Talk:Sherpa Fire

Sherpa Fire has been listed as one of the History 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: August 13, 2016. (Reviewed version).

California

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wildfire Low‑importance

	Sherpa Fire is part of WikiProject Wildfire, which collaborates on wildfire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.WildfireWikipedia:WikiProject WildfireTemplate:WikiProject WildfireWildfire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Droughts / Wildfires Low‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Droughts and wildfires task force (assessed as Low-importance).

"Sherpa" is spelled wrong[edit]

The "Sherpa" is spelled wrong. It is still officially called The "Scherpa fire", though people keep spreading the rumor that it is spelled as "Sherpa".^[1]

^ http://www.independent.com/news/2016/jun/20/yes-sherpa-fire-spelled-wrong/

Rcd178 (talk) 02:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"So, Beyer summed up, even though it’s spelled incorrectly, the official name of this week’s Santa Barbara fire is the Sherpa Fire. A spokesperson with California’s interagency management team made it a point to apologize for the typo. While The Independent had been using “Scherpa” in its daily reports since last Wednesday, we’ve decided to switch to the alternate spelling in future stories in hopes of avoiding any further confusion." Quote from the supplied reference. Fettlemap (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The fire is spelled wrong, but is now officially spelled in the documents as "Sherpa", not "Scherpa". Evancahill (talk) 14:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 15:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article on a subject with which I am completely unfamiliar, but I'll give it a review regardless (and hopefully learn something in the process!). Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lede:

ResolvedMention where "Santa Barbara County" actually is (i.e. in California, southwestern United States). Remember that many non-American readers will not be at all familiar with U.S. geography any more than most American readers will be familiar with Chinese geography etc. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved"exploded" seems a little dramatic and non-technical. "spread" should do the job just fine. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In some respects I feel that he lede could do a better job summarising the article's contents. For instance, it doesn't mention anything about the wildfire's name or the efforts that were made to counter it. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:55, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Events

Resolved"Exploded" appears again. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved"According the the"? Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved"Forest Service" might be better written as "United States Forest Service". Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved"down the canyons"? What canyons are these? Any links? Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Midnightblueowl: unfortunately no links to specific canyons, but how does "...fire down canyons in the Santa Ynez Mountains with gusts of..." sound? Gives more context.--Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds good to me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved"as it continued to spread.[2] As the fire continued"... "continued... continued". Fairly repetitive. I'd change one of them. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Down to only 2 occurrences of "continued" and they are 3 paragraphs apart. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved"as well as a livestock evacuation center as the" - "as...as...as". Again, it's a little repetitive. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cut a number of occurrences in the text. How does it look now? --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved"Thursday evening the sundowner winds resurfaced" - "On Thursday" might be a clearer way of introducing this sentence. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Midnightblueowl: My one concern with this is that the sundowner winds ONLY surfaced in the evening so it is important to emphasise that point and "On Thursday evening..." sounds weird to me. Thoughts? --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I still think that opening a sentence with "Thursday evening" is inappropriate. How about "On the evening of Thursday 16..." ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved"On June 27th" and later dates. we haven't been using "th" or "st" at the end of dates earlier in the article so we probably shouldn't have it here. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved"In the following weeks, Santa Barbara County Fire Department responded to multiple small flares up within the fire ground." This isn't referenced and could be considered WP:Original Research. If you can't find a reliable source to bolster this claim then I would suggest scrapping it. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Midnightblueowl: You're good. TOTALLY guilty of WP:OR with that statement.--Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:31, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Effects

ResolvedAs a standalone section, this doesn't really work. Given that this consists of just three lone sentences, I would consider merging them all into the "Events" section at the appropriate junctures. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Midnightblueowl: I have enlarged the section adding more content and sources. Thoughts? --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Resolved This has a duplink to United States Forestry Service. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if this section would work better at the start, before the "Events" section. Just a suggestion, don't worry if you disagree. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The sources all look fine, however I would definitely recommend getting some web archive links in too, lest the ones you currently use become deadlinks over the next few years. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The images look fine. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few prose issues here with I fear conflict with "1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct" but those can be cleared up without too much difficulty. Beyond that I am generally happy that this article meets the GA criteria and can be passed (so long as the prose edits are dealt with). Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:53, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Gallery section appears to be a fairly random assortment of images WP:IG, Template:Cleanup-gallery. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just the one last point, regarding "Thursday evening", Zackmann08. After that is sorted I Will be happy to pass this article as a GA. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Midnightblueowl: thanks again for your help on this! Should be good to go based on your notes. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.independent.com/news/2016/jun/20/yes-sherpa-fire-spelled-wrong/

[1]