Wikipedia:Peer review/Zaprešić/archive1

Zaprešić

 * 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 January 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 January 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed Zaprešić for peer review because I'd like to make this article at least GA-class. I've started working on this article three weeks ago while it was still a 2 KB copyright violating stub and I think I've turned it into a pretty good article. I've come to peer review mainly because it probably needs some copyediting and I've been told before that I'm not good at grammar and MOS (I'm not a natural English speaker); also, I tend not to finish sentences sometimes when I'm in a hurry.

Thanks, Admiral Norton (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting article, and I enjoyed it. It's certainly broad in its coverage, stable, illustrated where possible, neutral in its point of view, and it seems factually accurate and verifiable. To improve this article to GA, you'll need to deal with the two small cleanup tags in the last section, but that shouldn't be difficult. That plus what you've already done would take care of five of the six GA criteria. Most of my comments below and the small changes I made as I went through the article have to do with the sixth, that the article be well-written.

Two areas for possible expansion occurred to me. You might want to include a bit of the area's geology, either in its own section or in the geography section. I'd suggest adding a climate section with information about temperatures, rain, snow, wind, and anything else that readers might find useful.

Lead
 * The ideal lead summarizes the whole article without introducing material undeveloped in the main text sections. The existing lead does not mention anything from sections 4 through 11. You'll need to expand the lead to meet this part of the "well-written" criterion for GA articles. WP:LEAD is helpful.
 * I completely rewrote the lead to ensure it summarizes all sections. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "However, it was formally established as a city as late as 1995." - The phrase "as late as" is vague. Perhaps this would be better: "However, it was not formally established as a city until 1995."
 * Fixed all such phrases in the article. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

History
 * "passing near today's settlements", "still stands today", "municipalities of Pušća (still exists)" - Words like "today" and "still exists" are tricky because they are vague. "Today" refers to no particular time, and it is always changing. One way to fix this is to use something like "still exists as of 2009" or "passing near modern settlements".
 * Fixed. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "did not formally exist until November 30, 1995" - Since this is an article about a European city, the dates should appear in the main text in day-month-year format. I ran a script to flip them. If you disagree with this change, I can flip them back.
 * I didn't know about that rule before. I tend to write them in month, day form when I write in English, as it's more practical for me. However, the day, month format is the only one commonly used in Croatian language and Croatia and I don't have any problems with keeping the dates in the European form. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Geography
 * "18 km (11 mi)" - WP:MOSNUM recommends spelling out the main unit, kilometer in this case. You can fix this by turning off the |abbr parameter in the convert template. The template will still correctly abbreviate the secondary unit.
 * Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Demography
 * "91.1% of inhabitants" - The Manual of Style recommends not starting a sentence with digits. You might say, "About 91 percent".
 * Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "the whole Zagreb County" - English is odd in many ways. "The whole county" would be correct English, but when the county name appears first, "the whole of Zagreb County" would sound more natural. Further down, "the younger towns in the Zagreb County" would sound more natural as "the younger towns in Zagreb County", without the "the".
 * Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Government
 * was founded and settlement awarded a mayor as late as 30 November 1995" - Since the exact date is known, "was founded on 30 November 1995 and awarded a mayor" would be better.
 * Fixed. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "The city council ... has the legislative power over the town and, as explained above, elects the mayor and members of the city government. It represents the residents... ". - You don't need this internal cross-reference. I'd suggest deleting "has the legislative power over the town and, as explained above".
 * Actually, the other part of the sentence was explained above. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Infrastructure
 * It was beforehand left in Gorjak Creek, endangering the tap water quality." - Maybe "piped into" would be better than "left". The text implies that Gorjak Creek is a tributary of the Sava River. If so, it would be good to say so directly.
 * ❌ Sava drains a half of Croatia, so Gorjak Creek must be its tributary one way or another. However, I can't find a map of this area (either printed or Internet-based) that names all the little creeks in the area, so I can't be sure, although I have a good candidate. I have reworded the sentence as a temporary solution. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "construction of the Zajarki water purification system for screening the used water" - Does the plant only screen out the solids? That would still not "purify" it for drinking.
 * I rewrote a sentence so that readers don't think the tap water is pumped from Sava; the river is way too big and polluted for its water to be potable. Zajarki system releases the water into Sava, not anywhere near Šibice and the water pump, and frankly, I don't see a point in this (maybe they want to protect the non-existing fish). Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Transport
 * "It is thus known as the "northwestern gate to the Zagreb County." - Direct quotes should have citations right after them. If this is not a direct quote from a source, I would suggest removing the quotation marks and the "the" in front of Zagreb, thus: northwestern gate to Zagreb County.
 * It is a direct quote (from geography_zap reference), but not in English, so I followed your advice. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Stubica in this section links to a disambiguation page and should be made more specific.
 * Donja Stubica is the largest town of all Stubicas. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "current city urbanistic plan" - "city plan of xxxx" would be better, where xxxx is the date. "Urbanistic" is not a word in English. "Urban" is a word, but you don't need it since you already say "city".
 * ❌ This is a bit tricky, because the "general urbanistic plan" or "general urban plan" of a city (Croatian: generalni urbanistički plan, GUP) is a legal term of sorts in urban planning in Croatia, something like a cadastre and there are other plans, such as "spatial plan" (prostorni plan) or "urban plan of land restructuring" (urbanistički plan uređenja), and the same place can be covered by more than one of them. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "The date when the construction starts was not yet announced." Better to say, "As of January 2009, the date of construction had not been announced."
 * Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Culture and media Sports and recreation
 * "Two of these are in the zero category of cultural preservation" - Outsiders won't know what "zero category" means unless it is explained.
 * I've mentioned the organizations that issue these categories. A link to an explanation page would come in handy here, but I'm afraid this is the best I can do. Admiral Norton (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "a fitness club, a sauna and a massage parlor.[49][50][51][31]" When a string of footnote numbers appear together like this, it's good to arrange them in ascending order, thus: [31][49][50][51]. You do that by rearranging the inline references.
 * The problem is that I sometimes add an existing footnote somewhere near the lead or in the infobox and the numbers change. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Notable inhabitants
 * "an infamous germanization" - I'm not sure what this means. It might mean he invited Germans to immigrate or that he gave some kind of ruling power to the Germans or that he made people learn the German language. A bit of elaboration would help.
 * There was a movement to separate Croatia from Austro-Hungary, called Illyrian movement, and Jelačić worked against it. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "The statue is still located on the square today" - Another one of those "today" problems.
 * I did a nice workaround here. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "rector of the Croatian course" - I don't know what the "Croatian course" means.
 * That should've been "Croatian language course." Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Still living inhabitants" - This is like the "today" problem because "still" is ambiguous and always changing. Since you give the birth dates and no death dates for this last group, you don't need to say that they are still alive. Maybe "Other well-known inhabitants" would be better.
 * It's a bit awkward now, but I can't think of anything better. Admiral Norton (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

I hope these comments and suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, preferably one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 01:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)