Talk:Crystal Springs Dam/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: 3602kiva (talk · contribs) 20:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 21:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the most part, this is well written. I did a little light copyediting a little while ago. The one thing that has me confused is: The structure was completed in 1889 at a height of 120 feet (37 m).[1] However, a wet winter in 1889-1890 caused the dam to overflow, leading to an addition to bring the total height of the dam to 145 feet (44 m), making it the tallest dam in the United States at the time Earlier you said that the tallest dam in the US was 95 feet, so didn't this beat that at the initial 120 foot height? This makes it sound like it wasn't the tallest until reaching 145 feet.
https://www.foundsf.org/ looks like an interesting site, but probably not a WP:RS.
https://www.cementkilns.co.uk/ does not look like a WP:RS.
The dam is classified with an "Extremely High" downstream hazard rating by the California Department of Water Resources in the event of a breach is cited to an interactive map. Given that it is from the California Dept of Water Resources, the data itself is probably reliable, but surely this is not the best way to present this. I'm sure you can find some other source which supports this statement in an easier-to-access form.
As a general rule, every paragraph, other than in the lead, needs a minimum of one citation at the end (with more for individual sentences as needed). This is not met. For example, the last paragraph of Background and the several paragraphs in Operations and repairs.
I need to do a spot check per WP:GAN/I#R3, but I'll hold off on that until you've addressed the other sourcing issues.
I don't see any indication of copyright problems in Earwig.
This meets the "Broad in its coverage", "Neutral" and "Stable" criteria.
For the most part, the images look fine, but File:Crystal Springs Dam Front.jpg and File:Crystal Springs Dam Leeside.jpg both have tags saying they are pending review. Could you please chase down whatever review process is required on commons to clarify the licensing?
If you could create a map showing the location of the dam relative to San Francisco (I suggest using {{Maplink}}), that would give the reader some geographical context.
I'm going to put this on hold for a week to give you time to address the above points. If you need more time, please ping me and I'll be happy to extend that to any reasonable interval. RoySmith (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback; will get to work on these as soon as I can. 3602kiva (talk) 05:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Viriditas and Pi.1415926535: I just noticed you had previously commented on this submission, so pinging you both to make sure you're aware of this review. Feel free to chime in with additional points if you like. RoySmith (talk) 22:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and removed the "pending review" tags from the images. Viriditas (talk) 22:51, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source spot-check

I'll take a deeper look once you're finished with the above issues, but here's some things I've spotted for now:

The structure was completed in 1889 ... making it the tallest dam in the United States at the time. The source doesn't say anything about being the tallest.
Two outlet towers were constructed near the dam, the first being built in 1891. Magura 2024 talks about "a tower, main shaft, tunnel, and three feeder delivery tunnels ..." and goes on from there with a more detailed description. It would be good to include at least some of that in the article.