Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Balch Creek

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 01:22, 3 August 2008 [1].

---

Balch Creek

Nominator(s): Finetooth (talk)

I'm nominating this good article for featured article because, improved during peer review, it meets the criteria. It describes and tells the story of a short, schizophrenic creek that begins in a forest and ends in a storm sewer in Portland, Oregon. My thanks to User:Epicadam, User:Doncram, User:Ruhrfisch, and User:Ealdgyth, who took part in the peer review, and to User:Juliancolton, who did the GA review. Finetooth (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• The first sentence is exceedingly awkward: something of the something in the something of the something in the whatever (or something like that). Consider rephrasing.
• Second sentence seems to suddenly digress - how about "...is named after (person), who is famous for..."?
• You use "unincorporated Multnomah County". First of all, the second "unincorporated is unnecessary (though it's fine to describe it as "unincorporated" again later in the text). Second of all, what does "unincorporated" mean in this context, anyways?

More later - I'm busy right now. Nousernamesleft (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Support (and more comments) - prose is excellent over all, some little things:

• "This bottom land"?
• Why exactly is "Guild's Lake" bolded?
• "in the early part of the 20th century" -> "in the early 20th century"
• "The creek drops from 1,116 feet (340 m) at its source..." - add "above sea level", if that's what you mean.
• You use "a minimum of 0" then just "minimum of 0". Be consistent.
• Redundancy: "including mixtures of red alder and cottonwood trees in some areas" - this is debatable, but I like to strive to be as concise as possible.

Excellent work. Nousernamesleft (talk) 23:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply: Thank you, User:Nousernamesleft, for the helpful suggestions and for your support. I took your advice and made all of the changes you recommended. I have unbolded Guild's Lake, replaced "bottom land", removed the repetition of "unincorporated" and wikilinked "unincorporated" in the main text. In this context "unincorporated" means not part of Portland or any other city or town with a municipal government. I have added "above sea level" and wikilinked it, fixed the red alder sentence, and inserted the missing "a" before the second "0". I fixed the "20th century" phrase. Most helpful were your suggestions about the lead, which I re-wrote for clarity and concision. The lead included a nest of passive-voice verbs that User:Epicadam had warned me about but which escaped fixing until today. I have replaced them with active verbs. Thanks again. Finetooth (talk) 03:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments - I reviewed the sources at PR, and the one concern I had was addressed. I double checked them again just now, still look fine. Links all checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, Ealdgyth. I always appreciate your help. Finetooth (talk) 17:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• there are a few refs that should be combines ("Streams & Water Bodies" is cited in two different footnotes)

• Are there any named tributaries? The map clearly shows at least one tributary, but none are mentioned anywhere in the article.

Circeus (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply: You are right about the redundant citations. In response, I found ways to combine or compress several. I think I caught them all. Your question about tributary names is good. I can find no "official" names. The Friends map shows three tributaries, one joining the main stem at Cornell Road and two crossing the Audubon property. I originally thought the bigger of the two Audubon streams was called "Woodpecker Creek", but only one source called it that. It may well have been a "working" name rather than an official one since an official Woodpecker Trail is nearby. In response to your question, I have added the three unnamed tributaries to the course description. Thank you for your helpful suggestions. Finetooth (talk) 01:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Support As noted, I peer reviewed this and felt it was nearly FA quality then and find it has only improved since. Great job, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words and your support. Finetooth (talk) 04:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Support (and comments) A very well-written, interesting and informative article -- just what an encyclopedia should be. I fixed a couple of very small grammatical issues and I have one question about a street name:

• • Industry section: "longterm economic viability as an industrial district." - corrected 'longterm' to 'long-term' per the cited material
    • Did you mean to say "Northwest Northwest" as in: "what later became Northwest Northwest Saint Helens Road and Northwest Yeon Street"?
  • Fish and wildlife section: substituted 'simpler' for 'more simple'

Good show! Geoff (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Reply: Both of your changes improved the article. Also, you are quite right about the accidental doubling of "Northwest", which I fixed after seeing your note. Thank you for your kind words and support. Finetooth (talk) 19:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment. All the images are fine copyright-wise.--ragesoss (talk) 01:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, ragesoss, for checking the images. I appreciate it. Finetooth (talk) 03:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

• Note, it looks like you strugged with delinking accessdates. What you did works, but another way to do it (for future reference) is to use the accessmonthday and accessyear parameters, instead of accessdate; that results in delinked retrieval dates. Please consider cleaning out those empty parameters on cite templates in the future, as they just unnecessarily chunk up the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks User:SandyGeorgia. I removed the rest of the empty parameters in this article, and I will remove them from other articles in the future. I moved the access dates back inside the templates using the two parameters you suggested. This is more elegant than leaving them orphaned. Finetooth (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.