close. CorporateM (Talk) 23:35, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First lookover

Lead

Is citation 3 reliable enough for such a bold claim? I noticed the publication says "voices" in the title, which is usually indicative of something crowd-sourced. The publications says it's "powered" by its members and many local publications have a crowd-sourced model. I can't seem to find any information about the author.
"according to the City Attorney of San Diego, the property is in the Nestor neighborhood." <-- Is there any way to get this without attribution? It's such a non-controversial claim, just about any source should be fine. Ideally we would be confident what neighborhood it's in and be able to put it in Wikipedia's voice.
The Lead should define the subject, state why it's notable and summarize the entire article in a representative matter. In this case, the Lead is completely focused on its claims to notability. It would be great if we could trim some of that and summarize it's history.

History

"Records date it back to at least 1871" -> "Records date is origins as being before 1872" (or something)
"another sources" who?
"~~finally~~ reaching"
"during the majority of the 20th century, the amount"

Operations

"have the natural conditions ~~where~~ such that salt extraction from sea salt is feasible.[16]"
"Water evaporated at the salt works come from the ocean, not the bay.[17]" <- which ocean and which bay for those of us that are geographically handicapped
Two "also"s in a row
"has been owned by the"
This is a primary source that is not suitable to support the bold statement that "that usage has been supported by multiple regional politicians and organizations."

Post closure discussion

@CorporateM: Sorry for my long delay on getting to this. I had began a bunch of GANs, then went on an extended wikibreak. This article was just one of them.

Regarding the Voice of San Diego, it is a news organization which frequents KOGO (AM) and appears to meet WP:IRS according to their about us page. That said I have added additional sources to verify the claim.
Regarding the City Attorney of San Diego attribution, I have removed the attribution here.
I modified the lead, to better summarize the article per WP:LEAD.
I have made the changes to the history section as requested here.
I have made some of the changes requested to the operations section. I could not find the "also also" statement.

I hope this resolves most of the issues. Let me know what else I can do to improve the article before resubmitting for GAN.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:22, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]