Talk:Lavaca Bay

	Lavaca Bay 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 10, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 25, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Lavaca Bay in Texas has been classified as a superfund site due to mercury contamination by Alcoa?

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Limnology and Oceanography Low‑importance This article is part of the WikiProject Limnology and Oceanography to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the inland waters and marine environments. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on limnology- or oceanography-related topics, as well as to ensure that limnology and oceanography articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.Limnology and OceanographyWikipedia:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyTemplate:WikiProject Limnology and OceanographyLimnology and Oceanography articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Texas Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   I don't think that environmental groups did the clean up as stated in the last para of the lede, but rather Alcoa itself.

   B. MoS compliance:

   Refs 2, 13, 14 and 15 need place of publication. Refs 13, 14, 15 need last page relevant to the info cited. Title of Ref 14 needs to be capitalized like the other refs.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   I have no idea where Point Comfort, Indianola, etc. are. The watershed map is OK, but this article needs a map of the bay proper since that's the subject of the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Thank you for the review. All of the above concerns have been addressed. I inserted a map that is showing up as a poor map that I uploaded on wikipedia a few months ago because I accidentally uploaded the nicer map under the same name at commons. I have requested that the file on wikipedia be deleted. Once this deletion occurs, a nice map will show up in its place.--William S. Saturn (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd still like to see some of the failed towns shown on the maps as well, but that's for later.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the towns are on the map here. The only exception is Linnville, which was in the same place as Port Lavaca.--William S. Saturn (talk) 21:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]