Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of wind farm projects in Romania/archive1
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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].
- 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]
- Ok i removed the image. Mario1987 10:03, 6 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]
- I talked to someone, hope he will respond. Mario1987 17:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The article was proofread by User:Art LaPella and now it's ok. Mario1987 20:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I solved the Dab problem. Mario1987 17:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The article was proofread by User:Art LaPella and now it's ok. Mario1987 20:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I talked to someone, hope he will respond. Mario1987 17:42, 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]
- 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]
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)
|
- 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]
- Don't worry :). Mario1987 18:52, 21 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.