Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Seacology/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 14:07, 5 October 2011.

Seacology

 * Nominator(s): –  VisionHolder « talk » 20:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I feel that it meets the FA requirements. I will admit that I worked with the organization to write the article, but I also did my own independent research and failed to find any criticism. All details check out. I have done my best to remain neutral and to attribute opinions rather than stating them as fact. The article is comprehensive—even the Seacology staff were blown away by the level of detail. Also, all sources are archived. Several are scans of the sources kept by Seacology (available on their website—links provided in the refs), and I have verified the publication of many of these pieces. As always, I will be happy to address any concerns. –  VisionHolder « talk » 20:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Additional note on images: Immediately following the GAN review, the Goldman Environmental Prize released a photo of Paul Alan Cox and Fuiono Senio under CC-BY-SA. I have added the image to the article, but the OTRS is pending. Given that lately the turn-around time with OTRS has been between 24 hours and 7 days, this should not be a problem. If needed, I know some people who handle OTRS with whom I can place a special request. –  VisionHolder « talk » 21:45, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Taken care of by HJ Mitchell—Thanks! –  VisionHolder « talk » 18:18, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. I performed the GA nomination review of the article. I spent about five hours thoroughly reviewing the article, and the few concerns I had were quickly addressed. I spotchecked many references, and in every case the assertion was fully backed up by the source. I found no problems with close paraphrasing. Looking for neutrality problems, I searched for sources critical of the organization, and couldn't find any. Details are at Talk:Seacology/GA1. – Quadell (talk) 20:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, again, Quadell for both the thorough GAN review and this FAC review. –  VisionHolder « talk » 21:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: Just a minor detail, perhaps You should add "|deadurl=no" to the references with archive-links? It is probably not necessary for FA but I think it would be an improvement. It will change the main link to the original url. Thanks for your work on the article! Iusethis (talk) 07:23, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the suggestion. I had completely overlooked this parameter in the past, and later this afternoon I will work on adding it. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 18:49, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I had little to do this morning so I fixed it myself, I hope you don't mind. Iusethis (talk) 07:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I appreciate the help. Thank you! –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks done by Quadell above. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Newspaper names should consistently be italicized
 * To what exactly are you referring. Are you considering Salon.com a newspaper?  Otherwise, all web sources (from what I could tell) use cite web while all news sources use cite news.  Please give examples. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Not Salon.com, but when using cite web for a newspaper web site the newspaper is notated as a work - for example, Bangkok Post in FN 6. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've italicized Bangkok Post in FN 6 per your request. Good catch.  If there any others, let me know.  Looking through the list, I didn't see any others like it. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 18:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Check for small inconsistencies in reference formatting like doubled periods
 * Good catch. I only found one, and fixed it. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * FN 11: page(s)? Citations to multi-page sources should include page numbers
 * The problem here is that this is the only source where I draw off of multiple pages out of such a page range. I've listed all the page numbers in the citation per your request, but do you think I need to repeat the entire citation 4 times for each of the four pages?  To be honest, the information is very easy to find as is. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think what you've got is fine, as it's not a large number of pages. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * What makes this a high-quality reliable source? This? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:36, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Per WP:RS:

"'Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight. Such sources include websites and publications expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature, or which rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions. Questionable sources are generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties, which includes claims against institutions, persons living or dead, as well as more ill-defined entities. The proper uses of a questionable source are very limited.'"
 * These two web sources (one written like an article) are used once each, and neither makes contentious claims. One simply supports a claim that Seacology won some awards (which I think Seacology mentions on their website... but I wanted another source), and the other reports on experiences from an eco-tour.  If they need to go, they can go.  However, for the purposes they serve, I don't feel these sources violate WP:RS.  In fact, I trust these sources more than I trust U.S. news services (...talk about highly unreliable). –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:42, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The ecotourism one is probably fine, however under the circumstances Seacology would suffice as a ref without about.com. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * About.com ref has been removed and replaced by a ref to the Seacology website. –  VisionHolder « talk » 18:18, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Media Review Everything checks out.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  08:00, 19 August 2011 (UTC) P.S. You might want to update your userpage, as it still says you're trying to get Small-toothed sportive lemur to FA.
 * Comment: ALT text not included for most images. Text should be added per WP:ALT. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:23, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Alt text is no longer part of the FA criteria and is not required. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but seeing as the Vision Holder has already included ALT text for two images he may not have a problem with including them. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:45, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Since you asked, I added it. –  VisionHolder « talk » 15:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Support; I've read this twice so far (once for the DYK review and once for FA) and in my opinion it fulfills the criteria. Good job for your first corporation expansion, VH! Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

 Comments . Very detailed, but I'm wondering if there might be too much detail in a few instances. Overall, well-written and interesting. Sasata (talk) 15:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Support All my concerns have been addressed, and I think the article meets the FA criteria. Sasata (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * please check several instances of "in order to"; usually, these can be reduced to "to"
 * Thanks for the thorough review. This has been fixed. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "For the first few years, the organization operated as a volunteer-based organization." repetition of organization
 * Fixed. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "… awards its annual Seacology Prize to indigenous islanders for their momentous efforts in conservation" Their efforts may be momentous, but this phrasing doesn't sound neutral in an encyclopedia
 * I'm sorry that made it into the article. I guess I was trying to signify that the efforts of the award winners were considered more significant than those of other people.  Anyway, the word "momentous" has been removed. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Cox began his work in Samoa in 1973 during his first Mormon missionary service, at which time he worked with the local people and learned about the medicinal properties of the local plants. After working with" 3 repetitions of work/working
 * I removed the middle one, but wasn't sure how to reword either of the other two. The problem is that I'm not precisely sure of the nature of his "work". –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "… including the protein prostratin…" prostratin is not a protein, it is a phorbol derivative that activates protein kinase C
 * I was going by the source. How would you state it in this article, precisely?  Unfortunately, my knowledge at organic chemistry are quite limited. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * How about "therapeutic agent" (as used in ) Sasata (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Changed. Thanks for the suggestion. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Without the new school, the government warned that they would withdraw the teachers in the village, leaving the children without an opportunity for education." I'm a bit uneasy about the conclusion in this sentence, which doesn't seem to be explicitly given in the sources; all "education" doesn't come from a classroom setting.
 * I changed it to read "formal education". Is that good enough? –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Verne and Marion Read took over payments on the mortgage for the school" Who are these people, and do their names have to be in this encyclopedia article?
 * Good point, but this all the source said. I don't know whether to call them friends of Dr. Cox, business associates, colleagues, or what...  Suggestions? –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If it were me, I'd leave the names out. Sasata (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Removed. –  VisionHolder « talk » 22:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "… Rex Maughan funded the construction of the school and repaid the loggers." Why repaid the loggers? Did he borrow money from them?
 * The sources were not clear on this, and to be honest, the sources do not tell a consistent story. I have asked the staff for clarification already, and none of them (including Silverstein) have been around long enough to know.  I suggested that they ask Dr. Cox to write a short, consistent piece about the history of Seacology in one of their newsletters so that I would have something better to cite, but I'm not sure when or if that will happen.  In this I can remove the part about repaying the loggers, if that sounds good to you. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If the sources aren't clear what it means, it should probably be left out. Sasata (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Removed. –  VisionHolder « talk » 22:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Together with his assistant, Rita DeSpain" Is the name of his assistant encyclopaedic information?
 * Probably not... removed. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "…bringing in more money than the villagers would have earned from selling their forest." Do we know how much they were offered for the forest?
 * That information was not provided in the source, or any other source I saw. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Four years after being founded, Seacology's administrative office moved Ken Murdock's office." To where? Is this important?
 * The word "to" was missing. Fixed. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * looks like the double image in "Activities" is left/right swapped
 * Lol! Great catch. Fixed. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "According to evolutionary biologist E. O. Wilson …" why not use his full name? (there's a later instance as well)
 * The man is always referred to by his initials, just like J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, or T.S. Eliot. Even our article is called E. O. Wilson. Ucucha (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * "In 2008, Seacology started it Carbon Offset Fund" fix
 * Fixed. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "… has funded over 200 projects globally, and thereby preserving …" change in verb tense
 * Done. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * well-being or wellbeing?
 * In the dictionary, they appear to be the same... and I'm not sure which one is the proper usage. I standardized on "wellbeing".  –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "Seacology also emphasized that it would repair …"
 * Done. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "In addition to its efficiency, the organization boasts a responsive and reliable staff, who answer the phone instead of using automated answering services." Source?
 * Great catch! I'm not sure how that got left out! –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "…who share a commitment to island conservation the preservation of island cultures." missing word?
 * The word "and" has been added. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "he was named one of eleven "Heroes of Medicine" by Time magazine" how about a specific citation to this issue?
 * I have been trying to acquire this, but they only kept the clipping and not the whole issue. They have been having difficulty tracking it down.  (Trust me, I've already hounded them about original sources on everything.) –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it this issue? Sasata (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you. I confirmed it and obtained the full citation with the help of my local library.  I've added the reference. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * link biodiversity
 * Done. –  VisionHolder « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * did you try a Google books search for more sources? Here's a few I came up with:
 * Heather Zeppel (2006) "Indigenous ecotourism: sustainable development and management"
 * according to this source, the organization also helped protect golden-headed langurs (which they also call "the world's most endangered primate)
 * I will look into these tomorrow. I can mention the golden-headed langurs, but at some point I have to draw the line.  They have probably worked on close to a hundred projects, and I simply tried to sample them, based mostly on the frequency of mentions in the literature.  (I also tried to show samples of each type of project.)  But like I said, I will look at those sources soon. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked through the first 10 pages of Google's search results for books, and I added information about the langur. The Zeppel book seemed to only reiterate what was already in the article, and also listed several more examples of their projects.  All the other results were the same—brief summaries and more project examples.  Again, I feel I need to draw a line in regards to how many sample projects we detail.  If you disagree, please list which projects you feel need to be added to better represent the scope of their work.  You can access the complete list of their projects here. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 20:16, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * there's no mention of Seacology award recipient Elisabeth Rabakonandrianina (Bako) and her work in preserving Malagasy rainforests (see here). Come to think of it, how about a complete listing of all award winners?
 * I wasn't sure how much of that to cover. Should we maintain a list for every year to come?  I just selected the latest recipient and one of the most noteworthy.  I guess I would like more feedback from other reviewers on this one if I'm going to maintain an award recipient list from here on out. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 09:38, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say yes to a section with a table that lists all the recipients, it seems to be a relatively major award both monetarily and in terms of prestige. Maintaining the list shouldn't be more work than adding another column every year. Sasata (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I will work on adding the list, so feel free to tweak it when I'm done. I'm also (slowly) reading Cox's book, Nafanua: Saving the Samoan Rainforest and may use it as a reference to fill in the missing or unclear pieces of the story at a later date, assuming the information is even in there. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:52, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The table has been added. I tried several different alignments and layouts, but given that it is 600 pixels wide, I opted to center it.  On small browser windows, this looks good... but on larger screens it introduces a lot of white space.  I can't make it look good for both, so I am opting to favor the smaller browsers given the rise of mobile web use (sadly).  I also did my best to handle the years with multiple recipients.  I named the islands when the Seacology website specified them.  Feel free to tweak as you see fit. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 23:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, this isn't FLC, but if it were, I might complain that the columns probably don't need to be sortable, but if you think they do, the sort template should be used so that the names column will sort according to last name. Also, perhaps link any award recipients that have articles. Sasata (talk) 15:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point about sorting by last name. I'll do that.  I opted to use a sortable table in case people wanted to sort by country (to quickly count the number of instances) or name (to find someone).  If I'm the only one who thinks that might be helpful, then others are welcome to remove it.  As for links to people with articles, I'm pretty sure the only ones who do are Fuiono Senio and Ómar Ragnarsson, both of whom are linked in the text already.  I'll double-check on the other names. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 16:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Never mind on the sort issue. I've removed it because the feature appears to be broken, not only when I implement it, but also on the help page that shows how to do it. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 16:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Note: I have finished reading Cox's book, Nafanua: Saving the Samoan Rain Forest, and using this autobiographical account, I have fixed the inconsistencies in the "History" section. New and previous reviewers are welcome to review these relatively minor changes and clarifications. –  VisionHolder « talk » 19:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Please reword this sentence: "According to evolutionary biologist E. O. Wilson, even bird species that are endemic to islands face a greater risk of extinction—40 times greater than on the continents, including 90% of all bird extinctions between the 17th and 20th centuries." Why the "even"? Also, the word "including" doesn't seem to refer back to anything. Ucucha (talk) 14:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Also, I searched and didn't find any more dashes.  I think you fixed them all. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 20:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You call Nomascus hainanus the world's rarest primate overall in the lead, but the body only claims it is one of the rarest. Is it rarer than Piliocolobus badius waldronae? Ucucha (talk) 14:25, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I've changed it to read "one of the rarest" in the lead. With populations that small, it's hard to accurately say which is the rarest at any given moment... despite what the sources say.  –  VisionHolder  « talk » 20:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, we rarely have population estimates precise enough to say anything accurate about issues like this. Thanks for fixing those two issues. Ucucha (talk) 20:58, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The claim that 2000 bird species have gone extinct in the Pacific is sourced to a newspaper article, which isn't a good idea—scientific claims should have scientific sources. The newspaper article actually says that the number is in E. O. Wilson's book Biodiversity II (ISBN 978-0-309-05584-0); at a minimum, that book should be cited. However, the number seems unrealistically high, since there are only about 10,000 bird species worldwide. Perhaps he meant that the 800 largest islands have collectively lost 2000 species (in that case, a species going extinct on five islands would be counted five times), or it is just an error for 200. Ucucha (talk) 20:58, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There does appear to be a chapter in that book (starting around p. 145) that might contain the information, but Google Books only shows 3 pages of it. It might take up to a week to order in, but I think I can get the book from my local library. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 00:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Google Books gives me a preview of p. 145, where there is a table of minimum estimates of bird extinctions on islands; it says 141 bird species went extinct in the Pacific (90 prehistorically, 28 between 1600 and 1899, and 23 from 1900 to 1994). Ucucha (talk) 01:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing what you were able to see. Using the information you provided, I have updated the stats.  Also, since more than one or two books were cited, I have also standardized the book references by listing them in "Literature cited". –  VisionHolder  « talk » 20:58, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Since I now have the book in hand, I have updated the numbers and the wording to reflect a more general issue with islands. I left the newspaper in as a secondary reference. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 23:49, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - comprehensive article that is well written and follows the style guidelines. Lead could be a bit shorter maybe? But overall support it being promoted. Coolug (talk) 09:12, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and support. Since no one else has stressed concerns about the lead length, I'd prefer to leave it as it is... especially given that most readers only read the lead anyway.  If others agree that some material needs to be cut out, then I will do so. –  VisionHolder  « talk » 22:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It wasn't a massive concern and you make a fair point, leave it as it is, it's a great article with a lot of effort behind it. Coolug (talk) 07:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.