Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Outline of caves/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Outline of caves

[edit]

Outline of caves (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Kingsmasher678 (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I think that it meets the criteria. It should greatly improve navigation of cave related topics, which is currently a bit of a nightmare. This is my first FLC, so I greatly appreciate any constructive criticism that is offered. Thanks in advance!

Kingsmasher678 (talk) 04:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsmasher678, you forgot to add the nomination to WP:FLC, so I have done that for you. Cos (X + Z) 16:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, I thought it ran was added automatically. Thank you!
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 16:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review by EF5

[edit]

Will review references and do a spotcheck shortly. EF5 17:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man! Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many references have some sort of issue. I will keep reviewing later when I have more time (luckily you nominated it on a Friday, which means the weekend), but there are quite a few issues that'll need sorted out (ref-formatting issues are pretty easy to fix, hence why I'm not opposing off-the-bat). EF5 17:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 05:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@EF5, anything else you see?
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, issues seemed to have been resolved. Support on ref formatting, I don't feel like I have adequate time to do an in-detail spotcheck. — EF5 18:35, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@EF5: Noting there are a LOT of reference formatting issues still, some of which I've detailed below. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042

[edit]
  • All images need alternative text.
  • Why does the cave related media section cite no sources but every other section does?
  • "youth soccor team" is spelt wrong.
  • "many types of subterranean cavity" -> "many types of subterranean cavities"
  • "World-wide" -> "Worldwide"
  • "most common variety of cave." -> "most common varieties of caves."
  • "these cave are likely to form." -> "these caves are likely to form."
  • "and more permeant homes" is spelt wrong.
  • "types of cave exist" -> "types of caves exist"
  • "water based features" -> "water-based features"
  • "calcite based speleothems" -> "calcite-based speleothems"
  • "that forms after" -> "that form after"
  • "a tremendous impacts" -> "a tremendous impact"
  • "humanities' past." -> "humanity's past."
  • "native peoples of a regions." -> "native peoples of a region."
  • "by lack of scientific intent" -> "by lack of scientific intent"
  • "places on sightseeing" -> "placed on sightseeing"
  • "Well known cavers." -> "Well known cavers", it isn't a full sentence.
  • "caver falls" -> "cave falls"
  • Ping when done. History6042😊 (Contact me) 16:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @History6042 done except for "caver fall", that one is intentional. The cave isn't the thing falling, its the person. Should I switch it to just "falls"?
    Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes probably, I trust you to do that though so I will support now. History6042😊 (Contact me) 12:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review and comments by Arconning

[edit]

Hey man im josh

[edit]
  • Ref 1 – Remove stray "t" at the beginning of the ref
  • Ref 4 – Change author to separate Kevin and Carlene, even though they share the same last name
  • Ref 5 – Downcase ".Com" to ".com"
  • Ref 17 – Address shouldn't be listed as the author
  • Ref 17 – Link to the National Park Service for consistency
  • Ref 47 – Publisher should just be Cornell University Law School (and linked)
  • Ref 56 – Missing website or publisher
  • Ref 57 – Missing website or publisher
  • Ref 61 – Inconsistent website with other Britannica sources
  • Ref 65 – Currently all caps title, shirt to title or sentence case
  • Ref 79 – Remove "Startcaving.com" from the title and move it to the website
  • Ref 93 – Add author
  • Ref 94 – Link to CNN
  • Ref 97 – Unclear what makes this a reliable source. Threw up red flags for me because it's a wordpress site
  • Ref 107 – Link to Times of India
  • Ref 112 – Link to The Jakarta Post as the website
  • Ref 112 – Remove "The Jakarta Post" as the author
  • Remove "Britannica" from the title of references that are from Brittanica.
  • If the website field includes "www.", this should be removed

There's a lot of reference formatting issues and information missing. I'll leave it at this for now and ask that you go through the references and ensure that you're adding a website/work/publisher where appropriate, the authors where available, and publish dates when available. Please ping me when all of this has been addressed and you've gone through the references to ensure the appropriate information is added and is as consistent as you can make it. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hey man im josh
Done, I think.
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:28, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 17:49, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 20 – Match ref 43, list the website
  • Ref 3 – Doesn't need the abbreviation included
  • Ref 2 – Inconsistent with other NPS sources, note that NPS is not italicized here as it is elsewhere
  • Ref 8 – Not sure what makes this a reliable source, can we do better regarding types of caves?
  • Ref 32 – Change website to Missouri Department of Natural Resources
  • Ref 32 – Remove everything from the title after "Streams"
  • Ref 35 – Add British Geological Survey as the website
  • Ref 40 – Unclear what makes this a reliable source
  • Ref 42 – Wikilink Elsevier Science
  • Ref 44 – Use the long name of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  • Ref 68 – It looks like what you put as the author should actually be the title
  • Ref 75 – Missing website parameter
  • Ref 99 – Missing website
  • Ref 105 – Change to "The Times of India"
  • Ref 107 – Use the url-access parameter to note that a subscription is required
Honestly there's a lot of sources that are relatively questionable if you're not familiar with them already. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed refs #20 and #43 -- listed the conference that the papers came from Mrfoogles (talk) 20:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed ref #3. Ref #2 is an interesting situation as NPS is listed as the publisher here and website in the other ones, which is why it isn't italicized in ref #2. Moved it to "website". Mrfoogles (talk) 20:22, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed refs #32 and #35 -- #35's website is actually "Foundations of the Mendips" Mrfoogles (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed refs #40, #42, #44, #68 -- seems like #68 had a different issue, but it should be fixed. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:34, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed refs 75 and 99, although you may want to look at 99 again. There's no real appropriate title, as it's a database entry. Mrfoogles (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed ref #105 and #107 -- formatting should be fixed. Although should the url-access level parameter still be "subscription" if a limited number of articles can be viewed by creating an account? Mrfoogles (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hey man im josh I think that the concerns were taken care of.
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment by Mrfoogles

[edit]

Don't do FAC reviews a lot, and I'm not sure what is required, but I'm going to note a lot of the alt texts tend to repeat the caption without necessarily describing what is in the image. E.g. one file has the caption "Hands at the Cuevas de las Manos upon Río Pinturas, near the town of Perito Moreno in Santa Cruz Province, Argentina." and the alt "Hands at the Cuevas de las Manos upon Río Pinturas, near the town of Perito Moreno in Santa Cruz Province, Argentina." Alt text is specifically supposed to not repeat the caption. That one I fixed, but this is a pattern in the article. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:09, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That said I've just gone through and fixed all the alts (I thought there were more images, but I guess not), so overall it's not longer a problem. Still, @Kingsmasher678, if you wrote those alts, it's important to not repeat the captions and focus on describing the content of the image -- it might be worth rereading WP:ALT. Mrfoogles (talk) 21:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man! I was planning to do it tmrw, but you’ve beaten me to it.
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 13:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IntentionallyDense

[edit]
  • The following outline... is this kind of introduction common with outlines? I just know that it's frowned upon to say "this is a list about xyz" and this kind of sounds similar but I'm unfamiliar with outlines.
  • "subterranean cavities" feels a bit too technical for the lead
  • I would wikilink Speleothems in the image caption
  • carbonic acid and sulfuric acid should be wikilinked, maybe limestone as well since it's mentioned quite a bit
  • typically have no dark zone a wikilink, footnote, or quick explanation may be helpful here
  • with in should this be "within"? google was not helpful here
  • I'm not 100% sure here as dashes are not something I'm too familiar with but it looks like according to MOS:LISTDASH they should be used?

That's all I have for now but I will come back to this, ping when you're able to respond! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 20:03, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"The following outline" is nearly if not completely universal with outlines.
For subterranean cavities, what would you suggest? I personally think that it is a good counterpoint to "caves", which is a common name, but "underground cavities" could work also.
Wikilink in place
rephrased to something more clear
I think it should, that was a typo on my part
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@IntentionallyDense
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the fact that I didn't even know that subterranean cavities meant caves is a good indicator that the wording is slightly too technical for the lead section. I would suggest the word "caves" instead. I'm realizing now that (at least according to my 5th grade teacher) since it is a definition, it shouldn't include the word itself, however I still think with some careful rewording you could make this a little less technical.
  • overhangs of rock, are typically illuminated by natural light. remove "are"
  • wikilink barometric pressure
  • Caves are commonly linked to karstic and volcanic environments, and as such much of their geology is linked to these geologic contexts. remove "and"
  • wikilink aragonite
  • wikilink speleologists
  • Spell out "SRT accidents" in full.
  • For "Caving Incidents" it may be helpful to give a brief scope for the list, like you did with "Notable cavers", also "incidents" doesn't need to be capatilized
  • animal species that are adapted to live in an underground environment. appears to be unsourced
  • Since "cavernicoles" doesn't appear to have a wikilink, a brief explanation may be nice.
I think a careful comb through this article to pick up on any missed wikilinks may be helpful. Ping when you're able to get back to me, thanks for the speedy response! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 04:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@IntentionallyDense done except the volicanic one, I switched to "or" instead. It fits that meaning better.
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 22:40, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for that one I meant it would sound better as "environments, as such" instead of "environments, and as such", I should have clarified that! IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 19:49, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Outline_of_caves/archive1&oldid=1286616581"