Wikipedia:Featured article review/Yellowstone fires of 1988/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC) [1].

Yellowstone fires of 1988

Notified: User:MONGO, Wikipedia:WikiProject Weather, Wikipedia:WikiProject Wildfire, talk page notification 2021-12-05

User:Hurricane Noah, I have added the talk page notification diff for you; please be sure to add it on future noms. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review section

I am nominating this featured article for review because it has ~~numerous unsourced statements~~, ~~grammatical errors~~, ~~image stacking~~, ~~needs alt text~~, lacks more recent academic literature on vegetation recovery and updates to fire management. Noah^Talk 15:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Common decency should dictate that before an article goes to FAR, some time should be given to address any talkpage comments made; Hurricane Noah allowed near zero time for this to happen. With that said, and despite the overt rudeness of this behavior, I will address the issues in this article. I ask for clemency as to the timing as I will need 45-60 days to finish this.--MONGO (talk) 06:05, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hold in FAR per MONGO until 28 February at least, and then re-evaluate for ongoing progress and the possibility of a further extension. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hold in FAR per Sandy, to give MONGO a chance to tidy this one up. Hog Farm _Talk 20:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- This article is being worked on, albeit slowly. It will take me another 45 days to restore it as many of the ref URLs are dead so have to go through them individually.--MONGO (talk) 01:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  I see MONGO has started in here, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  
  MONGO could you provide an update? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  A little over halfway through updating refs.--MONGO (talk) 20:38, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Refs all updated. Need a bit yet to cleanup wording and add any further developments such as recovery, etc.--MONGO (talk) 21:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:21, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy, Hog Farm, Hurricane Noah, it looks like MONGO has unfortunately gone inactive - where are things at here? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I can take a look but it'll be a few days. Hog Farm _Talk 18:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is on my radar ... as soon as I can. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing I started looking at was the uncited note 3 in the infobox (which is actually cited by source 2). In trying to fix that I see that:

Article says: [2]

Losses to structures were minimized by concentrating firefighting efforts near major visitor areas, keeping property damage down to $3 million

Source says: [3]

Estimated property damage totaled more than $3 million.

That's the first thing I looked at, and is a contradiction. I simply do not have time, due to IRL issues, to go systematically through the whole thing to see if updates have been completed and to check for source-to-text integrity; without further intervention from MONGO, MOVE TO FARC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on source...3 million is widely cited. I found a report from 1989, now added as the ref that says 3.280 million...--MONGO (talk) 01:41, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and currency. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All the refs have been checked, replaced, updated and or revised. Most of this was accomplished between February and end of April of this year....a snapshot of trhe changes can be seen here--MONGO (talk) 01:23, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MONGO: Thanks for the update and improvements. There's an 'according to whom' tag in the final paragraph? DrKay (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why those last two sentences were even there as they are not accurate so I removed them altogether--MONGO (talk) 08:41, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Hog Farm and Hurricane Noah: what issues are outstanding here? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- On my list - will try to look but I've got to do 600 miles of traveling around the Ozarks for work next week so I can't promise when I'll get to this. Hog Farm _Talk 03:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will look later today for the academic literature. Everything else I mentioned appears to be fixed and I performed a copy edit to fix various grammatical issues. Noah^Talk 14:28, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is fine now. Noah^Talk 00:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed on talk and noted significant source-text integrity issues; as this FAR has been ongoing for 7 months and still has these issues, I am at a delist barring new work. Hog Farm _Talk 03:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Hog Farm I apreciate the time you spent at the talkpage listing the article's shortcomings. I request a further extension of time to be able to address these and others concerns of 30 days if possible.--MONGO (talk) 06:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would imagine that @FAR coordinators: would be fine with that. I found it difficult to verify the Franke and Politics of Disaster sources because they are the length of short books and it often wasn't clear where it was being pulled from in the source. Hog Farm _Talk 13:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Update: MONGO is working through the source-text issues listed on talk. Hog Farm _Talk 01:36, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      - Yes I am and have some more to do yet and hope to be done by Sunday evening. If other items arise let me know and I do all I can to address concerns.--MONGO (talk) 23:05, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'd like to assist with this article where possible. I can dig into some source text issues and other suggestions—are the source-text issues still a/the top priority? Penitentes (talk) 13:44, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to help as well. I think source-to-text is definitely an issue; the first reference I checked ([5]) did not line up with the source. I'm going to systematically go through all the citations, and also try to use a few more book/journal sources for historical statements, instead of government ones (which I think are best for statistics). Ovinus (talk) 15:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist it is October and there are still outstanding issues --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 17:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful delist – Unfortunately there are still too many text-to-source issues remaining, and I don't have the energy to get through all the citations. The content and structure is nice, but alas, WP:V. Ovinus (talk) 00:02, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still at a delist myself, I think. The fact that source-text concerns are still remaining at this point is concerning and suggests that most or all references will need to be gone through one by one. Hog Farm _Talk 13:38, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist, per above issues and lack of updates on this. –♠Vamí _IV†♠ 09:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.