Jump to content

Talk:Clark State Forest/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting GAR Parrot of Doom (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing the article. Please note I am not reviewing the editors - only the article - so please do not be offended by anything I type.

Main article text

[edit]
  • Originally 2,000 acres (8 km²), it is now 24,000 acres (100 km2). - 2,000/24,000 acres of land, I know, but it needs clarifying. You should also bear this in mind for the rest of the article - there are several instances where 'acres' are used, but are they acres of land, trees, water...
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It features two internal trails, and the 59-mile (95 km) Knobstone Trail, meant exclusively for hikers. - does this make three trails?
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are nine horse trails, ranging from easy to rugged. - could you expand upon easy and rugged, so the reader understands to what they refer?
If you could put the difficulty information in the body of the article, and not the lead (which is only a quick summary) that will be fine. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two nature preserves are also situated in the park: the White Oak (160 acres (0.6 km2)) and the Chestnut Oak/Virginia Pine (20 acres) - this is not mentioned in the body of the article. See WP:Lead for guidance.
As above, could you keep the specifics in the body of the article? Also, there is a ')' that needs removing on this line. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In May 1903 the Indiana state government purchased 2,028 acres - the lead says 2,000 acres.
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • noted for its knob features, - What are knob features?
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This provided not only using the land of the state forest productively, but to also instruct the art of forestry. - poor grammar
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • During the Great Depression, the Works Progress Administration chose to make Clark State Forest a training center for the Civilian Conservation Corps, and made it Indiana's largest CCC cantonment in November 1933. They created artificial lakes within Clark State Forest, and built many bridges, to aid in water conservation, provide beauty spots within the forest, and teach members of the Civilian Conservation Corps forestry skills. The state forest proximity to the Jeffersonville Quartermaster Depot was key in the decision to focus so much attention on the state forest.[6][7] - repetition of 'state forest'
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the original 2,000 acres - history section says 2,028 acres
You missed this, so I changed it for you ;) Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the original 2,000 acres (8.1 km2), Clark State Forest now covers 24,000 acres (97 km2), with many curvy roads and paths. This includes a hundred miles of horsepaths, which was a major cause for the future plans for Charlestown State Park to not include horse trails. - the lead uses the term 'trail' - could you use 'trail' here also? Also, the second sentence is grammatically poor, and needs revising
First part done, second sentence still needs revision - I'd change it myself but don't understand the context. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hunting is also allowed on the property, save for those areas designated specifically for human recreation. - is hunting not recreational? Or is the hunting performed by employees to control the environment? Also, no mention has yet been made of what wildlife lives in the forest.
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hiking, biking, fishing, and picnicking are other pursuits to visitors to the state forest. However, all of these human activities are of secondary importance to the main purpose of the state forest.[6] - what is the main purpose of the state forest? A small reminder would suffice here.
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Timber management is the main purpose of Clark State Forest today. - it may look better to add this to the end of the line I have highlighted above
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trees sold for lumber within the state forest are between 70 and 100 years old, and are previously marked for such use - are the trees sold and then cut down, or are they cut down, trimmed, and then sold as lumber? Could you expand upon 'previously marked' - how long ago, how are they marked, etc?
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Schlamm Lake has a fish hatchery is just north of it. - could you improve the grammar here?
Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

Reference 8 is a deadlink, and also requires publisher details, and date of access.

Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from that, the references are fine, but I think you should use one of the citation templates that Wikipedia provides. Considering your references are mostly books, have a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style. My preference is to use {{Citation|...}} for online sources, and {{Harvnb|...}} for books. Drop me a line if you need help here, I'll be happy to assist.

 Done--Gen. Bedford his Forest 23:56, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested improvements

[edit]

Can you add information about visitor numbers, types of tree, biodiversity, etc? Geographical co-ordinates should be placed top right of the article page also. Some more images would be nice but I can appreciate this is difficult sometimes. As things stand the article is a little brief, not a bad thing in itself but it does tend to leave the reader wanting for more.

I'll put the article on hold pending these changes. There are some minor grammatical problems I can resolve, but I'll wait until the above has been done. Parrot of Doom (talk) 19:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added tree types. Visitor numbers aren't available, probably because there are no gate fees to count the visitors by. I can take another picture next week, but more pictures would be better in the spring. Infobox has been added, should be helpful. WHat do you think of it now?--Gen. Bedford his Forest 01:36, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly there

[edit]

Well done on the changes made - the map is a welcome addition. The referencing still needs to be resolved, as well as a couple of minor things above (I have removed the <s>strikethrough</s>. I have done the Keller book reference for you - have a look to see how it's done, and how the Keller link in the references section now clicks onto the book details in the Bibliography section. Once this and the remaining issues have been resolved, I think you'll have your GA. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That should do it.--Gen. Bedford his Forest 01:41, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll check everything tomorrow, but have a look at the code for the Keller reference - the Harvnb (search the article for it) template - convert the other book references using the same template, and they'll all then click-through to the books in the bibliography section. It won't take you 5 minutes to do, you've done half the work already :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 01:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAR

[edit]
  1. Well-written:
    (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
    ✓ Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;[2]
    (b) 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);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
    ✓ Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
    ✓ Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    ✓ Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.[4]
    ✓ Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:[5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]
    ✓ Pass
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ a b In-line citations, if provided, should follow either the Harvard references or the cite.php footnotes method, but not both in the same article. Science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FAC; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not necessarily outline every part of the topic, and broad overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement for Good articles. However, if images (including other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clark_State_Forest/GA1&oldid=1136615378"