Wikipedia:Peer review/List of national parks of Sweden/archive1

List of national parks of Sweden

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article (based on List of National Parks of Canada) for peer review because I'd like some comments before I take it to FLC. Thanks,  The Le ft orium  20:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton (talk) 19:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm looking forward to it! :)  The Le ft orium  20:00, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: In general the lists look pretty OK, and the illustrations are wonderful. Some suggestions for improving the article:-
 * General point: would it be possible to include a map of Sweden, indicating the geographical locations of the main parks? An equivalent map exists in the Canada national parks list.
 * Lead
 * The words "national parks of Sweden" in the opening sentence should be bolded, and not linked
 * My view is that "Sweden" does not require linking. If you want a link on "national park" you can create it at next mention, in the second sentence.
 * There is no need to list the names of the nine original parks, since this information is included in the list which follows immediately.
 * Awkward sentence: "There are currently twenty-eight national parks in Sweden, though a twenty-ninth park, Kosterhavet National Park, is scheduled to open in September 2009." 28 and 29th can be stated numerically, and it's not really a "though" sentence. Thus: "There are currently 28 national parks in Sweden; a 29th, Kosterhavet National Park, is scheduled to open in September 2009."
 * "The Swedish national parks must represent unique landscape types and be effectively protected and used for research, recreation, and tourism without damaging nature". Presumably this statement is covered in the citation, but it would be better if you stated the authority behind the assertion. There are also too many "ands" in the sentence, and the odd grammar glitch. Suggest: "According to [xyz], Swedish national parks must represent unique landscape types, be effectively protected, and be used for research, recreation, and tourism without damaging nature."
 * "The reason for this are..." Should be "is"
 * Repetition of adjective "large". You can avoid this by calling the mountain ranges "extensive".
 * No spaces around mdashes
 * "Approximately" 200,000 hectares should not be converted to an exact total of acres. If you insert "sigfig=2" into the conversion template you get an answer of 490,000 acres, which matches the hectares approximation.
 * What is meant by "unbroken cultivation"?
 * reindeer-herding" needs a hyphen
 * Last sentence: the mdash point again, and the spurious accuracy in the conversion.
 * List
 * If the list is presented in alphabetical order by park name, why is Ängsö National Park listed last?
 * "Ä" is the second last letter in the Swedish alphabet.  The Le ft ori um  16:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Future national parks
 * "thorough" in the first sentence is POV-ish and should be deleted
 * "thirteen should be expressed numerically
 * Is the column heading "Establishes" deliberate? If so, what meaning is it intending to convey?
 * Can you clarify what you mean? I'm not sure if I understand you.  The Le ft ori um  16:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The hectare area figures are all round numbers, which suggests approximations. The acres should be approximates, too, using the "sigfig" option.

THat's it. I hope that you find these suggestions helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 15:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the excellent review! I have addressed most of your concerns, but I left a question further up.  The Le ft ori um  16:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)