Wikipedia:Peer review/Croton Dam (Michigan)/archive1

Croton Dam (Michigan)

This is a relatively new article about a power dam on the Muskegon River that recently had its 100th anniversary... It has been selected as a DYK nomination and recently passed Good Article review as well. Most of the photos in it were taken by me, but the lead was one found on Flickr that I convinced the photographer to license so we could use it! I'm interested in taking the article further, perhaps all the way to FA. A peer review at this point seems a logical next step. Comments and suggestions appreciated. Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 20:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Those will be taken on board (there are less there than some automated reviews, and I think, mostly easy fixes). Anyone else have any comments? I'm hoping to take this article to FA... some of the paras need combining to be sure, I've heard that elsewhere already. ++Lar: t/c 18:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Review by BirgitteSB

• Lead Needs expansion to summarize the entire article.
• History Begins with a one sentence paragraph which needs to be combined with other text in one paragraph. Personally I don't like the tone of that first sentence and would instead say: "Croton Dam was an early electric enterprise made possible by the adaption of hydro mechanical technology." Then give the information of Foote's their background in mills and don't forget "Predecessor projects" and "Damming the Muskegon" are sub-headings. They need at least a sentence introducing them in the first paragraph. The writing currently is as though there is no heading break. The map need a more informative caption or else edit it Paint or something to label the waterways. I personally don't like the repetitive text of the historical marker. I can easily read it in the thumbnail, but I understand why you would want it in a more readable place. I think the image AND the text is too much, the article has enough images I would cut the image of the marker. BTW put an image or two on the left hand side.
• Impact and controversy This section still needs more content. There is only one source used in the whole section and you can tell what their viewpoint is. I think you need to find more sources on these issues and hopefully that will bring in more content.
  • It allegedly causes potentially harmful changes in water temperature and oxygen levels in a stretch of the river downstream of the dam, according to company data. Is this alleged, or is it backed up by data?
• Current status Not a fan of this title, how about "Operations". It would be wonderful if you could find more info on historical operation and tell us if these same method have been used for 100 years or else how they developed. What you have is good.--BirgitteSB 18:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)