Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Island No. 2/archive1

Island No. 2

 * Nominator(s): jp×g🗯️ 07:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

This article is another sordid tale of 19th century life, love, and loss on a now-uninhabited island; but this one is in California. jp×g🗯️ 07:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I had a bunch of stuff to add to this, but I don't think I have enough spare time at the moment to handle a FAC, and given the number of weeks that my "in a couple days" has turned out to constitute so far, I think I am just going to try again later. How do I withdraw the nomination for now? jp×<b style="color: #029D74">g</b>🗯️</b> 03:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Your request has caught the eye of this coord, will action shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment First impressions: This is a lovely short read. Thanks for your work on this.
 * One thing that is distracting is the inconsistent use of the serial comma. Compare the following sentences:
 * the area is "regularly used by hunters, fishermen, bird watchers, photographers, and hikers". (serial comma in use)
 * most marshland in the [area] was diked, drained, and being used for livestock grazing and farmland". (serial comma in use)
 * along with Island No. 1, Green Island and Tubbs Island, are labeled on a 1902 USGS map of the area (no serial comma after "Green Island")
 * "handsome new club house with 8 bedrooms, a huge club room, kitchen, pantry, showers, lavatories and all other modern conveniences" in addition to "a keeper's cottage, outhouses, blinds, ponds, levees, etc". (no serial comma before the first "and"; a serial comma before "etc.")
 * In November 1926, some interest in the property was sold from Ellen Weinstein, Estelle Meyer and others to a Z.S. Israelsky. (no serial comma after "Meyer")
 * Islands visible include, from bottom of image: Mare, No. 1, Knight, Russ, No. 2, Green, Bull, Edgerly, Coon, Little, and Tubbs. (serial comma in use)
 * I don't care whether you use the serial comma or not, but I think it should be used consistently throughout the article.


 * Is there any reason the URLs aren't archived? It usually only takes IABot a minute to archive everything and prevent the sources from getting link rot.


 * The 1902 map of Island No. 2 is greatly appreciated! Is there any way we can get a map that is larger? Even the largest "zoom" available is tiny, and my eyes are weak and old.


 * Comparing this short article to other FAs, such as your own excellent FA Powder House Island, the article feels stubby; are there really no external links that would be beneficial to the user? Nothing on Commons?
 * Many of the references are missing an access date. Compare, for example, references 6 and 7. Why does reference 6 have an access date but reference 7 does not?
 * These are just my first impressions. First pass. Firsfron of Ronchester  08:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments from UC

 * Despite being a short article overall, the "History" section is extremely long. It also covers diverse topics: I'm sold that the island's administrative status, its partial inundation and its ownership history are all history in some sense, but I'm not quite sold that they're so similar as to belong in the same section. I think you could help both of these issues by adding some judicious subsections.
 * Flowing text shouldn't just jump into a quotation without some sort of context: either "a local newspaper described it as 'terrible'" or "the island was 'delightful', in the words of a local magazine". It's particularly important that the body text contains enough information to make the reader clear on who said/wrote it.
 * Relatedly, a lot of those quotations read as scare quotes: see in particular.
 * I understand that the sources may not be as rich, but the contrast with your excellent Powder House Island is striking: the latter reads as far more obviously comprehensive. You may wish to compare the FA Caroline Island for some additional topics (geology, flora/fauna) that might be possible to expand upon. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 11:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose from Eddie891

 * Oppose, with respect to the work JPxG has done here. While an interesting article, and it's cool to see the work you have done on it, I don't think this article is ready for FAC. In addition to the above (unattributed quotes, unstructured article), the lead could certainly be expanded. For instance, its location in the Napa River feels like a fact that should be in the lead. Content-wise, it feels like something is missing. Sentences like "Around February 1909, David fractured a rib while "endeavoring to get into a bath tub at Island No. 2"" that are really not related to the island makes me feel like you're grasping at straws to expand the article. "Its restoration was carried out in Phase 2 of the project, completed in 2006. It is currently designated as "Pond 2"." leaves me really confused as to how an island became a pond. Points like these are ones that probably should have been addressed before FAC in my opinion. Honestly, if this is all that exists on the island, I would suggest it should be merged to an overarching article on Islands in the Napa River or something. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:17, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I share the same concerns as Eddie891. Is this island really that notable to warrant its own article? It may meet our basic requirements under WP:GNG, but nonetheless I think we should consider merging into Napa Sonoma Marsh or creating Napa-Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area (which is currently redlinked from the Island No. 2 article). Edge3 (talk) 17:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No offense taken; I'm glad to get feedback. I ran across some stuff that goes into more depth on geology, which I'll try to work on getting in. <b style="font-family: monospace; color:#E35BD8"><b style="color:#029D74">jp</b>×<b style="color: #029D74">g</b>🗯️</b> 03:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 19:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)