Talk:High Park fire

Wildfire Low‑importance

	High Park fire is part of WikiProject Wildfire, which collaborates on wildfire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.WildfireWikipedia:WikiProject WildfireTemplate:WikiProject WildfireWildfire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Colorado Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Colorado portal This article is supported by WikiProject Colorado, our collaboration to create, improve, and update Wikipedia articles about the U.S. State of Colorado. To comment about this article, select the Add topic tab above. For questions about, or to make suggestions for Colorado articles, go to our project's talk page. We invite you to join us!

Stats

The use of "most expensive fire in history" is a bit misleading. In this fire, homes burned is being used to determine "expense". In the second most destructive, fourmile canyon fire, insurance claims are used to justify expense. Maybe a possible rewrite?Keystoner idin (speak) 20:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So noted, and corrected. The insurance claim data for the High Park fire obviously have not come in yet. Paul (talk) 23:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete sentence

Hi! There is an incomplete sentence at the end of the "This culminated in the major rain/flood event" paragraph, in the "Impact of 2013 Section". It's invisible (<1-- ... -->), but you can find it in Edit mode. Cheers Thouny (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is also an error in the Development section. The last sentence of the first paragraph reads: "The fire was named High Park as this is the local name for the area it fire." --Eyeslikesugar (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High Park fire. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120625220120/http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20924347/colorado-wildfire-new-pre-evacuation-order-high-park to http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20924347/colorado-wildfire-new-pre-evacuation-order-high-park

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) 05:08, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]