Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lake Burley Griffin

Lake Burley Griffin

Excellent work! Detailed and interesting. What can I say. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:03, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• Support. However, the article needs to be expanded to cover the hazards of the Lake (its rather dangerous for recreational boating, and small changes in weather can cause large changes in safety.) Also might want a link to the homicidal hospital demolition explosion. Fifelfoo 05:28, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • There is no article about the demolition accident on wiki to link to, and I don't think this is the appropriate place to write about it. Martyman 10:13, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • I am unaware of saftey concerns about lake burley griffin, are you possibly confusing it with Lake George? Martyman 10:13, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • I have created a safety section now, the hospital explosion incident is linked to in the See also section. Martyman 01:13, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Object, I'm afraid. There's a lot of small sections, and it just doesn't seem to be organised that well. I'm also not a big fan of having two panoramic pictures right at the bottom. A map would also be good. I just think this needs a bit more work generally, although it has improved a great deal lately. Vastly improved. Support. Ambi 05:42, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • The article has been re-organised and now contains a map. Martyman 01:13, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Object. 1) No references, no lead section (see Wikipedia:What is a featured article). 2) As Ambi points out, there are lot of small sections. I think more can be said on most of these topics. 3) Again following Ambi, this really needs a map. Additionally, dimensions of the lake are also necessary (not just the surface area). Jeronimo 06:43, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Some of these may be better suited to merging rather than expanding. Ambi 07:12, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Note it currently has a lead section. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 08:11, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)
  • The following objections have now been addressed: Martyman 01:13, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    1. The article now has references, and always had a lead section.
    2. Some sections have been expanded other grouped under a single heading.
    3. A map has been added.

The lead section should give a summary of the article. The current is two sentences long, and doesn't say anything about the topics of most of the sections in the article itself. It is therefore not a summary. See also Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Lead section. Other issues have been resolved. One new issue: units (km, liter, etc.) should be linked to the appropriate article on their first occurrence (see WP:MOS). Jeronimo 10:02, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Looks good now, support. Jeronimo 09:53, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• No vote yet. I did some minor work on the article (wikification and section rearrangement). I'd like to see a few things added before I support.

1. a map that details the location of the lake and additional measures of the lake.
   • I am working on a map at the moment and will have it up tonight. Martyman 08:44, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
2. a way to incorporate the panoramic pictures into the article (and make sure readers don't have to scroll.
3. some more info on water quality and safety.
   • These areas have been expanded somewhat. Martyman 01:13, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 08:11, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

• The article has improved, but I still have some issues with it.

1. At least 2 pictures don't seem to be in the section they belong in.
2. The reference section is quite messy.

Clarification as requested:I feel the reference section is a big lump of text. I'm unsure of what link shows what info. Maybe the refs can be subdivided in minor sections? -- [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 12:15, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

I see this as a deficiency in thw Wikipedia Code. There is no easy way to work a proper referencing system. For example the references in this scientific publication [1]. The reference links after each paragraph should have numbers that correspond to the entries in the refernce section. Martyman 11:12, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

After some thought, I've come to the conclusion blank lines won't work as well as I'd hoped. The rest of the article looks fine to me. Support. -- [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 11:53, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

• Support - I used to live in Canberra and I didn't think much could be written about Lake BG, but this article is very very good. AlbinoMonkey 14:22, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support Dysprosia 06:07, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support The bellman 06:51, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support Chuq 23:35, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support ZayZayEM 01:47, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support Securiger 15:48, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Support, but there are a lot more things that can be wikilinked in this article. I did a few, but it will take more than one person working on it. - Taxman 02:19, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)