Talk:Dolphinarium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Dolphinarium has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cetaceans (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cetaceans, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cetaceans on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Architecture (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Zoo (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Bombing[edit]

Is the arab-israeli conflict section really necessary? In regard to consistency at Wikipedia, every news event (whether a peace treaty or bombing) probably does not merit a separate subcategory in articles for location-types where bombings have occured such as: café, coffeehouse, restaurant, nightclub, or geographic locations such as Maryland (location of Camp David).

Therefore will be deleting this section from the dolphinarium article. Santaduck 11:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know who put it back but I'm going to delete it again for the same reason. It's just as relevant as placing WWII at the top of countries or Liza Minnelli at the top of women. (SketchNL (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC))

List of dolphinariums removed[edit]

It was very incomplete, but, besides that, a complete one would be hard to make and would also become very long (there's 49 dolphinariums in Japan alone!) BabyNuke 12:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

With luck I came across what seems to be a pretty complete list. I've reorganised it, added / removed / changed it to the best of my knowledge and gave it its own page. BabyNuke 21:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Good article review[edit]

Please:

  • insert more images (maybe from here)
  • improve external links

and I make it pass GA candidation. NCurse Nuvola apps edu science.png work 07:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Added three more links and one image. BabyNuke 19:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Just one thing left:

  • "Currently an estimated 3000 Bottlenose Dolphins live in captivity across the world." (a reference would be good)

Anyway I couldn't find any fault in the article. NCurse Nuvola apps edu science.png work 20:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the exact number. Though a quick search on google came up with a page confirming the number of 3000, I also found pages with different claims. BabyNuke 20:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Now it's a good article. Nice work. :) NCurse Nuvola apps edu science.png work 20:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the effort! :) BabyNuke 20:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

Hello, I've created a proposal to merge several articles, including this one, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cetaceans#Proposal_to_merge_articles_on_cetaceans_in_captivity. Please add your thoughts there. Kla'quot 11:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dolsling.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Dolsling.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Pluralization[edit]

This might be a stupid question, but should "dolphinariums" be pluralized to "dolphinaria"? Cavatica (talk) 21:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Encarta (http://uk.encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861712322/dolphinarium.html) suggests both are correct. BabyNuke (talk) 21:48, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    The Lead does not adequately summarise the whole article. Please read WP:LEAD for guidelines. I would also like you to look at the WP:External links and see if they are all necessary and add encyclopaedic content.Green tickY
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Ref #3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13 are dead links. Compuserve and geocities are not WP:RSGreen tickY
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    May need some updating. Green tickY
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Just the concerns noted above to be addressed, on hold for seven days, major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
    I see some work is being done - are you ready for me to have another look? Jezhotwells (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
    Nothing has been done about the lead - it should be at least 3 paras for an article like this and summarise the whole article. Still has one dead link [1], which is geocities and not RS anyway. I moved the book into further reading and formatted the citation. I will take a look tomorrow and make a decision then. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing that. I fixed the last remaining dead link and expanded the lead per above. Note that MOS indicates that the appropriate length of the lead is 2-3 paragraphs for articles of this size. Elekhh (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, I am happy to confirm that this article is worthy of GA status. Thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Changing sub-section name not minor edit[edit]

Hi, Babynuke - please do not mark a change like this as minor or a tweak - there may be disagreement about it. See WP:Minor Bob98133 (talk) 18:44, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

File:Marine world.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Marine world.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 7 April 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Marine world.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:53, 7 April 2012 (UTC)