# Talk:2020 Zagreb flash flood

This review is transcluded from Talk:2020 Zagreb flash flood/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Governor Sheng (talk · contribs) 20:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I will be reviewing the article. --Governor Sheng (talk) 20:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@Governor Sheng: Pinging reviewer since it has been 10 days since they created this page. NoahTalk 03:45, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
@Hurricane Noah: Thank you for your notice. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:20, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts, Governor Sheng! I hope I've managed to address all the concerns listed. Please review my responses when you have time. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Lead section
Per MOS:LEADCITE, since this subject isn't controversial, the references shouldn't be used in the lead section. The lead section should provide short description of the article, while the references, the inline citations, should be placed within the body of the article. The major issue I noticed within the lead section is that there's an inline cleanup template. It says that the lead section should be updated.

I've removed the references. Regarding the statement needing update, there is a Facebook fan page covering the arrested man, according to which the trial was still ongoing in March (when I wrote this page), but since that hardly counts as RS, I put the date of the latest RS I could find on the topic. However, after checking again, I've found out that the man was exonerated a few weeks ago and this was covered in the news, so I've updated the article accordingly. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Ok, looks good. --Governor Sheng (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Related to the above, the second paragraph of the lead section seems very politicised and one-sided. Is there an epilogue to the story?
--Governor Sheng (talk) 17:32, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the "futile attempts" sentence clause. While it wasn't only the residents who said that Hrvatske vode couldn't be reached, I'm not sure if it's an uncontested claim. Hrvatske vode claimed that nobody called them (whether it was the residents' or the city authorities' duty to call depends on which H.v. statement we're talking about). As for the rest, I've moved Hrvatske vode to the beginning of another sentence since they appear to have received the most criticism. I hope that this is satisfactory; if you can think of any more improvements, please suggest them. From what I've gathered in the sources, the handling of the crisis appears to have been characterised unanimously negatively by the press, the question being only who is to blame, hence I feel that the POV reflects the sources. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
OK. --Governor Sheng (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Background
This section is ok, except for the inline citations behind the part of the sentence "The last major flooding event in the city was the overflowing of Zagreb streams during record rains of 3–4 July 1989". The inline citations should be placed in numerical order.

Done. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
The image used in this section seems to be alright, no copyright problems as far as I can see. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:34, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Meteorological history
Same issue with inline citations as in the paragraph above, this time after the sentence "Hail was recorded in Istria, and in the afternoon a flash flood struck Senj, a coastal city south of Zagreb". The inline citations should be in numerical order. Everything else is ok. --Governor Sheng (talk) 17:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Done. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Flooding
Fix the inline citations as stated above, after the sentence "Water interrupted tram traffic and rendered major streets and underpasses impassable, while the failure of the sewer system caused water to back into homes and buildings"; after the first part of the sentence "Areas affected by flooding included Ilica street, British Square,"; after the sentence " Around 23:00, Zagreb Fire Department requested that citizens not call them except in cases of extreme urgency".

All done. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Per MOS:ALLEGED, the sentence "The dam is managed by Hrvatske vode, who allegedly could not be reached during the emergency" should be rephrased. The translation should be more precise. It is more adequate to translate nasip as a levee or an embankment, rather than a dam. Also, the section should reflect the source used here more comprehensively. Namely, Hrvatske vode claimed that the levee was in the jurisdiction of Vodoopskrba i odvodnja. The sentence after this one will fit better into the section after this change.
--Governor Sheng (talk) 17:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

The claim was made by the residents assembled at the H.v. press conference. Hopefully that's clear from the way the sentence is now phrased, thanks for pointing this out.
Regarding terminology: there might be some confusion here. Zagreb is defended from floods by the embankment (Savski nasip), but there is also a sewer/stormwater outflow for the inner city, at the mouth of the underground Kuniščak stream. This is controlled by a sluice gate (ustava) and the whole feature is called brana by Hrvatske vode, which I translated as "dam". The gate and Kuniščak's mouth are both underground (a sewer main goes through/under the embankment and ends underwater in Sava), hence I could only include a picture of the shed which contains the sluice gate controls. Daß Wölf 22:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for pointing that out! --Governor Sheng (talk) 10:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Kuniščak dam
This section is written very well. I'd like to ask you to resolve MOS:SANDWICH. You can move the external video from the Arrest section a paragraph lower, or however you want. --Governor Sheng (talk) 10:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Done. Daß Wölf 00:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Arrest
Rearrange inline citations in numerical order after the sentence "Tihomir Blagus, the Trnje resident who operated the sluice gate was arrested by the police the day after the storm".
Same as above for the second part of the sentence "and sparked a discussion on whether citizens are allowed to film police officers on duty".
The red link to "Ombudswoman of Croatia" should link to "Ombudsman of Croatia" (or whatever the official title of the office is).

This was fixed by Tomobe. I also added lt= parameter so that the text shows up in correct gender while the link goes to Ombudsman of Croatia. Daß Wölf 00:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Rearrange inline citations in numerical order after the first and second part of the sentence ("Social and news media condemned the use of force and hailed Blagus as the "hero who saved Trnje for his actions during the flood".
Same for the second part of the sentence "and in September charges were filed against Blagus for breach of peace and disrespecting an officer of the law". --Governor Sheng (talk) 10:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Damages
This section is well-written. Are there any updates for the last paragraph? --Governor Sheng (talk) 11:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Zagreb.hr has a list of households which were found eligible for the compensation payments, about 600-700 of them. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find any information more concrete than this. Daß Wölf 00:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Response
Rearrange inline citations in numerical order after the sentences: "News reports covered the poor shape of storm drains in Zagreb, the maintenance of which had ceased after the earthquake, according to ViO director" and "ViO and the city also received criticism for poor sewerage design from residents of a number of flooded neighbourhoods, citing recurring flooding issues that started after sewer or road works". --Governor Sheng (talk) 11:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Future
This section is well-written and in accordance with WP:CRYSTAL. --Governor Sheng (talk) 11:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Other
I noticed that the article is written in British English standard, therefore I advise you to add Template:British English on the article's talk page for consistency reasons, in accordance with WP:ENGVAR. --Governor Sheng (talk) 11:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Done. Daß Wölf 00:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Governor Sheng, since Daß Wölf seems to be on a wikibreak or otherwise inactive since 29 May (hopefully nothing permanent) and only minor items seem to be outstanding in this review, I took the liberty of addressing those and few other tweaks re WP:EGG and overlinking. Cheers.--Tomobe03 (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm very sorry for taking so long, I was swamped IRL and thought I would find time for doing the review and I forgot about it in the end. Thank you so much for jumping in Tomobe03! I'm a little busy ATM, but I'll make sure to address the issues by the end of the day. Daß Wölf 15:49, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
@Governor Sheng: Thank you for the review and for keeping the article on hold! I hope that Tomobe03 and I have covered all the issues listed so far. I am sorry for the unnecessary wait, I'll make sure to respond to any further comments in a timely manner. Daß Wölf 00:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
You both did a good job, and I thank you for your collaboration. --Governor Sheng (talk) 16:08, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Well written  Pass
Verifiable with no original research  Pass
Broad in its coverage  Pass
Neutral  Pass
Stable  Pass
Illustrated  Pass
All the criteria have been met, therefore I'll promote the article. --Governor Sheng (talk) 16:08, 26 June 2021 (UTC)