Wikipedia:Peer review/Chunchucmil/archive1

Chunchucmil

My colleague and I have been working on this page concerning the ancient Maya archaeological site of Chunchucmil. It is currently rated as a B leveled article, and were hoping to move it through the stages towards a Featured Article. Looking for a peer review to help us get the ball rolling. Thanks in advance! Oaxaca dan 05:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that could use some improvement is the images. The top one looks like it would be most appropriate for a guide on tourism because of the cropping and text. I notice there's also a fair use image there with no fair use rationale (see WP:FURG for more info); my guess is that it doesn't meet the first of the fair use criteria since it should be possible to get an overhead picture of the area. (If it isn't possible because say, the area's off-limits, then make sure to include that in the fair use rationale.) ShadowHalo 08:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the other contributor to that article. I think ShadowHalo's comment about the first image is a good one. I'm going to change it to something a little less "logo" like. However, all images within the article were created by me (original photographs, original artwork) or by my colleagues. I use the "ShareAlike 2.5" for most of the image releases, I don't think there is a Fair Use image. But if so, that was a mistake in uploading. We own the rights to every image on the page. Thanks for the comments!Chunchucmil 13:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I just realized that ShadowHalo was referring to the GoogleEarth image. If a google earth screenshot is not appropriate, I can find other sources. I just thought it would be a valuable image to let readers know that the archaeological site can be seen from space using Google Earth. Again, let me know if this is not appropriate. My understanding (based upon the links available on [[1]]) is that one screenshot of such software is perfectly appropriate on a Wikipedia entry. Chunchucmil 13:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first image (that ShadowHalo found to be too much like a tourist logo) has been removed. I left the Google Earth image in there, pending further advice Chunchucmil 13:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 21:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, APR, these minor issues will prove useful to our revisions. We have already begun addressing the points raised by the Javascript bot. However, we would greatly appreciate advice from other (flesh and bone) editors who might provide insight on the content, layout, design, formatting, or other issues (rather than the automated response).Chunchucmil 14:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]