Talk:Image Lake/GA1

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

Reviewer: LT910001 (talk · contribs) 00:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I'll take this review. I'll note at the outset I've had no role in editing or creating this article. I welcome other editors at any stage to contribute to this review. I will spend a day familiarising myself with the article and then provide an assessment. While you wait, why not spare a thought for the other nominees, and conduct a review or two yourself? This provides excellent insight into the reviewing process, is enjoyable and interesting. A list can be found here Kind regards, LT910001 (talk) 00:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for waiting. In conducting this review, I will:
 * Provide an assessment using WP:GARC
 * If this article does not meet the criteria, explain what areas need improvement.
 * Provide possible solutions that may (or may not) be used to fix these.

Commentary
Thanks for bringing this article to this standard. This article is a well-written and comprehensive article which will surely be promoted, however I have some minor stylistic comments below: Additional comments:
 * Unusual to see "Nineteenth century and the early Twentieth century" capitalised
 * "However, places such as fragile alpine meadows are recovering, and wolves and grizzly bears have been sighted in areas near Image Lake." may need an "As of" and am not sure "have been sighted" is encyclopedic enough to be mentioned in the lead? Sounds somewhat like a travellogue
 * Suggest add a ", which surround Image Lake" after "and travel northeast toward the Cascade Mountains", for clarity
 * "In the winter, the areas west of the Cascade Crest experience heavy snowfall." is stated twice, suggest remove
 * Hydrology provides areas in miles, kilometres, acres and hectares, suggest pick a pair and stick to that.
 * I feel the 'climate' and 'hydrology' sections may benefit from See also links to the relevant article, as this lake appears to belong to a greater ecosystem
 * "began during the late cretaceous" add ”period"
 * Suggest "North Cascades Ecoregion" decapitalise "ecoregion"
 * In "History" suggest add "the": "before present" -> "before the present"
 * Overall quite well-written and engaging to read
 * Article does not appear to close paraphrase
 * Article is well-sourced
 * No problems with images

I look forward to your comments. Kind regards, --LT910001 (talk) 06:54, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I do have a few comments relating to MOS:NUM and how it connects to your advice:
 * According to WP:PRESENT, "before present" is preferred over "before the present."
 * All right, no worries then. --LT910001 (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:NUM, placing the "secondary" unit in parentheses after the "main" measurement is preferred.
 * Sorry, my meaning was that there are two pairs of measurements relating to area (square km + square miles, hectares + acres) and that for consistency only one pair has been used. --LT910001 (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I either have or will soon address ed the other issues that you brought up in the above list. Thank you very much for your advice, and I hope you have (/had) a happy new year. — SamX‧☎‧✎‧ S  01:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC) (Updated 16:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC))

Conclusion
Thanks, the article is looking much better. I'd still like the area issue addressed, but the article as it is meets or exceeds the GA criteria is well-written, and well-sourced, so I'm promoting it to GA status. Well done! I have made the relevant changes. Best wishes on your wiki-travels, --LT910001 (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)