Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Presque Isle State Park
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted 03:02, 26 November 2007.
I'm nominating this article for featured article because I feel it meets the criteria at WP:WIAFA and shows some of the best wikipedia has to offer. There are not many FA's on state parks at the moment. It is related to FA Erie. —treyomg he's back 21:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support looks good. Well worth the read. Two suggestions though: 1) you have a few one liners in the article that could be combined with a paragraph, I would suggest doing so, and 2) If you find that the info from the article introduction is also in the article body I would suggest citing only the article body reference (I didn't notice this to be the case, but I sometimes read what I think is there and not what is ectually there, hence the comment :) TomStar81 (Talk) 11:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The "one liners" have been fixed. Thanks for catching that! Dincher 12:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose[Wowah! at changes][due to 1a, 1b]Looks okay, I wouldn't say good, and definitely not brilliant (not yet anyway).
The fact that there are no FA's on state parks is irrelevant to whether this one deserves to.- Thanks for your feedback. I think the point was that there are no current FAs that are solely about a state park (and only Redwood National and State Parks is even partly about one), so there is no real state park FA model to follow. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The writing style resembles that of a stub. It seems to include facts, but not quite integrate them, not to mention -it doesn't [resent the facts brilliantly, nor does it does not do it with the main topic in mind.History is missing large swathes of time.- I added a bit about former waterworks at the park. I really don't know what else can be added to a peninsula that has been largely uninhabited.Dincher 22:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the suggestion. I have expanded History, added the lighthouses to it, and tried to rewrite / polish it, focusing on integration and the main topic. Any feedback would be very welcome. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a bit about former waterworks at the park. I really don't know what else can be added to a peninsula that has been largely uninhabited.Dincher 22:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Habitat lacks detail(perhaps linkable to flora/fauna ofphiladelphia[Pennsylvania, USA, Great Lakes]?).Notes the number of endangered species, but doesn't specify.- Endangered species are mentioned in several sources, but these sources lack specifics. The mention of the endangered species has been removed for now. Dincher 00:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I found that one of the species is the Piping plover. This newspaper article mentions them. --Dtbohrertalk•contribs 01:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Another useful source is Presque Isle Audubon Society, which lists recent rare bird sightings. As for the suggestions about flora and fauna being perhaps linkable to Philadelphia, Presque Isle is 300 miles (500 km) from Philadelphia, which is in the Atlantic Ocean tidal zone via the Delaware River, while Presque Isle is in the Great Lakes. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Saw the local Audubon site too, but I think alot of those birds are not endangered, their just not native to the area. --Dtbohrertalk•contribs 04:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I looked through it very carefully all but two of them listed as being spotted in the last year are rated LC - least concern the two are NT not threatened. I think that the DNCR is being a bit wordy or overstating the facts. -- Dincher (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, didn't read it closely enough. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A short list of the endangered and threatened birds has been added with a reference. Dincher (talk) 00:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry there... Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, different things.--Keerllston 02:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Saw the local Audubon site too, but I think alot of those birds are not endangered, their just not native to the area. --Dtbohrertalk•contribs 04:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Another useful source is Presque Isle Audubon Society, which lists recent rare bird sightings. As for the suggestions about flora and fauna being perhaps linkable to Philadelphia, Presque Isle is 300 miles (500 km) from Philadelphia, which is in the Atlantic Ocean tidal zone via the Delaware River, while Presque Isle is in the Great Lakes. Thanks, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I found that one of the species is the Piping plover. This newspaper article mentions them. --Dtbohrertalk•contribs 01:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Endangered species are mentioned in several sources, but these sources lack specifics. The mention of the endangered species has been removed for now. Dincher 00:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Should lighthouse really be it's own section? How about a section with all the buidlings?- The lighthouses are historically and currently significant to the park. Why shouldn't they have their own section? Dincher 22:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- With the History section rewrite I made a Lighthouses and Coast Guard subsection. They are also all shown on the new map. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The lighthouses are historically and currently significant to the park. Why shouldn't they have their own section? Dincher 22:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"It's one of the 20 must see parks" how about telling us why? seems on the quality of the park - actual content relating to that would be nice, how is it a must-see park? what is special about it? what is "must see" about it? This is completely missing, yet seems to be the most notable thing about it.- Thanks, the PA DCNR description of Presque Isle on the "20 Must See Parks" page is quite brief, but I have added a summary to the State Park section. The things DCNR cites (beach, National Natural Landmark, "geological and biological diversity and its historic significance") are addressed separately in the article. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an actual map of the park? it's kind of vital..- The map has been added to the article. Feedback, comments, and suggestions welcome, Image:Presque Isle State Park Map.png Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Too [sorta] short,too [sorta] unfocused. Seems right out of GA.- --Keerllston 19:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- My apologizes for not checking back soon, busy in real life. I will start making fixes soon. —treyomg he's backForrmerly Know As TREYWiki 00:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The nominator has an [extremely] amiable attitude! :D
The Tom Ridge Center section is not integrated at all to the article - it seems like it was copied from the introduction of that article instead.- --Keerllston 02:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply we believe all your concerns have now been addressed. More species are known for each of the ecological zones, but that seemed too much detail (seven lists of common species). Thanks again for your helpful comments, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Very, very, nice work.--Keerllston 02:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks very, very much - if you no longer oppose, do you now support or are you neutral? Just curious, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I hadn't made up my mind- I feel like supporting... you might want to fix the excess use of parenthesis especially in "Early Inhabitants" and "Forts, settlers and War of ..."- parenthesis generally signify both bad formatting/grammar and bad quality content.--Keerllston 00:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks very, very much - if you no longer oppose, do you now support or are you neutral? Just curious, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Very, very, nice work.--Keerllston 02:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply we believe all your concerns have now been addressed. More species are known for each of the ecological zones, but that seemed too much detail (seven lists of common species). Thanks again for your helpful comments, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support per the quality of formatting, the quality of writing, the comprehensiveness, the composition. Great Job! While the number of sources seem to be below average, they also seem to be above average quality. Again - great job.--Keerllston 00:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your comments and support - per your above comment I just removed eight sets of parentheses in the History section. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, very nice. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, great article, well written and constructed. A good model for other park articles. VerruckteDan (talk) 10:18, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the kind comments and support, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.