Talk:Central Valley Project/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hey everyone. I'll be reviewing this article for possible GA status. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I feel that this article is not ready for GA status at this time. Please take a look at my comments below, and feel free to renominate the article once you have addressed my concerns. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Writing and formatting
The entire article seems to have some problems with clarity and tone - this needs to be addressed.
 * You may use US units (like acre feet), but these should also be converted into SI units per WP:MoS.
 * "brought an end to this livelihood" -> would suggest "practice" or something similar to replace livelihood
 * "the agriculture of the valley has turned to" - is this before or after CVP was initiated? Please reword for clarity
 * "suffers from just the opposite problem" - this wording is colloquial and a bit awkward. Consider rewording
 * Be consistent in naming - choose "southern part" or "south part", not both
 * The paragraph beginning "Before the CVP was initiated" is written mostly in present tense, but it details events of the past
 * "the southern end of the valley, (San Joaquin Valley)" -> remove comma
 * Large sections of "Project history" jump between past and present tense, and parts are unclear or poorly worded
 * "flood damage as on 1994" -> should this be "as in"?
 * "is complete in two of its five sections" - meaning?
 * Needs more internal links for engineering terms
 * "a 19th-century teredo infestation" - was referred to earlier has occuring in the early 20th century.
 * Be consistent in the way monetary values are referred to - either $300 billion USD or 25 million dollars, not both
 * In "Power generation", use either "power plant" or "powerplant", not both
 * The Spring Creek Dam prevents contaminated acid mine drainage from Iron Mountain Mine into the Sacramento River - I think part of this sentence is missing
 * "Benefits" and "Negative impacts" - section headings for pros and cons should have the same format - either "Benefits" and "Consequences" or "Positive impacts" and "Negative impacts"
 * "Negative impacts": prose is unclear in places and could be reworded for a more encyclopedia style

Accuracy and verifiability

 * All statistics need to be referenced, without exception
 * References needed for:
 * covering 42,000 square miles
 * unprecedented die-off of cattle
 * using far more water than any farming practices in the past
 * erratic rainfall patterns in the valley
 * receives between 60% and 75% of the precipitation
 * it covers only about 25% of the area
 * was suffering from an increasing number of crops needing irrigation with a steadily shrinking water supply
 * caused major problems for the water quality
 * If the combined flows of the rivers at that point was less than 3,300 cubic feet (93 m3) per second, there would be a sudden influx of salt water into the bay at high tide
 * The situation was at its worst from 1919 to 1924
 * caused approximately 25 million dollars of damage
 * The worst year was 1924
 * once peaked at 65 percent
 * Pittsburgh and Antioch decided to cease drawing water from the bay
 * the first attempt at developing a Central Valley Project dates back to 1873
 * submitted much later to the Governor of California, in 1919
 * In 1931, the State Water Plan was submitted
 * The California Central Valley Project Act, which authorized the sale of revenue bonds to build the Central Valley Project, was passed in 1933
 * the bonds failed to sell
 * The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935 handed the CVP over to the federal government
 * The Central Valley Project began with the construction of the Contra Costa Canal in 1937; it started delivering water on August 16, 1940; and was completed to its terminus in 1948
 * the largest and most important dam in the Central Valley Project
 * The Sacramento River was blocked on January 1944
 * were developed in tandem with and are shared with the California State Water Project
 * The former two were authorized in 1949, and the latter in 1965
 * Folsom Dam being the single most important component for flood control
 * The Folsom and Sly Park units of the American River Division are primarily for flood control and municipal water supply
 * The primary purpose of the Auburn-Folsom South Unit is irrigation
 * In 1955, Folsom and the downstream Nimbus dams spared downstream communities 20 million dollars in flood damage
 * In the 1963-1964 floods, the Folsom and Nimbus dams prevented some 90 million dollars in damage
 * The largest flood came in 1986, when 1,140,000 acre feet of water poured in for six days without stopping
 * I'm going to stop listing things here, but I will reiterate: all stats and published opinions must be cited


 * "-U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project Overview" is unneeded, as it duplicates the inline citation
 * The Great Depression started in 1929, not 1933
 * Under "References", links 3, 12, 15, 22 are broken
 * Should be consistent in how "US Bureau of Reclamation"/"Reclamation" is referenced
 * Links 34, 35, 37, 39, 41 need retrieval dates and source information
 * Under "External links", link 2 is broken
 * "Cool Photos of CVP canals" is not the page's official title, nor is it an appropriate title for a link in an encyclopedic article

Broad

 * In general, articles longer than 30-50 KB should be split into smaller articles and merely summarized on the main page, especially when parts are as technical as they are in this article
 * The lead states that "In recent years, however, major recurring droughts in the American West have forced the CVP to cut irrigation water supply to zero". This is then never mentioned again.

Neutrality

 * Multiple uses of words to avoid, a number of which introduce a biased, non-encyclopedic tone
 * Several examples of asserting opinions without the necessary references to back it up. See my comments above under "Verifiability" for examples
 * Saying that certain dams or diversions are "important" constitutes peacockry

Stable
No issues noted

Images

 * There are two identical pictures of the Sugar Pine Dam - the one in the lead could be replaced with a more "universal" picture
 * All images are compliant with fair use policy