Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Zagreb/archive2

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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 15:44, 15 March 2009 [1].

---

Zagreb

Nominator(s): NIR-Warrior

No more of those needed citations, I've provided all the citations in the article, corrected all grammar errors and wrong sentences, fixed links and organized all the aricle with a new design and a great look who meets all with the FA status's criteria. NIR-Warrior (talk) 13:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Unreferenced sections, 11 deadlinks in the links, websites without publishers or last access dates, bare numbered links in the refs. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess that there is model of links too in other FA articles, I've checked them myself; I think definitely thats this article have to be a FA one, as I works on it day and night. NIR-Warrior (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Strong Oppose Needs a thorough copy-edit; the quality of information is not high and the sourcing is subpar. Sorry, but this isn't near the standards right now.

• Why is there a link to 1094?
• "Most important branches of industry are: production of electric machines and devices, chemical, pharmaceutical, textile, food and drink processing. Zagreb is international trade and business center, and the transport crossroad of Central and East Europe." These two sentences are confusing. First, there are basic grammar errors (missing "the" and "a"), and second, confusing language. What is a "transport crossroad"? The list is ambiguous "production of electric machines and devices, chemical, pharmaceutical, textile, food and drink processing"—are foods produced or processed?
• The economy section is barebones at best; there are many stubby paragraphs.
• The sourcing quality is not good at all; [2] is a travel site; [3] is a Wikipedia mirror (!)
• There is an image gallery, please move images to commons.
• The Tourism section is completely unreference; "Domestic products which deserve to be tasted" says who?
• "The old Medvedgrad, a recently restored medieval burg built in the 13th century, represents a special attraction of Medvednica hill." Why is it a "represent[ation]"?
• "RFF is a new film festival, which will have it's 3rd edition this January. The RFF is organized and run by a group of young enthusiasts, who struggle to find some way of expressing themselves in "this cruel world"." Not cited, and another simple grammar error, "it's"-->its.

Please withdraw and resubmit after major work is done. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your question on my talk page, have you left asked at the relevant WikiProject talk pages? Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Croatia comes to mind. See WP:PRV for a list of volunteers for copy-editing. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree nearly with all your wrong points.

• The Gallery is not a problem as Belgrade is a featured article that have a gallery - point done
• About Medvedgrad, Im not sure what you mean.
• The Tourism section, you said unreferenced, precise what is so.
• "RFF is a new film festival, which will have it's 3rd edition this January..." this sentence is removed
• "The economy section is barebones at best; there are many stubby paragraphs." Precise what.NIR-Warrior (talk) 23:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Belgrade was promoted a while ago, standards have risen a lot then. The "but this Featured article has it" argument doesn't fly with me that much.
  • The gallery should be removed per WP:IG. Few, if any of those images are vital to readers' understanding.
  • ""The old Medvedgrad, a recently restored medieval burg built in the 13th century, represents a special attraction of Medvednica hill."" Basically, what do you mean by "representation"?
  • When I say stubby, I am referring to the one- and two-sentence paragraphs. Combine paragraphs or add information. I would lean toward the latter. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• If the gallery is in Belgrade, i do not see the problem right now.
• About ""The old Medvedgrad, a recently restored medieval burg built in the 13th century, represents a special attraction of Medvednica hill."" The Old Medvedgrad is the main attraction of the Medvednica hill.

Whats the problem again ? NIR-Warrior (talk) 23:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Belgrade article has a gallery for right reasons, in short, taking from the image use policy they "may be appropriate in Wikipedia articles where a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.". Basically they are not just thrown into there by chance, there is a reason why each and every one of those photos is in that gallery. That means that just like any major revamp in a FA you'd have to talk with other users over changing those images.

Anyway the image is gallery is not the major problem here nor are the other FA articles, you need to concentrate yourself on sourcing and in-line citations. I have just noticed that in history section there are only six references. You must fix that. Not every single sentence needs a reference but when it comes to history section, it's the more the merrier. Economy and demographics are well covered but then we have cityscape section with not too many refs. Highways section has many references but roads, bridges, public transportation, tram have almost none.

So please work on the following:

• History (very important!)
• Roads
• Bridges
• Public transportation
• Tram network
• Other museums and galleries
• Other cultural sites and events
• Religious organizations (not a single reference, why?)
• Surroundings
• Tourism

And make sure you have zero Template:fact in the article (like you have in the section Twin Towns - Sister Cities).--Avala (talk) 23:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose It's clear that a lot of work has been put into this, but it does not meet the Featured article criteria at this time. There are issues with prose ("Some croats legends says", pervasive verb tense problems, proseline); style ("approx." used in the lead, inconsistent capitalization); images (many places where text is sandwiched between images, non-compliant gallery); and verifiability and reliable sources (lots of uncited statements, inferior sourcing, incomplete citations). Significant work is needed to bring this up to FA quality. Maralia (talk) 20:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose, 1a and 1c. As Maralia said, a lot of great work has been done here. However, at the bare minimum, this needs a thorough copyedit by someone with a strong command of English, and a thorough audit and fixing of citations and sources. --Laser brain (talk) 06:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - I'll reiterate once again that lots of hard work has clearly gone into this article, but it is not of FA quality at the present time. Entire sections are unreferenced, the formatting of the refs is all over the place, and in many places the English is very poor. I suggest as a minimum it needs a thorough copy-editing by someone whose first language is English -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Tech. Review

• Dabs are not up to speed (based on the checker tool in the toolbox)

• ..they need to be fixed.

• External links are not up to speed (based on the checker tool in the toolbox)

• ...they need to be fixed.

• Ref formatting is up to speed (based on the WP:REFTOOLS script)--Best, ₮RUCӨ 00:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

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