Jump to content

Talk:Zaprešić

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleZaprešić has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 20, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
February 15, 2009Good article nomineeListed
March 5, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
April 4, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 4, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Zaprešić is the most densely populated city in Zagreb County, Croatia?
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Zaprešić/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    • Note the difference between a hyphen (-), an endash (–) and an emdash (—). (fixed)
      • I'm not very familiar with these rules in English and the person who did the peer review fixed this (apparently incorrectly).
        • Hardly anyone knows this, except MoS-freaks and typographers. You are probably now the only one on the block.
    • It was initially a bit unclear whether there are three separate election, or one simultaneous one, but the text explained it later, and I rephrased as sentence. (fixed)
    • Ideally, accessdate dates should be written out (e.g. 14 February 2009) instead of using ISO-dates, but this is by far not a GA requirement.
      • Interesting, I didn't know that. I've used the ISO style since I started editing Wikipedia, since I found it in many articles and it was the most convenient for me.
        • I also did until a few weeks ago ;) This is mainly due to the removing of the autoformatting of dates in the templates.
    • I feel there could be somewhat more use of commas, but I tend to find that I prefer more commas than most editors; I guess it is a matter of taste. No more action needed during GA review.
    • Why does the sentence: "However, it is, as of 2009, navigable only up to Rugvica, leaving Zaprešić with no possibility of river transport." state as of 2009? Could it be better explained, i.e., when did it/will it have river transport.
      • This was intended to be a figure of speech to avoid saying "currently". However, there are plans of extending the navigability of Sava to central Zagreb, but that would not affect Zaprešić or its surroundings.
    • The USD is rather volatile these days; would it not be better (and geographically more correct) to convert the euro? Personally, when I write Norway-related aricles, I do not convert to any oth currency. People reading the article will be using a host of native currencies, and they will typically only use the indicated currency as an intermediate, thus potentially creating wrong values. Denote all currencies with their ISO-codes. (fixed)
      • I thought about suing $ instead of €, because the dollar is the most widely used currency in the English world and no English-speaking country uses euro. However, I'll remove it as I see your point. If you feel like including the euro, http://www.xe.com/ucc is a good site I've been using.
    • "Zaprešić has a rich cultural heritage" is a very vauge claim; though supported by the following remarks, it is a bit POV.
      • Rephrased.
    • I have removed some sentences that are very redundant, such as "Jelačić is not the only notable historic inhabitant of Zaprešić." They add nothing to the article, but increase reading time.
      • I intended these to help the transition between various aspects of a section, but it does indeed add a more story-like feel to the article.
        • In a non-encyclopedia it would have been great; especially the one mentioned.
    • There are a few instances of terms linked several times. (fixed)
      • I took care of it prior to listing it for GA review, but as the main contributor I know the text almost by heart, so I tend to continually skip some issues.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Ref 44 (the tram) is dead (404). It would be best to find a new url for it.
    I found a new URL, but I'm not sure whether it's a permalink (maybe the website periodically moves files). I'll check the link in a week or two and link to the main list of bus lines if it dies again.
    That will be fine. Stuff like this often changes all the time.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  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:
    Article placed on hold. A few things to fix up, and the article will pass without any problems. Do not hesitate if you have any questions or comments. On a personal note, I wonder if I actually have been to the town. I was traveling north of Zagreb, visiting some villages on the Slovenian border, and we stopped to do some shopping in a town up there. One of the images looks familiar, but it is rather vauge, so I honestly do not know. Anyway, a very well-written article, only a few picky things (much better than the host of stuff that gets nominated by first-time nominators to GA). Arsenikk (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    You were probably in Zaprešić or you might have been to Brdovec. However, Brdovec has a more village-like feel, lacking a city square and other amenities, although it has 10,000 inhabitants. Regarding the quality of the article, I have to thank User:Finetooth for the peer review which fixed many problems I had overlooked. Admiral Norton (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks great. Congratulations with a good article! Arsenikk (talk) 20:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Zaprešić. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Zaprešić. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Zaprešić. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Zaprešić. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect information

[edit]

Hello,

I've noticed several incorrect pieces of information in this article and would like help with editing it as I am not very knowledgeable in editing Wikipedia.

First off, it is stated that the town has a town government of 7 members (upper house) and a city council of 21 members (lower house). This is untrue in several instances: 1:) With the newest changes, the city council has 19 members. 2.) The town government is not the "upper house" as it doesn't have to approve of any legislation - it is just an executive body. 3.) It also doesn't have seven members, you can see the full list of members here: http://www.zapresic.hr/naslovnica/gradska-uprava/gradska_uprava/374/ It is worthy to note that the term "town government" is colloquial since the town's statute doesn't mention this term; instead, it mentions that the town can create various administrative departments (e.g. for social matters, for finance etc.) and appoint heads of those departments. Therefore, it's not clear who should be considered to be a part of the town government (does it include secretaries etc.) Also, the town has one deputy mayor.

Secondly, it is untrue that the town operates without loans. The town has a loan of 20 million HRK in 2021 as can be seen here: http://www.zapresic.hr/naslovnica/gradsko_vijece/sjednice/izvjesca-sa-sjednica/27_sjednica_GV_Proracun_2021/2919 and also it had loans in previous years.

Thirdly, the article is also a bit outdated, mentioning e.g. the budget for 2008, some projects which have been abandoned, like the airport and it doesn't list current projects (such as the southern bypass, cyclist lanes to neighbouring municipalities etc.).

I hope theses issues can be resolved.

P.S.

Also, the town's football club Inter Zaprešić is no longer in the top tier league, but has fallen into second league: https://sportnet.rtl.hr/vijesti/540444/nogomet-hrvatski-telekom-prva-liga/inter-nastavio-seriju-poraza-i-matematicki-ispao-u-drugu-hnl/ and it's not doign quite well there either.

Town council colours

[edit]

Please use less similar shades for Domovinski pokret and HDZ… the difference between the blues is barely visible. Dege31 (talk) 18:05, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Zaprešić&oldid=1213268583"