Talk:Columbia Park, Torrance, California/GA1

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

Hi, I'll be doing the review here. I'll have comments up by about 01:00 UTC, tomorrow. Aptery gial  11:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Lead:


 * ✅ The lead is too short. I'd like to see at least two paragraphs twice the size of what is already there (i.e., four times the size).
 * ✅ "Columbia Park (formally Columbia Regional Park) is a 52-acre (210,000 m2) a grassy expanse recreational area in Torrance, California." The second "a" is not needed.
 * ✅  Torrance, California . The link would be better as  Torrance, California .
 * ✅ I'm not a huge fan of cites in the lead. WP:LEADCITE basically says that if the subject matter is not controversial, there is no need for cites. Move the cites in the lead to the repetition in the body.
 * Great work on the lead! That's fantastic. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Park features:


 * ✅ The link to Regional park negates the need for the explanation. In addition, the "Columbia Regional Park is home to a variety of such special attractions" bit really is redundant. That whole paragraph should be removed.
 * ✅ "baseball diamonds" should be linked.
 * ✅ The "Burns O'Connor, Letitia" cite (currently cite 3) should be moved to the end of the sentence.
 * ✅ In fact, this whole sentence would read better as "Columbia Park includes a roller hockey rink, six soccer fields and two baseball diamonds. It also features community garden plots which compose one of twelve city-operated Smart Gardening centers around the city."
 * ✅ "Columbia Park includes a 1.32-mile (2.12 km) walking path divided by a fence line to the east of the main soccer field into a 0.75-mile (1.21 km) west section and a 0.57-mile (0.92 km) east section." This is fairly hard to decipher. I think you meant to say "Columbia Park includes a 1.32-mile (2.12 km) walking path which is divided by a fence line to the east of the main soccer field into a 0.75-mile (1.21 km) west section and a 0.57-mile (0.92 km) east section."
 * ✅ "The park, located adjacent to an ExxonMobil oil refinery,[4] includes a 494-foot (151 m) radio antenna that services the Los Angeles all-news radio station KNX (AM)[1] and includes 120-foot (37 m)-high electrical line towers, each of which supports 220,000-volt electrical lines maintained by electricity supply company Southern California Edison." "Includes" is overused here. It would probably be better as two sentences, like so: ''"The park, located adjacent to an ExxonMobil oil refinery,[4] includes a 494-foot (151 m) radio antenna that services the Los Angeles all-news radio station KNX (AM).[1] There are also 120-foot (37 m)-high electrical line towers, each of which supports 220,000-volt electrical lines maintained by electricity supply company Southern California Edison.[8]
 * No problems here. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * History:


 * ✅ "In that same year, Standard Brands Paint Company in Torrance donated to the park a sculpture by public works artist Roger Berry." "donated to the park"'' is clumsy. Move "to the park" to the end of the sentence.
 * ✅ "As a result of Saito's efforts, the California Landscape Contractors Association awarded Saito an achievement award in March 1985 for the design and installation of Columbia Park." Reading it, it's quite clear what he was given the award for, so "for the design and installation of Columbia Park." can be cut out.
 * Fine here. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Growing pains:


 * ✅ I'll let the title slide here, but I think it is a little idiomatic. Suntag Comment - I revised it to read "Early park problems".
 * And I removed "park" from the title. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ "In the summer of 1985, a sail skater was clocked by a police radar gun doing 40 miles per hour (64 kph) inside Columbia Park." All I can say about this is how impressed I am.
 * ✅ "had had" never looks smooth. I think you can get away with just the one here.
 * ✅ "Later that year, the council awarded Baldwin Park, California construction company Terra-Cal Construction a $173,655 contract for development of the southwest portion of Columbia Park." Baldwin Park needs to be linked.
 * ✅ "the 494-foot (151 m) KNX antenna" The height should be moved to when the antenna is first mentioned. In addition, this KNX (AM) link should be removed per WP:OVERLINK.
 * ✅ "and eat the gopher." "eat it" would flow better.
 * Coolio. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Increasing usage:


 * You may want to consider creating the Ajax page. Suntag comment I recall looking for information on Ajax, but did'nt find much. I unlinked it in the Columbia Park article.
 * ✅ "In 1991, Ajax won the U.S. women's amateur championship with the help of both defender Joy Biefeld-Fawcett and forward Carin Jennings.[2] That same year, Fawcett and Jennings helped the U.S. national team win the first women's World Cup that were held in China." The second sentence has no real relevance. Neither does the first, unless it was held in Columbia Park. You may want to consider creating the Ajax page. Suntag comment - I revised the article to clarify Fawcett and Jennings connection to the park.
 * ✅ "Over the next fifteen years, the park receive good and bad usage." Apart from the typo, I don't really feel that the sentence is all that necessary, and sounds a little vague and subjective. If you do decide to remove it, take out the "for example" in the next sentence.
 * ✅ "However, the necklace worn by the woman around her neck stopped the bullet from completely penetrating her chest." "Around her neck" clearly isn't necessary.
 * ✅ "activist efforts". Lobbying? Protesting?
 * ✅ "Torrance officials sought to improve security and took the unusual step of closing the park's basketball court by removing the basketball rims and padlocking the entry to the court." This kind of implies that the gangs used the basketball court, although that is not explicitly mentioned.
 * ✅ "gazebos" should be linked.
 * ✅ "A reason for this was to encourage visitors to park on 190th Street rather than nearby residential streets." Why? Did neighbors complain? Suntag comment - From the news article, it looks like the idea was pushed by a busybody trying to get neighbors to vote for her City Council bid. I removed the sentence.
 * ✅ "120-foot (37 m)-high" "220,000-volt". These stats have been mentioned elsewhere in the article and do not need to be included again. Likewise, "Southern California Edison" do not need to be mentioned again.
 * ✅ This whole paragraph: wow.
 * ✅ It is a little jarring in the next paragraph when you go from talking about a suicidal man being shot to talking about Buddhists donating cheery tree costs. Move the first sentence to the previous paragraph.
 * ✅ And "buddhists" should be linked (to Buddhism).
 * ✅ "During the summer of 2001, the Buddhist association Soka Gakkai International USA donated the cost of 100 cherry trees to the city of Torrance as part of Torrance's Living Tree Dedication program that began in 1993.[27][28] The donation was part of Sōka Gakkai's campaign to plant trees in cities across the nation as a way to "create a peaceful environment" in society and better the communities they live in.[27] In regards to the city's living tree program, the plan was to plant 10 cheery trees at Columbia Park as part of a ceremony each year for ten years beginning in 2001." Needs a bit of re-ordering, something like: "During the summer of 2001, the Buddhist association Soka Gakkai International USA donated the cost of 100 cherry trees to the city of Torrance as part of Torrance's Living Tree Dedication program that began in 1993.[27][28] The plan for the program was to plant 10 cheery trees at Columbia Park as part of a ceremony each year for ten years beginning in 2001. This donation in particular was part of Sōka Gakkai's campaign to plant trees in cities across the nation as a way to "create a peaceful environment" in society and better the communities they live in.[27]"
 * "By April 2007, 70 cherry trees had been planted in Columbia Park" What about now? Suntag comment - I added info from Decembe 2007, but couldn't find an more information on the program. I don't think I can address this request any further.
 * "In October 2001, plans were made to divert portions of the lower areas of the jogging path and those jogging path trails overlapped by sprinklers to prevent water flooding along the paths." Was this carried through? Suntag comment I searched and could not find any follow-up story. I did add a sentence about "crushed granite" being added, which should give a sense of "at least something was done." I don't think I can address this request any further.
 * ✅ "Once the two were arrested, the police later determined that the car was a rental car that was overdue rather than a stolen car." The "later" isn't needed.
 * ✅ "kids" should be "children".
 * "Three years later in January 2006, the firetruck and the fencing were removed with an intent to replace the truck with "some kind of neat and attractive play equipment with rubberized matting"." And did this happen? Suntag comment I couldn't find any writings on whether neat and attractive play equipment with rubberized matting was added to replace the firetruck. The firetruck is gone and I believe there now is play equipment with sand. I don't think I can address this request any further.
 * ✅ "Approximately two years later, in October 2006, Columbia Park along with Torrance's Wilson Park were both considered a possible sites for a fenced-in dog park, where large and small dogs could roam leash-free." And did this happen? Suntag comment I followed this up. I can't believe the Open Spaces committee turned on the dog park idea between Sept and Nov! Every important city has a dog park. What a shocking turn of events.
 * That's terrible. Having said that, my city doesn't have one (but is it an important city?). Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ "large and small dogs" would be fine as "dogs".
 * Section looks fine now. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * General


 * ✅ Don't switch between "park" and "regional park" for variety. Pick one and stick to it.
 * I feel the article should be moved to Columbia Park, California. Suntag comment There is a Columbia Park in Sunnyvale, California and in San Francisco. There may be others.
 * OK. I was just looking at the disambiguation page. You may wish to add those other parks as redlinks to the dab page. Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ The article needs to be listed at Columbia Park (disambiguation).
 * ✅ Checklinks was fine.
 * ✅ References look OK.
 * I would like to see a few more pictures, but I'm willing to wait until after the review. Suntag comment There are some photos at torrance.ca.us. I'm thinking that the firetruck might be fair use since it no longer exists. If you agree, I'll add the firetruck photo to the article.
 * My understanding of image policy in that area is that it has to provide encyclopedic value to the page that would be otherwise impossible. I don't think the firetruck qualifies here. As I say, it's not pressing. You don't live near Torrance? Aptery  gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Maybe a see-also section?

As you can see, I'm a bit of a grammar freak. There is a lot of stuff still in there which is a little clumsy. In terms of the Good article criteria, you are pretty shaky on criterion 1, passable on 6, and fine on the others. I'll put the article on hold for now. Let me know when you think you have adressed these concerns, or if you have any questions. Aptery gial  00:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I placed done next to those request where I took action. I commented on the other requests. I think I have adressed the noted concerns. -- Suntag  ☼  18:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Good. You've done some great work on the article. This is GA material. I went through and did a few minor changes, and it's now solid. I love doing this bit:


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Congrats. A fine addition to the encyclopedia. I'm always open for any further questions about improving the article. Aptery gial  00:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sweet! Thanks for the review. -- Suntag  ☼  08:12, 15 December 2008 (UTC)