Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/South Jordan, Utah/archive1

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

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 14:32, 27 April 2010 [1].

South Jordan, Utah[edit]

South Jordan, Utah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Bgwhite (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

Spring has sprung. My wife is gone for a week. I'm happy and joyful. Therefore, I am nominating this for featured article to bring misery upon myself. This is my first nomination of what I hope is many more (I have good mental health insurance), so please be extra critical so I can learn from my mistakes. Bgwhite (talk) 02:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments. No dab links or dead external links. Ucucha 02:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I haven't read the whole article, but I strongly suspect a thorough proofreading is in order. It's never good when one finds three typos in one sentence. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I added that sentence a few days ago... after the two proofreadings the article has been through. Bgwhite (talk) 05:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reluctant OpposeComments: I hate to be the one who spoils your happy week, but there are significant problems here, all sortable however:-

  • Lead
    • At present the lead is not acting as a summary of the whole article, but rather as a fairly random collection of facts about the city.
    • The initial prose reads very jerkily, with two short sentences that should be run together.
    • The third sentence begins: "Currently estimated at 51,131 people,..." To what does "currently" relate? You need some time specificity (e.g. "As of 2010..."). Also, the number doesn't look like an "estimate", rather like an exact tally. The phrasing is wrong anyway; it needs to be reworded along the lines "With a 2010 population of 51,131..."
    • However, you probably need to rewrite the first paragraph anyway, to give a stronger introduction to the article and to "draw the reader in". The opening sentences of the lead should (a) define the subject and (b) summarise its chief notability. I doubt that being the 11th largest city in Utah and being 13 miles south of Salt Lake City are the most notable facts about South Jordan.
    • The second paragraph of the lead uses the word "community" four times in three lines. It should be possible to find some alternatives, e.g. "dormitory town" for bedroom community.
      • Done Removed two "community". Kept "bedroom community" as that is the proper terminology and its a wikilink. Kept "daybreak community" as that is the name of the development Bgwhite (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Last paragraph "It is also..." "It" needs specifying
  • Further down: I've not had chance yet to read much more of the article, but here are a few more points:-
    • "The changing climatic conditions, combined with ancestors to the Ute, Paiute, and Shoshone pushing them out of the area,..." There is no "combination" here, these are two quite separate factors. Also, "pushing them out" doesn't read as encyclopedic language.
      • changed "pushing them out". However, while they are two separate factors, together it was the cause of moving them out.... both factors and not just one was the cause Bgwhite (talk) 16:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I still don't think the sentence is right. First, what were these "changing climatic conditions"? Was it suddenly getting hotter, colder, wetter or what? My main point, however, is still that whatever these climatic changes were, they didn't "combine", i.e. act in concert with, the movement into the area of the people you mention. I suggest a rephrasing along these lines: "Changes in climatic conditions [brief explanation], and the movement into the area of ancestors of the Ute, Paiute, and Shoshone, led to the disappearance of the Fremont people." Brianboulton (talk) 12:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Provost story should have a date.
    • Tragic though it was, does the bush crash story warrant an entire section to itself? Also, to say that the accident was "eclipsed" by another, 15 years later, seems inappropriate; I see no reason to mention the Kentucky incident here.
      • Removed mention of Kentucky accident and moved the bus crash section inside the twentieth century section Bgwhite (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In general I can see a lot that's good here, but more work is needed to bring it to featured level. You have a few days of freedom left to you, so all should be well. Brianboulton (talk) 10:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments: Here are some comments on the Early Mormon settlements section.

    • "...began to irrigate land and explore the area for new settlements." That sounds as though the new settlments already existed. I think you mean "explore the area with a view to establishing new settlements".
    • You need to introduce Alexander Beckstead at first mention, so that we know who he was. For example, "Alexander Becksmith, a blacksmith from Somewhere in Someplace, moved his family to the West Jordan area in 1849, and became the first of his trade in the south Salt Lake Valley."
    • Using modern grid references to describe the location of Beckstead's land, or other places, is not particularly useful to the general reader, or to anyone who doesn't know the layout of Salt Lake City. I would simply leave out this information, and also the grid information relevan to the ditch. Thus: "Beckstead became the first settler of South Jordan by moving his family along the Jordan River, where theylived in a dugout cut into the west bluffs above the river. The flood plain of the Jordan was level, and could be cleared for farming if a ditch was constructed to divert river water along the base of the west bluff. Beckstead and others created the 2.5-mile (4.0 km) "Beckstead Ditch", parts of the ditch are still in use today."
    • I would alter "are still in use today" to "were still in use as of 2010".
    • "...constructed on the east side of the current cemetery site in 1873." By current" do you mean "present-day"? Also, suggest rearrange to: "...constructed in 1873 on the east side of the cite of the present-day cemetery."
    • Maybe a little too much detailed information (size of bricks, interior curtaining etc.)?
    • "It came to be known as the "Mud Temple".[17] The building was used until 1908 when South Jordan Ward moved into a new building." Run these sentences together, and delete the redundant wording to get: "It came to be known as the "Mud Temple",[17] and was in use until 1908."
    • "bought it above" should be "brought it above"
    • "As a result, most of the families moved..." As a result of what?

Unfortunately I don't have the time to go through all the remaining sections at this level of detail. I have struck the oppose on the basis of your obvious willingness to address the issues, which has already led to significant improvements in the article. I hope that another reviewer will point out what else needs attention, and that the article will continue to improve. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianboulton (talk • contribs) 12:57, April 16, 2010

  • Oppose
    • Some of the sentences read like short dot points strung together
      • Could you point these out so I can correct them. Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Many paragraphs have no sources for hard numerical data, such as the census.
      • The 2008 census number in the infobox does have source as does the 2000 census in the demographics paragraph. Where are you looking at? Could you also please tell me what paragraphs don't have a source? Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • In the demographics section, the 2 adn 3 para have no ref, and the ends of the other two don't either YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 05:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • I see your/my confusion. The Demographics section has just one source for the entire section as all data in that section came from the one source. I broke out the last paragraph to an extended data page, but the first 3 paragraphs do reference the same source. Do I reference the same source at the end of each paragraph or just at the end of the third paragraph Bgwhite (talk) 05:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it possible to get information on the actual soil or terrain in the area, apart from just the raw elevation?
    • In politics, it is normal for the electoral authorities to have a booth-by-booth breakdown of the votes, so people can see the political stance of the area, as different suburbs/towns/villages in a 500k-people district will have different tendencies. Can this be located
      • All elected officials are Republican. I can mention that Utah is the most Republican state. I can give results for each candidate... The state Representative's district is just South Jordan and can say she won with 71% of the vote. Otherwise the cost is prohibitive for me to get results for each precinct. Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I added that Utah is most republican state and all elected officials for South Jordan are Republican Bgwhite (talk) 07:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Need specification of how far this place is from SLC's centre. There doesn't seem to be any hint of it
      • Previous reviewer had me remove it from the lead. Will add it back in. Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can more information be found on the university campus in the town. There's more information on car parking at the moment.
    • Compared to stuff like Waterfall Gully, South Australia, I'm not sure this article is well-researched enough to have extracted the possible meat out of it
      • I think it's apples vs oranges. I've been using Tumbler Ridge, British Columbia and Hillsboro,_Oregon as guides. I believe the South Jordan article has more "stuff" than Tumbler Ridge and is comparable to Hillsboro. With the addition of an expanded geography section, I'm not sure what else to add? There is no weather station in South Jordan, so can't add a climatology, no cultural stuff to add unless a movie theater counts , no economy except it being a bedroom community. Could you give me some direction? Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually I'll have to switch to oppose, as there is no information on workforce or any indication of how these people earn a living YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have already listed "bedroom community of Salt Lake City" twice. See question above. Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Add work information in the demographic section Bgwhite (talk) 06:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

  • "In 1859, Beckstead became the first settler of South Jordan by moving his family along the Jordan River where lived in a dugout cut into the west bluffs above the river.": There's a word missing between "where" and "lived".
  • Why is the American Civil War not mentioned? There are certain historical touchstones – such as civil and world wars – which need to be mentioned as they greatly affected a country. Even if the direct effect on South Jordan was minimal, this needs to be mentioned.
    • I'll have to disagree with the Civil War. South Jordan was just founded and had 9 families at the start of the war. Also, Utah was really not involved in the Civil War. Utah was under federal occupation up until the war with troops leaving because of the civil war. I will check into the world wars. Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Acronyms such as LDS need to be expanded on their first occurrence.
    • It's already expanded in the lead section Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "…greater acreage could be farmed, thus increasing the area's population": This implies that the population increased as a direct result of farming, as if they were growing people. It was indirect (more land for farming meant more food, which meant it was possible to support more people) so it should be phrased "…could be farmed, which led to the area's population increasing".
    • Where do you think the Solylent Green processing plants get their people? :) Fixed Bgwhite (talk) 23:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2009, the LDS Oquirrh Mountain Utah Temple was completed and became the second temple to be built in South Jordan following the Jordan River Utah Temple": This sentence is a bit ambiguous. Was the Oquirrh Mountain the second temple to built after the Utah temple, or was it the second built in South Jordan, with the Utah temple being the first? Also, why mention the Oquirrh temple but not the Utah one when it was first built?
  • The demography section lacks context. It's detailed enough for a Good Article, but at the moment stats such as "There were 7,507 households out of which 58.7% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 83.3% were married couples living together, 5.0% had a female householder with no husband present, and 9.8% were non-families" means almost nothing to the reader. To understand what these figures mean, you need to include comparative figures, perhaps from the sate or Salt Lake City metropolitan area. The crime section does this well.
  • "…with only the trout being able to keep": I assume this means that of the fish they catch, anglers can only keep trout, but this is a little clumsy and could be explained better.
  • Regarding the notable residents, is the only qualification that the person lived in the town (and are in some sense notable of course)? Can such a section be truly comprehensive? As it's so short, one option may be to integrate mention of those four people into the rest of the article. That way you wouldn't have a list (which is generally discouraged) and would have the opportunity to write a sentence or two a bout each one.

I've made some copy edits that you'll want to check over to make sure I haven't changed the meaning of anything. This is a good article and quite detailed, although in some places could use a little more. There's some occasional odd phrasing, but for the most part the article reads well enough. All in all, a good effort for your first FAC. Nev1 (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2010 (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_article_candidates/South_Jordan,_Utah/archive1&oldid=1088204430"