![]() | Tellico Dam has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
RoySmith (
talk) 15:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
5x expanded by AppalachianCentrist ( talk). Self-nominated at 20:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC).
@ AppalachianCentrist:. I have done as much as I can to improve the article, and I suggest you could consider resubmitting for Good Article review. My only remaining suggestion is to consider the "See also" section. Bussell Island could be mentioned in the body of the article, rather than just a listing in "See also". The other entry could potentially be removed, allowing the "See also" section to be deleted. Marshelec ( talk) 19:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Larataguera ( talk · contribs) 10:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
I am reviewing this article and will leave comments in the next few days. Larataguera ( talk) 10:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was formally established in 1933 as part of programs under the New Deal. The agency was initially tasked with modernizing the region, using experts and electricity to combat human and economic problems->"The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was established in 1933 as part of the New Deal. The agency was tasked with modernizing the region, using experts and electricity to combat economic problems" (remove extra words; which human problems? this would need to be clarified or removed)
In 1959, TVA chairman Red Wagner approved the restart of project development on the Fort Loudoun Extension, now named the Tellico Project.->"In 1959, the TVA reapproved development of the Fort Loudoun Extension, now called the Tellico Project" (22 words -> 16)
Timberlake, the TVA's ambitious attempt at creating a city from scratch, aimed at providing a high-quality and self-sufficient city supporting an estimated population of 42,000."Timberlake was envisioned as a planned community of about 42,000 people." (I’m sure it was ambitious, but would it ever have been self-sufficient? Certainly not. This reads like TVA marketing.)
The project was promoted as a nationwide demonstration of land use initiatives and economic development for the poor rural area of the Little Tennessee Valley, to transform it into a thriving economic urban center.-> "The project was promoted as a demonstration of economic development for the rural poor, transforming the Little Tennessee Valley into a thriving urban center." (34 words – 24; it was obviously not a nationwide demonstration).
The Tellico Dam component of the Timberlake initiative was planned to provide a large-size reservoir for water sports for recreation purposes and for freight transport via barge for proposed industrial sites that would get access to the Tennessee River through a canal.-> "The Tellico Dam would provide a large reservoir for recreation and for freight transport to proposed industrial sites with access to the Tennessee River through a canal" (42 words -> 27; same information).
Despite no plans for generating electricity at the Tellico Dam site, the canal that was part of the project enabled an extra 23 MW of power generation capacity by diverting the flow of the Little Tennessee upstream of Fort Loudoun Dam.-> "The dam would not produce electricity, but the canal would enable an additional 23 MW of power generation at the Fort Loudon Dam by diverting flow from the Little Tennessee River" (41 words -> 31, same information).
The Timberlake project obtained support with the announcement of major investment from the Boeing Corporation along with Congressional aid.-> The Timberlake project was initially supported with congressional aid and investment from Boeing Corporation. (19 words->14)
The plans for the City of Timberlake never fully materialized and were discontinued in 1975 following pullout from Boeing, who cited the project as not economically feasible.-> "Boeing determined that the project was not economically feasible and withdrew in 1975; the plans never fully materialized" (27 words -> 18)
Taken individually, none of these changes are super important, but such revisions are necessary throughout the article. I estimate that the length of the article could be reduced by 20%-25% with concise style and without losing any information. I will hold the review for two weeks to see if someone can complete these revisions throughout the article, and if not I will have to fail without further investigation.
(Criteria marked
are unassessed)
The following discussion 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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jonathanischoice ( talk · contribs) 23:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'm happy to review this over the next few days, I will build up comments below as I go. Please note I'm also reviewing
Matiu / Somes Island as well, so I will have my hands full! Cheers —
Jon (
talk) 23:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
*:
at the start of the line). Cheers —
Jon (
talk) 22:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | This is a well-written article with good style and maint-templates, categories and auth-control. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | lead ok; layout ok; watch words ok; fiction n/a; lists n/a. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | References are used in a consistent style with correct layout. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Sources are good. It might be nice to link to Open Library or Internet Archive instances of books sourced, rather than (or in addition to) Google Books, but this is a suggestion only. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | I'm satisfied that there's no unreasonable or overreaching use of references or undue synthesis. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | The Copyvio report on this article currently returns an alarming score of 93.9% which indicates a fair amount of verbatim copying from sources in ways that are not obvious quotes. Update: it turns out it was some junk SEO website that I think we can safely ignore. It may still be worth looking through the report to either quote-and-cite, summarise, or otherwise eliminate any verbatim patches, but I think they are mostly coincidental (place or organisation names, etc.) |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Passing, infobox dimensions now covered in the text. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | I think this is satisfied; good use of {{ redirect}}, {{ main}}, and {{ see also}} to delegate to details in related articles. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Satisfied |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | I'm satisfied that there is no edit-warring or other controversies in the talk page and edit history. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Image tags are sufficient and valid. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Good and meaningful use of images throughout. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | I'm passing this now, after a long effort and extensive improvements by User:AppalachianCentrist through three reviews. Well done! |
Comments below, by section.
Overall I think this is a very good article, just a few things to note so far. Firstly, the good things are the prose, grammar and spelling, use of illustrative images, and good linking throughout.
Lead/introduction
|
---|
|
Background
|
---|
|
Engineering and construction
|
---|
|
Environmental impacts, controversies, and legal action
|
---|
|
References
|
---|
|
The source: [1] claims that "Tellico’s reservoir also provides 120,000 acre-feet of flood storage above Chattanooga, formerly one of the most flood-prone cities in the nation." (Note: I have had to correct sloppy work on the website that trims acre-feet down to acres in the main text. See the side-bar for the correct units.). Although it is a primary source, the flood control capacity, and the benefits for downstream communities is a relevant factual statement (presuming it is correct). If supported by secondary sources, this should perhaps be included into the lead and the body of the article. (However, I am not aware of whether 120,000 acre-feet of flood storage is substantial or relatively insignificant compared with the prospective flood hazard.) The 120,000 acre-feet is approx 148 million cubic metres, or 0.148 cubic km. Marshelec ( talk) 02:08, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
These sentences are a bit hard to follow:
When the TVA began to approach property owners in the Lower Tennessee Valley for the development of Tellico Dam, several communities that TVA sought to "modernize" through this project were at the time in touch with most of the modern Appalachian society that TVA had contributed to since the 1930s. Members of the river shed communities least impacted by modernization reacted most positively to TVA's plans, compared with the more modern communities. Historians of the project have suggested that most TVA personnel did not understand the complexity of the communities that they were intruding into with the Tellico project, leading to more heated opposition.
I can't access the book that is the cited source for this content, but I suggest a possible alternative to these sentences that is more concise: "The proposed project affected diverse communities with widely varying levels of awareness of large government initiatives. Historians of the project have suggested that most TVA personnel did not understand the complexity of the communities that were affected by the Tellico project, and that this led to more heated opposition." Marshelec ( talk) 02:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
References
![]() | Tellico Dam has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
RoySmith (
talk) 15:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
5x expanded by AppalachianCentrist ( talk). Self-nominated at 20:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC).
@ AppalachianCentrist:. I have done as much as I can to improve the article, and I suggest you could consider resubmitting for Good Article review. My only remaining suggestion is to consider the "See also" section. Bussell Island could be mentioned in the body of the article, rather than just a listing in "See also". The other entry could potentially be removed, allowing the "See also" section to be deleted. Marshelec ( talk) 19:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Larataguera ( talk · contribs) 10:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
I am reviewing this article and will leave comments in the next few days. Larataguera ( talk) 10:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was formally established in 1933 as part of programs under the New Deal. The agency was initially tasked with modernizing the region, using experts and electricity to combat human and economic problems->"The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was established in 1933 as part of the New Deal. The agency was tasked with modernizing the region, using experts and electricity to combat economic problems" (remove extra words; which human problems? this would need to be clarified or removed)
In 1959, TVA chairman Red Wagner approved the restart of project development on the Fort Loudoun Extension, now named the Tellico Project.->"In 1959, the TVA reapproved development of the Fort Loudoun Extension, now called the Tellico Project" (22 words -> 16)
Timberlake, the TVA's ambitious attempt at creating a city from scratch, aimed at providing a high-quality and self-sufficient city supporting an estimated population of 42,000."Timberlake was envisioned as a planned community of about 42,000 people." (I’m sure it was ambitious, but would it ever have been self-sufficient? Certainly not. This reads like TVA marketing.)
The project was promoted as a nationwide demonstration of land use initiatives and economic development for the poor rural area of the Little Tennessee Valley, to transform it into a thriving economic urban center.-> "The project was promoted as a demonstration of economic development for the rural poor, transforming the Little Tennessee Valley into a thriving urban center." (34 words – 24; it was obviously not a nationwide demonstration).
The Tellico Dam component of the Timberlake initiative was planned to provide a large-size reservoir for water sports for recreation purposes and for freight transport via barge for proposed industrial sites that would get access to the Tennessee River through a canal.-> "The Tellico Dam would provide a large reservoir for recreation and for freight transport to proposed industrial sites with access to the Tennessee River through a canal" (42 words -> 27; same information).
Despite no plans for generating electricity at the Tellico Dam site, the canal that was part of the project enabled an extra 23 MW of power generation capacity by diverting the flow of the Little Tennessee upstream of Fort Loudoun Dam.-> "The dam would not produce electricity, but the canal would enable an additional 23 MW of power generation at the Fort Loudon Dam by diverting flow from the Little Tennessee River" (41 words -> 31, same information).
The Timberlake project obtained support with the announcement of major investment from the Boeing Corporation along with Congressional aid.-> The Timberlake project was initially supported with congressional aid and investment from Boeing Corporation. (19 words->14)
The plans for the City of Timberlake never fully materialized and were discontinued in 1975 following pullout from Boeing, who cited the project as not economically feasible.-> "Boeing determined that the project was not economically feasible and withdrew in 1975; the plans never fully materialized" (27 words -> 18)
Taken individually, none of these changes are super important, but such revisions are necessary throughout the article. I estimate that the length of the article could be reduced by 20%-25% with concise style and without losing any information. I will hold the review for two weeks to see if someone can complete these revisions throughout the article, and if not I will have to fail without further investigation.
(Criteria marked
are unassessed)
The following discussion 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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jonathanischoice ( talk · contribs) 23:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'm happy to review this over the next few days, I will build up comments below as I go. Please note I'm also reviewing
Matiu / Somes Island as well, so I will have my hands full! Cheers —
Jon (
talk) 23:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
*:
at the start of the line). Cheers —
Jon (
talk) 22:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | This is a well-written article with good style and maint-templates, categories and auth-control. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | lead ok; layout ok; watch words ok; fiction n/a; lists n/a. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | References are used in a consistent style with correct layout. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Sources are good. It might be nice to link to Open Library or Internet Archive instances of books sourced, rather than (or in addition to) Google Books, but this is a suggestion only. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | I'm satisfied that there's no unreasonable or overreaching use of references or undue synthesis. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | The Copyvio report on this article currently returns an alarming score of 93.9% which indicates a fair amount of verbatim copying from sources in ways that are not obvious quotes. Update: it turns out it was some junk SEO website that I think we can safely ignore. It may still be worth looking through the report to either quote-and-cite, summarise, or otherwise eliminate any verbatim patches, but I think they are mostly coincidental (place or organisation names, etc.) |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Passing, infobox dimensions now covered in the text. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | I think this is satisfied; good use of {{ redirect}}, {{ main}}, and {{ see also}} to delegate to details in related articles. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Satisfied |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | I'm satisfied that there is no edit-warring or other controversies in the talk page and edit history. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Image tags are sufficient and valid. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Good and meaningful use of images throughout. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | I'm passing this now, after a long effort and extensive improvements by User:AppalachianCentrist through three reviews. Well done! |
Comments below, by section.
Overall I think this is a very good article, just a few things to note so far. Firstly, the good things are the prose, grammar and spelling, use of illustrative images, and good linking throughout.
Lead/introduction
|
---|
|
Background
|
---|
|
Engineering and construction
|
---|
|
Environmental impacts, controversies, and legal action
|
---|
|
References
|
---|
|
The source: [1] claims that "Tellico’s reservoir also provides 120,000 acre-feet of flood storage above Chattanooga, formerly one of the most flood-prone cities in the nation." (Note: I have had to correct sloppy work on the website that trims acre-feet down to acres in the main text. See the side-bar for the correct units.). Although it is a primary source, the flood control capacity, and the benefits for downstream communities is a relevant factual statement (presuming it is correct). If supported by secondary sources, this should perhaps be included into the lead and the body of the article. (However, I am not aware of whether 120,000 acre-feet of flood storage is substantial or relatively insignificant compared with the prospective flood hazard.) The 120,000 acre-feet is approx 148 million cubic metres, or 0.148 cubic km. Marshelec ( talk) 02:08, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
These sentences are a bit hard to follow:
When the TVA began to approach property owners in the Lower Tennessee Valley for the development of Tellico Dam, several communities that TVA sought to "modernize" through this project were at the time in touch with most of the modern Appalachian society that TVA had contributed to since the 1930s. Members of the river shed communities least impacted by modernization reacted most positively to TVA's plans, compared with the more modern communities. Historians of the project have suggested that most TVA personnel did not understand the complexity of the communities that they were intruding into with the Tellico project, leading to more heated opposition.
I can't access the book that is the cited source for this content, but I suggest a possible alternative to these sentences that is more concise: "The proposed project affected diverse communities with widely varying levels of awareness of large government initiatives. Historians of the project have suggested that most TVA personnel did not understand the complexity of the communities that were affected by the Tellico project, and that this led to more heated opposition." Marshelec ( talk) 02:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
References