Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Heritage Sites in Peru/archive1

• • There is text overflowing from the location map image. You should either increase the map image or reduce the text size to avoid this;
  • I believe "ratified" is better applied to the official signing of conventions/declarations than just "accepted";
  • "... at the 7th Session...";
  • The second paragraph could be turned into a single sentence, for example: «At the 7th Session of the World Heritage Committee, held in Florence, Italy, in 1983, Peru had its first sites inscribed on the list: the "City of Cuzco" and the "Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu".»
  • The third paragraph is still related to the previous one, so you might as well join them into a more robust paragraph;
  • "Sites in Peru..." → "Peruvian sites..." (to avoid too many "Peru"s);
  • "In 1997 a wildfire..." — Add comma after the year;
  • Cuzco or Cusco?
  • No need to add "region" to every region in the table, the column header already says it;
  • In Machu Pichu's description: "The site of Machu Picchu sits at 2,340 metres (7,680 ft) above sea level was constructed..." → "At 2,340 metres (7,680 ft) above sea level, the site of Machu Pichu was constructed...";
  • In Huascaran park description: "... is located at the Cordillera Blanca...";
  • You have plenty of space to let those two images after the list display their default size (don't specify width).

  Parutakupiu (talk) 22:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment All these are done. Re: Cuzco/Cusco, spelling varies internally in English and Spanish. Since UNESCO spells it with a z, I've used that for all mentions. Grsz¹¹ 22:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Image caption, perhaps "Locations of the World Heritage Sites in Peru" (like the title of the list?)
  • Done.
• "South American state" - learn something new. I thought it was a country within South America... (am I being picky?)
  • I think so, it's a reasonable, common way of saying it.
• "Peru had its first sites inscribed on the list ..." perhaps a minor rephrase to lead on nicely from the previous para, so something like "The first Peruvian sites were inscribed on the list ..."?
  • Done.
• Under the UNESCO data explanation, would I be right in assuming that a mixture of "(i) to (vi)" and "(vii) to (x)" is what we're calling "mixed" in the lead? Worth a note?
  • Done, though it's explained previously in the lead.
• Blank cells (e.g. image of Rio Abiseo) should have a centrally aligned en/em-dash.
  • Done.
• "1200 people" - 1,200.
  • Done.
• I'd make the "Tentative list" a level one heading and tabulate it accordingly.
  • Done.
• Ref 7 is missing the first name of the author (Fabiola).
  • Done.

• Global Heritage website gets nasty if you don't have a Google Earth plug-in installed. Perhaps alert readers to that.
  • Huh, I didn't realize that (most not have noticed). The page is used just for info, but done.
• Ref 18 - what's PBS?
  • Public Broadcasting Service, done.
• And what makes that ref reliable?
  • According to us, "PBS is the most prominent provider of programming to U.S. public television stations".
• Do you need "World Heritage Sites in the Americas" as a cat if you've got "World Heritage Sites in Peru"?
  • Probably not.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • Comments made. Grsz¹¹ 21:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Ref 10 looks (to me) like there's a c missing.
  • I don't see anything?
    • "Archaeologial Sites."? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Aha, thank you. Grsz¹¹ 13:47, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]