Talk:Salmon Creek Dam/GA1

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

Reviewer: NortyNort (Holla) 01:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I will review, initial comments shortly.--NortyNort (Holla) 01:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. I have left a note on your talk page. Will you please leave a message of this GA on my talk page?-- Nvvchar . 10:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Initial comments
Lead
 * "...needs of their gold mining industry." "mining operation" is a better term, industry applies much more and is usually shared.
 * Yes done.
 * "When built, adoption of the constant arch design for the dam saved the cost by 20% in volume of concrete..." A little confusing, maybe "...reduced costs by 20% because less concrete was needed to construct the dam."
 * Addressed
 * "...continues to produce low-cost and reliable power" Redundant from previous sentence.
 * Yes, corrected
 * Can it be specified that more than "over 100" of these type dams have been built?
 * Done

Topography
 * "Its location is about 3 miles (5 km) northwest of Juneau" Redundant and inconsistent distances. This is again mentioned at the end of the section, which cites 4.6 km away.
 * Addressed
 * "The tram-way was built for hauling men and material for constructing the dam and its associated power stations to supply electric power to carry out mining operations at a site 6 miles (10 km) to the south at Sheep Creek." Confusing sentence, should be split. The second part of the sentence may belong elsewhere in the article since it talks about where the power went. Also, in first part of sentence, should be "material to construct the dam and..." or something of that sort.
 * Done.
 * "AEL&P" Acronym should be spelled out on first use. Also, I assume they bought the dam later so the sentence should indicate that the road was built later(?) If not, their role should be mentioned earlier in the article, perhaps the lead.
 * Done. A sentence added in the lead section. Who built the road to powerhouse is now clear from the reference and hence I have modified the sentence to say that AEL&P had built it to approach the Upper Powerhouse.

Evolution of the arch dam design Theory and design
 * "The basin formed by the creek has an elongated depression with an "equidimensional plan and of variable extent". Is this sentence necessary? It is hard to understand as well.
 * Yes, addressed
 * "During the Roman period, the theory of building a curved dam (arch dam) was broadly known as a means to withstand the water pressure and hold the masonry joints." I suggest removing "broadly" or re-wording. The Romans pioneered the arch dam but I am not sure it was broadly know throughout the entire Roman period. I can't see the restricted source cited.
 * Done
 * "...which dominated the dam building scenario in the..." Suggest: "...which dominated dam building in the..."
 * Done
 * "This theory led to the development of the “constant-angle” (or variable radius) arch dam." In this sentence you should mention "...arch dam, which was also thinner in design" in order to precede your mention of "thin arch" a couple sentences later.
 * Done
 * "In arch dam design, two basic shapes are adopted." You cited three in the next sentence. Isn't it just constant-radius and variable-radius arch dams as the two main?
 * Corrected to two basic designs
 * "The constant-angle arch design has also a variable–radius arch." Don't you mean that there is also a variable-radius arch dam? ...as opposed to the constant-angle.
 * Constant angle has variable radius which is the case of Salmon Creek Dam. Only the central angle is constant. This variation is within the constant angle arch dam itself.


 * "... is also mentioned in one source" x 2. Both of these should be cited with that source.
 * Fixed now
 * Is that pipe really considered the spillway or outlet works?
 * Yes it is the only method to discharge flood waters provided in the dam. Since there is no surface spillway, the pipe acts as the spillway.
 * Oh, ok. I thought it just didn't have one but if the source states it that way.

Benefits Drinking water supply
 * " assured benefits " How assured are they? Relatively, generally, etc. Maybe just drop the word.
 * Dropped the word
 * "The reservoir is also used as chlorine contact tanks, where chlorine is added and given time to react with any pathogens." This needs to be better explained.
 * It is meant for purification. Added this word in the text
 * ADEC needs to be spelled out.
 * I am trying to locate the expansion. If I can't find I would delete it. Found it. Fixed now

Fisheries
 * "In 1880, the Salmon Creek was named by Richard Ham and Joe Juneau as ‘Tilhini’ meaning "dog salmon" in 1889 (during their first visit to the area for gold prospecting), a native name used by Tingit Alaskan Indian; this name also shown in some early topographic maps." This sentence is confusing on what year it was named.
 * Yes. There was a mix up. I have made corrections now
 * What is a "fry ling" and what type?
 * Finger ling used in the reference is just fry which means “small fish, especially young, recently hatched fish”(See this dictionary definition here

Infobox Gallery Throughout article
 * Turbine parameter should list how many turbines there are and at what capacity.
 * Could not locate it in any source including AEL&P. I have sent an e-mail to AEL&P seeking this info. If they reply then we can fill up the infobox.
 * I don't think this is critical, so you could remove it.
 * Any idea on the cost of the dam project?
 * My intensive search has not helped to find this information
 * This can be removed per WP:Galleries. I see the importance of pictures of the dam to help the reader understand but there are already a bunch in the article, of which their captions could be adjusted to help the reader understand the variable-radius design better.
 * Deleted
 * Conversions. Some are cited first in km and some in miles I.e. "3 miles (5 km) with the watershed, which has a creek divide of 2.4 kilometers (1.5 mi)" This should be consistent.
 * Done
 * "cement concrete" Should use just "concrete".
 * Done
 * "Power House 2" or "Powerhouse 2", needs to be consistent.
 * Hopefully done everywhere

Above are the initial comments. I will place the review on hold before continuing until the comments are addressed. Just a note on the length and focus of the article. This was a revolutionary design so I understand the case to have more background information in the design in the two background sections.--NortyNort (Holla) 04:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, NortyNort for your thorough review. I fully agree with all your observations. I have replied under each of the observations made above, after making the needed corrections in the article. In case I have left out some issues please mention them. -- Nvvchar . 06:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem! Here are the final comments:


 * There is one comment in Theory and design that I believe you over-looked.
 * Sorry about the miss. I have fixed the reference now.
 * Ref #19 doesn't have a proper citation format but I believe it is a duplicate of Ref #5.
 * Yes. You are right. I have removed reference 19 and replaced with ref 5 now.
 * Regarding the cost, I don't think it is critical, I was curious.
 * I tried again but was not successful in finding the info.
 * Sort of the same with the turbine: if you don't know, you can just remove that field entirely from the infobox.
 * I have removed "turbine" word from the info box
 * In the lead, ref #5 doesn't back up "...it produces the most inexpensive electricity in Alaska...". Suggest removing "most"
 * Done
 * Citations. Some are bunched up at the end of the lead and elsewhere. In particular, the sentence in Evolution of the arch dam design, "In this regard, Bartlett Lee Thane, the mining engineer, who made a lasting impact in the mining industry – in the Alaska Gastineau Mining Company – was instrumental in introducing this design of thin arch dam with help from his former football team mates" has 5 citations. Ref#7 doesn't even mention Thane. This should be cleaned-up.
 * I have made amends. Again, sorry for the bunching. I have shifted Thane reference to the earlier lines and also cited to the last line. I hope it is OK now.

Other than this, I have no more comments on the article and would be glad to list it as a GA once everything is addressed.--NortyNort (Holla) 13:13, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the additional observations. These were definitely needed. I hope covered all observations now.-- Nvvchar . 07:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yea, all looks well, consider it passed. Good job on the article and congrats. I didn't realize you took two of the photos too!--NortyNort (Holla) 08:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)