Talk:Gran Paradiso National Park

Gran Paradiso National Park 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
April 7, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 16, 2008.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that Gran Paradiso National Park is Italy's oldest national park?

Protected areas Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Italy Mid‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

This article was started in 2006, how can it be on DYK in 2008? --Gerrit ^CUTEDH 10:16, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The DYK rules say that articles that have been expanded fivefold or more can be on DYK. This article was expanded. Bláthnaid 11:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good article

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
There are a lot of short sentences but the article is fluent and easy to read.

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Sourcing is adequate.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Seems to cover most of the typical aspects of national parks.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Hard to push a POV on an article like this, heh.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
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:
Would be nice if you could find an appropriate photo for the flora section, if only because it sounds beautiful in spring. The photo of the ibex is supercute btw :D
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

-- Naerii 07:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. By the way, I pushed the POV that ibex are adorable :p Bláthnaid 12:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Adorable ibexes are not NPOV but unless it uses emotional language let's leave it.Dave (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not bad, but I fail to see how it has been awarded both a "good article" and "featured article" status. Compared to the Italian version, which is full of detail, covers many aspects and generally seems excellent (though I have no specialist knowledge) it is very cursory and has one or two statements which do not match the version in Italian. To sum up: there is no justification in awarding stars to the derivative English version when the Italian has none. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.129.105.97 (talk) 11:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Some of this might be regarded as translated so I put this notice on this page as requested. I notice however that we English-speakers have gone off on our own with this and also have provided many references not in the Italian. Make up your mind, is it translated from the Italian or taken from English references? So I presume that like Britannica-type articles it started as a translation and now has a life of its own. Therefore I put this notification in here as requested but also took out the request for translation on the theory that we are beyond mere translation. I know I plan to expand it and also the refs need proper formatting. I expanded the box a bit and brought it in line with other national park articles. As for the rating, let's just leave it.Dave (talk) 12:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gran Paradiso National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080510222229/http://sea.unep-wcmc.org:80/sites/pa/0245v.htm to http://sea.unep-wcmc.org/sites/pa/0245v.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gran Paradiso National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]