Talk:Mount Leona Fire

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles

Okanagan Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Okanagan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Okanagan and Okanogan regions of British Columbia, Canada and Washington, United States, in addition to their native people 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.OkanaganWikipedia:WikiProject OkanaganTemplate:WikiProject OkanaganOkanagan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Protected areas Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington / Eastern Washington 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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington - Eastern Washington task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wildfire

	Mount Leona 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Mount Leona Fire appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 July 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Mount Leona Fire was finally contained on the upper slopes of Profanity?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mount Leona Fire.

Wikipedia

Before going live

@Bri, TacitMoose, and Yngvadottir: as the most recent contributors to the List of Washington wildfires or specific articles, I'm hoping you'll give this draft a look. Its my first attempt at a wildfire article and I want to make sure Im not missing anything I should be covering.--Kev min § 15:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks ready to me; I just made a couple of minor adjustments a minute ago. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you asked me, I am hardly an expert :-) Although I agree, the draft is already ready for mainspace, I went ahead and made quite a few copyedits and tweaks (which you are of course entirely free to reject). Some of them are toward US usage, such as using "that" not "which" for restrictives. Some are MOS, like putting refs after punctuation and not using "th" in dates, and I think my added hypens are MOS too. As you will see, I flipped a few things and tried to clarify some things, including adding that the Forest Service did finally sell salvage rights, which I didn't see actually stated in the text. Along those lines, there's an estimated area burned in the infobox; is that in the article text? When was it declared fully contained? And more generally, the Fire and Progression sections seem to me to overlap, with the paragraph that begins "It was reported on September 1" belonging at the end of Progression not Fire; notice how the Sleepy 91 sub-fire is introduced twice? I went ahead and added the 91 in the Progression section to match the Fire section. I'm not familiar enough with fire articles to know whether there's a fixed formula, but I'd be tempted to cover almost all of those two sections under something like "Progression and firefighting" after a very brief "Fire origin" section. Less importantly, the section on salvage logging just ends; was there a second auction or not? ... As I say, take or leave. I'm sorry to have such an aggressive red pencil. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bri, thank I'm always open to edits and improvements, Yngvadottir thanks for all your improvements as well. I've been looking at this article and the sources enough over the last couple weeks that I've gotten a bit blurry on what information i may have seen but am still missing from the draft! :-) Im still looking to see if any reports exist for the 100% containment and fully extingushed dates, but due to it happening in 2001, there are only news paper reports and no incident response paper trails on line, unlike modern fires with daily tracked webpages from management teams. I suspect we may only be able to say it was contained in September 2001. I think only one salvage sale happened, based on the testimony from Vaagen in 2005.--Kev min § 18:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 23:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Smoke from the Mount Leona Fire at sunset

... that sources have reported the Mount Leona Fire (smoke pictured) burning as little as 4,820 acres (1,950 ha) or over 6,000 acres (2,400 ha)?

Source:
- "Ferry County, Washington Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) section "4.2.2.1.3 Mount Leona Fire (2001) - 4,820 acres" bottom of page 65
- Associated Press (August 27, 2001). "Washington wildfires winding down". Ellensburg Daily Record. p. 3. gives 6,199 acres

ALT1: ... that the Mount Leona Fire (smoke pictured) was finally contained on the upper slopes of Profanity?

Source:

"Ferry County, Washington Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) gives 4820 section "4.2.2.1.3 Mount Leona Fire (2001) - 4,820 acres" middle of page 66
"Once the fire had reached higher elevations on Profanity Peak and the northerly slopes of the headwaters of Long Alec Creek, the fire behavior moderated so that hand crews and dozers were able to stop the fire"

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nama assemblage

Moved to mainspace by Kevmin (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 352 past nominations.

Kev min § 23:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Approving ALT1. Article is well-sourced, presentable, and copyvio-free. Article is long enough and moved to mainspace 1 day before DYK nom. ALT0 is lacking a verb (I think you just forgot to write "burned"); as such, I'm approving ALT1, which is intriguing and sourced here on page 73. Image meets criteria. QPQ done. Thank you for the nomination Kevmin! Kimikel (talk) 21:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]