Wikipedia:Peer review/Aliso Creek (Orange County)/archive1

Aliso Creek (Orange County)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to eventually bring this article up to FA. It has already passed GA status in February 2009 and has undergone some revisions since it was passed for GA. I feel that it is much better in referencing and prose now, but I think there are still some sections that need improving: Name, Course, Geology, and Floods sections need better writing and referencing. Also, I need some help in locating and removing repeat references, as they are quite rampant in this article.

Thanks, themaee^talk 18:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Doing Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:19, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll still be active for around a half-hour, but I'll most likely not be active for the following 17 hours or so, as it is Pacific Standard Time night and I will be busy tomorrow. Thanks, themaee^talk 04:25, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Sorry to be slow. I like this and recognize the large amount of work that has gone into it so far. It needs some work for FAC, so here are some suggestions for improvement with that in mind.

• In the lead, I have trouble with is a major river-like stream - the lead is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article and I don't really see anywhere else that says it is "river-like". I also think of rivers as being long, draining a large watershed, and having a steady and large volume flow year-round. From what the article says, this does not seem to be very river-like (it is a nice creek, but is fairly short and small in area and its flow is "erratic" enough that it is not sued for drinking water). If there is a reliable source that says this (river-like), fine (and please put it in the article) but if not, I don't see what it adds to the lead. (done)
• I would say in the lead that it drains directly into the Pacific Ocean (not everyone will know this from just saying the mouth is in Laguna Beach) (done)
• Watch for needless repetition - the first sentence in the lead identifies the name as Spanish in origin, then the third sentence says The name, of Spanish origin, was given to the creek by Spanish conquistadors in the 1700s, although there are now many places in California that use the name. I think at least one Spanish here is not needed (perhaps even "Spanish conquistadors" is uneeded too, not sure how wide-spread the knowledge is that the conquistadors were all Spanish - I can see someone asking were there any Norwegian or Chinese conquistadors ;-) )? In the same sentence I am not sure why "although" is used. Here it may help to be more specific on other places with the same name - there are five creeks in CA with the same name. There are many places with Aliso in their name. So maybe it should read something like The name was given to the creek by Spanish conquistadors in the 1700s; as of 2009 it is one of five Aliso Creeks in California, which has many places with "Aliso" in their name. Not perfect, but you get the idea.
• In the second paragraph in the lead, the geological eras are the oldest time periods referred to, so would it make sense to start the paragraph with that sentence, then go on to the more recent history? Chronological order? (done)
• It is not a MOS Issue (either way is OK), but I think most readers prefer a lead without references (except for direct quotations and extraordinary claims). Since the lead is a summary of the rest of the article, the refs will also be in the body of the article.
• One of the most difficult criteria for most articles to meet in FAC is 1a, a professional level of English. This needs some work - just in the lead for example I am not sure what this means As a result, the creek slowly declined in importance throughout the mid-20th century, ... since there is no other mention of importance anywhere else in the article. Or The creek continues to be a major pollution problem today would probably read better as Pollution continues to be a major problem for the creek (avoid today and the rest of the sentence gives a year anyway).
• My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but Floods and Recreation (at least) do not seem to be in the lead.
• Per WP:CITE references generally come directly AFTER punctuation (no space), and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase, so please fix things like ... watershed had a population of 149,087 divided between eight major cities. [1] (done)
• Per WP:MOS#Images, images should be set to thumb width to allow reader preferences to take over. For portrait format images, "upright" can be used to make the image narrower.
• The layout in the Overview section has a lot of white space (and I looked at it on two very different computers). On the monitor that has smaller type, the header is even with the mouth on the Geobox, then there is white space to the end of the Geobox. Then the locator map for Orange COunty in California has text down to about Humboldt County, then more white space to the end of that map. I think part of the problem could be solved with staggered left right images for the maps. (done)
• I know how much work it is to make maps, so I hate to criticize but the File:Acmapcomposite.jpg map does not help me much - I can't see where the ocean is on it, the places like cities or mountains or tributaries are not clearly labeled, and it is very obvious that it is pasted together. User:Kmusser makes lovely stream maps and may be able to help here. I would prefer the File:AlisoCreekReliefMap.jpg geology section map as it shows the cities and even a sliver of the ocean. Also would it be possible to add a red dot showing the location of the mouth of the creek to File:Wpdms shdrlfi020l santa ana mountains.jpg? I am guessing it is somewhere below the word basin. (done)
• I am not sure what the Overview section is about. Usually overview sections summarize the article more completely than the lead. It seems to be mostly about Geographic location, but name is a subsection. I have written a few creek articles and I would include most of this information in the Watershed or Geology sections. I owuld put the roads in the Course section. Your mileage may vary ;-) (done)
• The Name section does not repeat what the lead has told us, that Spanish conquistadors named the creek. Since the lead is a summary, this needs to be here too. Also since we know this was the border between two Native American tribes, do we know their name(s) for the creek? I also imagine Aliso Viejo takes its name from the creek, but the name section does not mention this either.
• At least one place besides the alternate name spells it Sulphur Creek (not Sulpher).
• Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V - current refs 1, 36, and 51 are just titles and links.
• References need to use the correct title, so I checked one at random. Current ref "Haldane, David. "Pipe to Protect Creek Pollutes It Instead - Los Angeles Times". latimes.com. http://articles.latimes.com/2001/mar/23/local/me-41541. Retrieved on 2009-02-02." needs the publication date (given online) and Los Angeles Times is the publisher, not part of the title.
• I think the large quotes in the Water quality section would not pass muster at FAC - pick out the best line or two and quote that, then paraphrase the rest in your own words. (see below)

OK, I'll stop for now - ask on my talk page if you want me to make more comments. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I will be able to revise the map in infobox, and add lables for the ocean, cities, etc. I remember the "Overview" section was added by someone else early in the GA review and I kind of overdid it since then. It has evolved to describe generally the watersheds and drainage in the area, the general location of the creek, etc. AlisoCreekReliefMap.jpg has no higher resolution than 200px, I think, because Planiglobe cannot zoom in far enough.themaee^talk 20:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I actually decided to remove the "Overview" section and move its references to corresponding sections. Took less work than I expected. :) Shannon1^{talk contribs} 00:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it'd be hard to narrow down the quotes, because if I removed any section it would not make much sense. For example, if I remove this: As a result, the area where the creek meets the sea, and the creek itself, are considered permanently off limits to swimmers and bear prominent signs that warn of the dangers of trespassing into such toxic waters. Nevertheless, people do, almost daily. Officials from the Orange County Environmental Health Department say that skin rashes, infections, "pink eye" and other assorted ailments are not uncommon to those who use Aliso Beach and, unwittingly, come in contact with the creek and its invisible bacteria. from the first large quote, the whole thing would not be clear that the creek poses health problems, and I intended to keep it like this through FAC. However, I will try to remove as much as I can from the quotes eventually, if the need arises. Besides, how long is the max length for a quote? Shannon1^{talk contribs} 21:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding - you do not have to remove the information in the quotes, just paraphrase much of it and save the actual direct quotes for the really important points / memorable phrases. For example in this part of a much longer quote:

The water's dirty," Haines said with a snarl. "The county has ignored the problem for years, and we're sick and tired of it. It's nothing but a cesspool stew, full of pigeons and pigeon droppings and nearly 90-degree water, right at the beach!" County health officials acknowledge that the bacterial count at the mouth of the creek--which curls into a warm-water stagnant pond that flushes out onto the beach--is at times alarmingly high, often surpassing the legal limit for California. ... [25] Michael Granberry, The Los Angeles Times, 1997

First off we have no idea who Haines is and the identity or role of this person has to be made clear. Assuming he is a local resident / activist ,I would make it something like this (not sure if I would identify Haines - is he important to understanding the rest of the article?):

A local activist said that the water pollution problem has long been ignored by the county "and we're sick and tired of it. It's nothing but a cesspool stew, full of pigeons and pigeon droppings and nearly 90-degree water, right at the beach!" According to the county health department, the number of bacteria in the creek, especially at its mouth in a warm stagnant pool, frequently exceeds the limits set by California law.[25] Hopefully this is clearer? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll try doing that tomorrow first thing on Wikipedia. Good (Pacific Standard Time) Night, Shannon1^{talk contribs} 04:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)