Talk:Kajaani

Kajaani 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: December 9, 2014. (Reviewed version).

What I continue to find amusing is that the Kajaani coat of arms depicts a castle, when there hasn't been a whole, intact castle in Kajaani for almost three centuries. JIP | Talk 13:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's just the ruins of it, but we call it a castle. (28.9.2006) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.50.192.202 (talk • contribs)

Katiska ?

What's that Katiska- district in the The Districts and Villages of the City of Kajaani section of the article ? It's not even in the Finnish Wikipedia's Stub Type of Kajaani. Where is Katiska in Kajaani ? I also searched with Google (Katiska Kajaani) and got no results. Hoikka1 (talk) 08:20, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll answer to myself. It is indeed an district, and it exists. The district is in where "Katiskatie" is. I'll add this Katiska to Finnish Wiki stub type. Hoikka1 (talk) 07:02, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Biblioworm (talk · contribs) 00:42, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review In progress. --Biblioworm 00:42, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AmaryllisGardener: Here is my review:

Is the article well-written? - Here are the issues I've found:
- There are 37,781 (30 September 2014)[5] inhabitants, and city surface area is 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi) of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water.
  - Change to "As of 30 September 2014, there are 37,781[5] inhabitants, and city surface area is 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi), of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water."
- Folklorist Elias Lönnrot frequently went on leave of absence from his job as district doctor in Kajaani to collect folktales throughout Karelia.
  - Not sure if this sentence really needs to be in the lede.
- The Russians blew the castle up in March 1716 and it has been in ruins ever since.
  - Add comma between "1716" and "and".
- Vuolijoki was consolidated with Kajaani in the beginning of 2007.
  - Change "in" to "at".
- The Kajaani River runs through Kajaani, thus the municipality is well known to fishermen because the river makes salmon fishing possible.
  - Change to "The Kajaani River runs through Kajaani; thus, the municipality is well known to fishermen because the river makes salmon fishing possible."
- Summers are cool and in winter, temperature can drop below −30 °C (−22 °F).
  - Change to "Summers are cool, and in the winter, temperature can drop below −30 °C (−22 °F)."
- The municipality has a population of 37,781 (30 September 2014)[5] (around 34,000 in the town itself) and covers an area of 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi) of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water.
  - Change to "As of 30 September 2014, the municipality has a population of 37,781[5] (around 34,000 in the town itself) and covers an area of 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi), of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water."
- Since 1993 The Art Museum of Kajaani (Kajaanin taidemuseo) has operated in the city.
  - Add comma between "1993" and "The".
- Paper industry was also very important employer.
  - Change to "The paper industry was also a very important employer."
- UPM Kymmene's Kajaani paper mill was the biggest private employer in Kajaani and its history dated back to 1907.
  - Add comma between "Kajaani" and "and". For the sake of professionalism, it may also be a good idea to change "biggest" to "largest".
- However UPM Kymmene decided to close the paper mill by the end of 2008 due to lack of profitability and high energy costs.
  - Change to "However, UPM Kymmene decided to close the paper mill at the end of 2008, due to lack of profitability and high energy costs."
- Closure of a paper mill will be the end of one era in Kajaani's history.
  - I don't think this sentence is necessary.
- UPM's Kajaani sawmill continued its operations as earlier.
  - Remove "as earlier".
Is the article verifiable with no original research? - There's a couple of unsourced statements:
- The barrels of tar were shipped to Oulujärvi and then along Oulujoki to Oulu on the Bothnian coast of the Baltic sea. From there, tar was shipped to continental Europe, where it was used as a sealant and an anti-rot agent for ship hulls.
- ...originally known as Sana ja Sävel, and Kainuun JazzKevät (The Kainuu Jazz Spring).
Is the article broad in its coverage? - Yes.
Is the article neutral? - Yes.
Is the article stable? - Yes.
Is the article illustrated? - Yes.

Result: On hold until the issues are resolved. Thanks, --Biblioworm 02:29, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Biblioworm: I have fixed all of the problems mentioned above. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 03:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AmaryllisGardener: Thanks for your work. The article looks much better. I found a few minor things that I originally overlooked:

- As of 30 September 2014, there are 37,781[5] inhabitants, and city surface area is 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi) of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water.
  - Change "city surface area" to "the city's surface area".
- Summers are cool, and in winter, temperature can drop below −30 °C (−22 °F).
  - Change "temperature" to "temperatures".
- The population density is 20.59 inhabitants per square kilometre (53.3/sq mi) .
  - Fix stray space at the end of the sentence.

Other than that, however, the article looks good. Pass. Good work! :) --Biblioworm 04:14, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Don't want to be a spoil sport but this IMO isn't even close to GA standard. It's start class, I'd dispute a C class grading. A very stubby section on geography, unsourced climate section, reliance on sports databases, and stubby sections on the others including some very short sentences/paragraphs. A lead which fails to summarise the article. Compare this to something like Esbjerg. It needs a lot of work if this is to retain GA. Perhaps User:Ipigott has something to say about it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:08, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@AmaryllisGardener: I agree with Dr. Blofeld that the article needs a lot more work if it is to have GA status. Why don't you start by drawing on the Finnish wiki. Even if you don't read Finnish, Google translate can help you with background to enhance most of the sections of the English article, especially the history which you can find in a separate article translated into English here. You should also look at the translation of the main article here. There are many sights and landmarks which could be included, possibly with their own articles. Kajanni is quite a large town and deserves much better coverage on the EN Wikipedia.--Ipigott (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been under the impression that GAs don't have to be as good as FAs or A-class. Therefore, I've never been too strict in passing them. (Now, if this were up for FA, it would fail miserably.) However, there's always the possibility that I've made a mistake, so I'd be willing to either reassess the article's status right now or help improve it and then take it to WP:GAR. Thanks, --Biblioworm 15:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GAs don't need to be as good as FA or a A class. But they do at least have to have a pretty sound grasp of all aspects of the topics with adequate prose and sourcing. A couple of stubby lines in each section by no means is a good grasp of the town. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About the geography section, I really searched hard for anything to add to it, like I did before, and I found one website, a fishing website, that I could cite when adding a single sentence to the section. So, that didn't help because I already had a sentence on fishing. About fiwiki, I don't speak Finnish, but you can see in the "Luonto" (translates as "Nature", but it's a geography section) section, nothing except the content in the climate section is sourced, and may have been written by someone who lives in Kajaani. I'm afraid I really can't improve this article much more, because I worked really hard on this (if I would've been able to get more info, I would've added it to the article), and according to you it's still Start-class. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 15:51, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've also spotted another unsourced statement: "...(around 34,000 in the town itself) and covers an area of 2,264.01 square kilometres (874.14 sq mi) of which 428.94 km2 (165.61 sq mi) is water. The population density is 20.59 inhabitants per square kilometre (53.3/sq mi)."

@Dr. Blofeld: How about I temporarily delist this and put it on hold for a one or two weeks, and then reassess it at the end of the period? If Amaryllis cannot find anything else to add to it, I'm sure other people that are interested in the subject can. Users with access to privileged data sources, such as Highbeam and JSTOR, could also probably be of help. --Biblioworm 16:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Finnish either; I think this would really benefit from a competent Finnish native speaker in researching. I will try to see what I can add to it but it's still a long way off GA I'm afraid. I'm not doubting it took a fair bit of time Amar, but compare it to the research that went into Aalborg for instance! Now a town of 37,000 I wouldn't expect to be close to that level, but I believe we can still produce some solid sections on this one comparable to Esbjerg. Perhaps ask at WP:GA talk page if you can do tha Biblio. That's why I didn't go running straight to GAR and to at least give it a chance to improve. It would be good if we could get hold of some native Finnish speakers in the meantime. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:25, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kajaani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]