Talk:Clayton Falls Creek

Clayton Falls Creek has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 9, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Canada: British Columbia / Geography Low‑importance

Canada
portal

WikiProject
Canada

Canada
notice board

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Clayton Falls Creek/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 01:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 06:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks interesting! Will review between 8–10 February. :3 ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 06:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I love brooks so much. Over to you! ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 04:09, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Wikilink creek to stream, since in other varieties of English creek has a different meaning; could also do "is a creek (stream)" or smth.
- Done. - G
At the start of § Geography and hydrology: "The Clayton Falls Creek" - the is not needed here.
- Fixed. - G
"580 meters (1,900 ft) penstock" – change to > "580 meter (1,900 ft) penstock" or "580 meter (1,900 ft)-long penstock".
- Fixed. - G
Could powerhouse be wikilinked to somewhere? I never knew it had a non-figurative sense.
- Done. - G
You can wikilink chum salmon fully even if pink is only partially so.
- Done. - G
"offers the only public" – I would rephrase it to avoid offers and say either "has" or "possesses" etc.
- Fixed. - G
"In 1961–1962" – was it built between these two dates or is the date of completion given as either 1961 or 1962? Specify this.
- Done. - G

Spotcheck

Passes on refs 3, 5, 6 and 9:

(11): the text says "Around the 1930s" but the cited source gives "c.1935?". Do you know if the formatting of the BC Geographical Names website permits "c.1935?" to be synonymous with the 1930s? Otherwise add "c.1935" or "Around 1935" to the article instead.
Oh, fixed! - G

@LunaEatsTuna: There we go - hope it's all good now! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:12, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! I am happy now to pass it for GA status. Congrats! ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 06:25, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.