Wikipedia:Featured article review/Restoration of the Everglades/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC) [1].
- Notified: Moni3, WP Miami, WP Florida, WP Environment, noticed in November 2022
Review section
[edit]This 2008 FA promotion has fallen out of date. For instance, "Early tests by the Army Corps of Engineers revealed this method reduced phosphorus levels from 80 ppb to 10 ppb.[42] The STAs are intended to treat water until the phosphorus levels are low enough to be released into the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge or other WCAs." partially sourced to a 2003 document and the rest unsourced, estimates of panther counts from 2008, etc. The article discusses the NRC's 2008 report on the restoration of the Everglades, but an eight biennial review was released in 2021. Updates are needed here. Hog Farm Talk 00:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Congratulations. This is the first of my FAs that have appeared at FAR.
- You found a source, Hog Farm, why not update the article? Moni3 (talk) 17:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I don't have the familiarity with the subject matter to feel confident being able to do the needed updates at a FA-level. But it's clear that this has not been maintained to a FA-level, either. There's an expectation that for an article to remain featured, it needs to stay at that level of quality. I wouldn't expect a reviewer at my current FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Lake Providence/archive1) to make all of the changes they identify should be made. It likewise shouldn't fall on other editors to do the needed maintenance for FAs on subjects that they don't have the needed heavy familiarity with the subject matter and available sourcing. Hog Farm Talk 19:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It likewise shouldn't fall on other editors to do the needed maintenance for FAs on subjects that they don't have the needed heavy familiarity with the subject matter and available sourcing.
- It absolutely should! I wasn't an expert before I started. I visited Everglades National Park like any other pleb in 2007 and the article sucked, so I added some material to it. Other articles didn't exist so, you know, I wrote them. I'm still not an expert. I just read stuff and summarized it. That's pretty much what Wikipedia is about. The logical end of your view is article ownership, also gatekeeping editors to make sure they're experts before editing. Someone will have to take over this article. This torch is burning my fucking arm off, please take it.
- You found one source, here's some more:
- https://www.evergladesrestoration.gov/
- https://conservancy.org/everglades-restoration/
- https://www.saj.usace.army.mil/WERP/
- A few articles from the Miami Herald or Sun Sentinel would probably be beneficial to see if they think the government is lying. Not that they ever have in the past. I don't have access to those anymore.
- This looks like an interesting book: Amy Green, Moving Water: The Everglades and Big Sugar
- I believe in you. Not just you, Hog Farm. All you fine people. Moni3 (talk) 22:32, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll try to get some familiarity with the sourcing over the next few weeks. The Vicksburg project is my wiki priority right now (there's some parallels with it and this Everglades project I think). I was under the impression when I nominated this for FAR that work was going to become less busy for me soon, but my employer had other plans it turns out. Hog Farm Talk 00:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Moni3: You stated above, "Congratulations. This is the first of my FAs that have appeared at FAR." Articles do not have to be featured articles, and no editor has to fix an article. If Hog Farm cares about an article retaining its featured status, they are welcome to improve it. If you care about "your" article retaining its featured status, then you have to address the concerns outlined above. It is not a reviewer's job to fix an article if they do not want to. Z1720 (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for volunteering, Z1720. You can start here: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d5179e7e42ca1000117872f/t/63c6ebca18925b391bf71009/1673980894394/CISRERP+Report+IX.pdf It's pretty long and detailed but it has a highlights if you want or need:
- https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d5179e7e42ca1000117872f/t/63bf0618b6021629ccdf2f53/1673463326027/CISRERP+Report-Highlights__Everglades-IX__FINAL.pdf
- The best place to start would be to make a sandbox and summarize what you read. Cite it, etc. Moni3 (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Moni3: I do not have the expertise, time, nor desire to work on this article. I am happy to provide comments once editors think this is ready for a re-review. Z1720 (talk) 15:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I already made this comment, but again, I am not an expert. I simply read the sources and summarized them. I never understood how anyone saw not being an expert as an insurmountable obstacle to writing an article.
- Anyway, you won't assist despite your deep concern. What a shame. I'll miss our discussions here, but feel free to carry on at my talk page as I guess this space should be restricted to business. Moni3 (talk) 17:08, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Moni3: I do not have the expertise, time, nor desire to work on this article. I am happy to provide comments once editors think this is ready for a re-review. Z1720 (talk) 15:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Moni3: You stated above, "Congratulations. This is the first of my FAs that have appeared at FAR." Articles do not have to be featured articles, and no editor has to fix an article. If Hog Farm cares about an article retaining its featured status, they are welcome to improve it. If you care about "your" article retaining its featured status, then you have to address the concerns outlined above. It is not a reviewer's job to fix an article if they do not want to. Z1720 (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll try to get some familiarity with the sourcing over the next few weeks. The Vicksburg project is my wiki priority right now (there's some parallels with it and this Everglades project I think). I was under the impression when I nominated this for FAR that work was going to become less busy for me soon, but my employer had other plans it turns out. Hog Farm Talk 00:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I don't have the familiarity with the subject matter to feel confident being able to do the needed updates at a FA-level. But it's clear that this has not been maintained to a FA-level, either. There's an expectation that for an article to remain featured, it needs to stay at that level of quality. I wouldn't expect a reviewer at my current FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Lake Providence/archive1) to make all of the changes they identify should be made. It likewise shouldn't fall on other editors to do the needed maintenance for FAs on subjects that they don't have the needed heavy familiarity with the subject matter and available sourcing. Hog Farm Talk 19:05, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC No major edits to the article since its listing at FAR. Z1720 (talk) 04:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to FARC no major edits. The major editor (Moni3) has also shown that they do not want to fix the article. Also, Moni3, in response to: "I started. I visited Everglades National Park like any other pleb in 2007 and the article sucked, so I added some material to it", the thing is you chose to edit the article, unlike here, where the FAR initiator (in this case, Hog Farm) realised it did not meet FA criteria and brought it here. Two simply different things. Unfortunately, this article in its current state does not meet FA criteria, and will be seeing its demotion soon unless an editor decides they actually want to do this. 750h+ 08:54, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
[edit]- Currency. 18:38, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Delist Currency concerns have not been resolved. Some updates needed. Z1720 (talk) 12:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sadly, I don't think there's anything I'll be able to do here. Work's been a lot busier than I honestly expected when I nominated this, and there's about to be a mandatory overtime requirement taking effect. I'm going to be hard-pressed to keep up with even my own project I'm afraid. Hog Farm Talk 04:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist. Uncited statements include statistics where the source of the data is not given and sentences where motivations are ascribed without giving a source. DrKay (talk) 08:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.