Talk:YVR Sustainability

Feedback

Hey Guys!

I'd like to first start off by saying that your Wiki Draft page looks really nice!

Introduction

The introduction is well written and explains what your WIKI page is about. I would, however, add references to back up what you guys have stated. For example, you guys mention that "YVR Sustainability is a department of the Canadian airport and it is concerned with airport green initiatives." I would add a reference link that proves this, maybe find it from the YVR website. Furthermore, because this is for the general public, and I know that "airport green initiatives" maybe easy for us to understand, I would like to suggest changing the word green to environment or something along those lines.

The picture at your intro is good! It would be cool if you have find like multiple pictures that showcases the heating, transportation, energy consumption, recycling and noise, and create like a collage for your beginning picture? I don't know, this is just an idea.

Your summary underneath the picture is good but where you mention about the six strategic priorities, I'd suggest rephrasing that sentence instead of the direct quote, and then putting a reference.

Energy Reduction Committee

Again here, I'd like to suggest rewording the quote instead of copy and pasting the entire quote from the website. Reword it, then reference! A much better way, kind of like writing an academic paper.There are 2 quotes in here. Make is something like your last sentence.

Solar Powered Hot Water

Nice work here! I like how you incorporated the references with reworded sentences! See if you guys can fix the "CO2 sensor" thing, the 2 should be under the O, it would just look better. I clicked on the link, if you go there, you should be able to just copy and paste what they've done there, and it should transfer over.

Taxi Incentive Program

Nice work again. You mentioned about the 47% and the incentive. Could you provide a reference for that information?

Greening up Our Walls

There is a quote here, I suggest rephrasing it. There's a minor typo, you have a (') before the word Euonymus Japonicus. Also, I do believe that if you're stating the scientific species with it's scientific name, it's suppose to be Euonymus japonicus. Please note 2 things here, italics and the fact that the second word in the scientific name is not capitalized. Please fix all of those.

YVR Fuel Project

This time, the quote that you put "not expected to result in any significant…" doesn't even have a reference to go along with it! Please rephrase and cite! Other than that, this section is good.

Rapid Transportation

Nice. Well done :) Nice picture by the way.

YVR Recycling Containers

Nice. Well done! Nice picture to go along with the section.

Noise Management

Please cite the first sentence. Other than that, this looks good too!

All in all, very well done guys! Your draft was really well layer out!

Fcheng62 (talk) 02:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

So overall the page is very well done. The information is separated nicely into their own sections but still smoothly transitions into the next with simple concise headings. The pictures work perfectly with their sections and allow readers to quickly get a feel of what it is they are about to read. The links are well placed and seem to be about relevant topics that people are likely going to be interested in reading more about. The only other thing I feel this page would really benefit from would maybe be a section on how YVR compares to other airports in terms of their ecological impacts. Also the fact that YVR has the largest living green wall in North America is interesting so maybe see if any of the other initiatives at are unique to YVR in some way and maybe highlight those as well. Other than that, the page is great. It provides all the essential pieces of information about each topic with no fillers.

Andrewhs91 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Luke Peer Review Kho

Hi, I'm Luke Kho. Your page looks almost perfect to me, so it was really hard to figure out what was missing.

1.There is no information about timeline. maybe you can get rid of it.

2.Energy Reduction committee, "installing an econo-mode setting on baggage conveyor belts to shut down conveyors when no bags are present; installing carbon dioxide sensors to control heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) according to the number of people in area; and patenting a black box to regulate electrical power to the flight information display monitors when no flights are scheduled." =>you quoted too much. I think it's better to reword the information as your own. Same with the next quotation.

3.Solar Powered Hot Water, "which was has led to a decrease of 25 per cent in natural gas usage." =>which has led

4.Greening up our gardens, "aquarium". I understand that aquarium is related to environment but I do not see how it is related to sustainability. Therefore, rather than explaining the size of the aquarium it maybe helpful to elaborate how it is eco-friendly.

5.YVR Fuel Project,"not expected to result in any significant adverse effects, based on the mitigation measures and conditions of the Environmental Assessment Certificate." =>again, make it into your own word rather than quoting.

5.YVR Fuel Project, "tankers double-hulled, pre-screened and each boat having two tugs" =>maybe it's me, but I'm a bit confused about the wording

6.Rapid Transportation=>Does YVR sustainability takes care of "rapid transportation"?

Again, it was such a great wikipage. I think there isn't too much to fix. Good job. thelukkolukko (talk)

Feedback

Aw jeez, this is really polished. Great job! I really don't have much to say about your work at all; the first thing that stood out to me was that "art linked to the environment" could just link instead to [green art].

However, there is such thing as too much information. Knowing how much public transit costs won't help anyone reading the page--anyone looking for that information would go to the transit website. The choice of words you choose to turn into links seems a bit arbitrary, too: having some thematic consistency in the words you're attaching links to could improve the utility and depth of your page.

Honestly, the suggestions I have are so minor I feel bad, since your page is so flawless--the references are well-formatted and reputable, there are plenty of good pictures (maybe take a couple down? Recycling bin is redundant), and your structure is intuitive. Rentarob (talk) 06:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments From Ruth

This page is well laid out and quite slick. However there some improvements that need to be made as this is not a very balanced article. Making these improvement will make this a great Wikipedia page:

· Where is YVR? No mention of Vancouver in the first sentence.

· How exactly do you “expand the quality” of an airport? This is extremely vague. Quality can mean many different things. You need to be more specific

· YVR art?? Is that actually part of YVR sustainability? If yes make this explicit. If not it does not belong in this article. Same with the nature displays.

· Say carbon dioxide instead of CO2

General comments

Nearly all of your references come from the YVR website or press releases. When looking at newspaper articles you have to see where the information in the article actually came from. If it came directly from the airport then it does not count as an independent source. You have to do a bit more digging to see if the figures you quote are reliable or just numbers that make the airport look good? For example how much non-recycled garbage does the airport produce? How much CO2 produced compared to how much saved? (Air travel is well known to be a significant contributor to global warming.) Draw comparison and be more critical.

If you make these changes I am sure this article will be on Wikipedia for many years to come!!

RuthVancouver (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Rosie

All of the peer-review comments are good, and you should address them all in your revisions, but you also need to dig deeper to make this a quality Wikipedia page.

• Is the page about sustainability issues at YVR, or just about the YVR administration department responsible for sustainability? It looks like the latter, but the former would be a better contribution. You could partially accomplish this by adding a section about other sustainability issues (air pollution? soil contamination? deicing fluids).
• Did you consider adding your information on sustainability as a section of the main YVR page, rather than as a stand-alone page? The Wikipedia editors may ask you to do this.
• Have you done any research into general sustainability and environmental contamination and pollution issues at airports? You could use this to provide a more objective framework for your article.

Rosieredfield (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)