Wikipedia:Peer review/Living River Siam/archive1

Living River Siam

 * 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 July 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 July 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I'm looking to see what can be done to improve this article to featured status. What kind of images would you suggest, given the resources available on the LRS/SEARIN website? Is the organization too loose?

Thanks, Shii (tock) 21:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * For a start, I would suggest that this article needs more images in order to illustrate the article. Perhaps some images of the dam projects they have worked on.  You can have a look on wikimedia commons to see if they have any or flickr.  There are also quite a few red links in the article and these should be eliminated.  Tbo 157   (talk)   15:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is interesting and a good start. I have a few suggestions for further improvement.


 * MOS:INTRO says, "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." The existing lead is more like an introductory paragraph than a summary. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a brief mention of each of the main text sections.


 * MOS:HEAD says, in part, "Section names should preferably be unique within a page; this applies even for the names of subsections." Because of this, it would be better to shorten "Development of Thai Baan research" to "Thai Baan" and "Research in Amphoe Chiang Khong" to "Amphoe Chiang Khong" and so on, to avoid repeating "research" in several heads. Other solutions are possible.
 * It would be helpful to include images. I agree with User:Tbo_157 about what might work. Also, it would be really nice to include a map of Thailand that shows where these rivers are. You might search the Commons to see if someone has already posted a map that shows the rivers.

Pak Mun Dam protests
 * Who launched Living River Siam? More background about the group's development would be helpful. How is the group funded? Does it have substantial political support within Thailand?
 * (This requires more research on my part) Shii (tock) 05:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikilink World Bank and sluice?
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Government reaction and other responses
 * It's not clear why the government decided to close the sluice gates again. If the electricity is not needed, what is the dam for? Why does the government like the dam even if many of the people do not? Did the government give any reason for rejecting all of the studies? Did the prime minister give any reason for shutting the gates?
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Research in Amphoe Chiang Khong
 * "The Mekong River remained free of dams until 1993 because of its complex system of rapids which reverse the course of some of its branches on an annual basis." - Is "rapids" the right word? How would rapids reverse the course of the branches? An in-text explanation would be helpful.
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "In response to the 2004 studies, the Thai government suspended blasting on one of the rapids, the Khon Pi Luang." - The Manual of Style generally deprecates extremely short paragraphs and extremely short sections. Two solutions are possible: expand or merge. This orphan paragraph could probably be merged with the one above it. Ditto for the last paragraph of the next section.
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

References
 * Some of the references are incomplete. Citation 1 is an example.
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 01:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Some of the references have dead urls. Citation 20 is an example. A link checker tool that can be run on any article lives here. It finds seven dead links in the references. These should all be repaired or replaced with other reliable sources, if possible.
 * (This is done) Shii (tock) 05:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 00:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your extensive input. I'm going to come back to this soon-- I'll leave a message on your talk page if I have follow up questions. Shii (tock) 04:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)