Talk:Phoenix (fireboat)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dolphin51 (talk · contribs) 11:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Images and disambiguation pages

Three images checked. All adequately licensed.

No disambiguation links. Dolphin (t) 11:58, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Lead

The opening sentence states that Phoenix is owned by California. In the Infobox it states the owner is the State of California. In "History" it states Phoenix was paid for by the State of California. I suggest State of California be used throughout.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphin51 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 2 February 2012‎

I have no further comments on the lead. Dolphin (t) 04:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

History

Lower case l (ell) is an acceptable abbreviation for litre. However, to avoid confusion with the number one, upper case L is also accepted. I suggest upper case L should be used throughout.

The cited source explains that the boat's two centrifugal pumps can each pump 3,200 gpm at 150 psi, so that is 6,400 gpm at 150 psi. It also states the boat can pump 3,200 gpm at 300 psi, and this is feasible – half the rate at twice the pressure. Unfortunately, the source also states the boat can deliver 9,000 gpm at 150 psi and this is inconsistent with the above information. Unless the statement about 9,000 gpm can be explained in a manner that is consistent with the other information I suggest it should be removed from the article. Dolphin (t) 22:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! I have implemented your suggestions, capitalizing the L of liter, streamlining the way the owner is presented, and by fixing the gallons per minute error (or white lie) that was present in the source and which fooled me. The source adds up all the monitors (nozzles) to get 9,000 gpm, but of course the two pumps are the true limit of how much water the boat can pump at one time. I am glad you caught that. :)

Binksternet (talk) 23:55, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Just part of the service!

Firefighting

The second sentence describes a fire in 1980 and one in 1984, and separates the two with a comma. The fire in 1984 and the one that caused $2.5 million in damage are separated by a semi-colon suggesting they are different. After reading the sentence a few times I now think the two events separated by a semi-colon are actually the same. This should be repaired.

In the second para it says Phoenix quickly put out the Berganger's blaze, but the tanker took longer. I suggest it should say but the Independent took longer. Alternatively, it could say quickly put out the freighter's blaze, but the tanker took longer.

There is a puzzling sentence saying A year later, a gasoline barge exploded while Phoenix and the Coast Guard were investigating ... What do you think of the following alternative syntax?

A year later, a gasoline barge collided with rocks. While Phoenix and the Coast Guard were investigating, the barge exploded killing two Coast Guardsmen and one nearby workman.

Dolphin (t) 01:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I used an em dash to keep the $2.5 million connected to 1984. I opted for "freighter" and "tanker". I recast the gasoline barge sentence much as you suggested. Binksternet (talk) 09:14, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Those changes look good.

1989 Marina District fires

The second para ends with the sentence Fire crews were manning hoses laid in anticipation ... This sentence is unsourced. I suspect one of the existing citations could be used to support this sentence.

I am uneasy about the following pair of sentences:

"Former mayor Feinstein wrote after the earthquake that the boat "unquestionably saved the Marina from a greater catastrophe". Feinstein, whose term as San Francisco mayor ended 21 months before the earthquake, saved the city's only fireboat from suggested budget cuts as one of her last mayoral acts."

The first of these two sentences describes events after the earthquake; the second describes an event before. The syntax of the second sentence is not good. The following is the start of a better alternative but it is probably not yet ideal:

As one of Mayor Feinstein's last mayoral acts before retiring, she saved the city's only fireboat from suggested budget cuts. 21 months later the earthquake struck. She wrote that the boat "unquestionably saved the Marina from a greater catastrophe".

Dolphin (t) 11:54, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I implemented something much like your suggested improvement in chron order. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Residue

I notice there is an existing category called Category:San Francisco Bay. It includes a small number of article about ferries and other boats. This article would go well in that category.

I have now finished my review. The article is very sound and ready for promotion to GA. Under "1989 Marina District fires" I mentioned an unsourced sentence at the end of a para. Comment on that one and we are all done with the review. Dolphin (t) 04:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I added the category. I removed the uncited sentence after searching the various sources for support, and finding nothing. Binksternet (talk) 16:07, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Oops! I found something in the Frederick Postel report to support the sentence. Two fire captains talking about where to make their stand if they had more water, the water to be coming from Phoenix. Binksternet (talk) 16:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Conclusion

1. Prose: Good
2. Style: Complies
3. Verifiable: Complies via citations and references
4. Broad: Sufficiently broad coverage of a very specialised topic
5. Focused Very focused
6. NPOV: Complies
7. Stable: Stable
8. Images: Checked
9. Overall: Pass

Dolphin (t) 02:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.