Talk:Otsego Lake (New York)

Etymology

What is the origin of this place name? Badagnani (talk) 04:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Finger Lake?

Not sure if the comment about Otsego Lake being related to the Finger Lakes should stay in. Hydrologically, it is not part of the Finger Lakes at all, as it drains into the Susquehanna watershed (the Finger Lakes drain into the Lake Ontario watershed). Perhaps this should be made more clear that Otsego was carved by glaciers, like the Finger Lakes.

Merger proposal

I propose that Council Rock (Cooperstown, New York) and Sunken Island be merged into this article. Both are extremely short, unsourced stubs that have received only a handful of edits (mostly housekeeping) since being created almost 10 years ago. Both pages are only linked from this article (and some dismbig pages). This seems pretty uncontroversial, so unless there are any objections I will likely complete the merge after a week or so. Antepenultimate (talk) 02:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Interpreting silence as ascent; it is done. Antepenultimate (talk) 01:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Otsego Lake (New York)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Stedil (talk · contribs) 03:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Greetings! Review will be coming soon. I will copy-edit as I read, with points that need addressing written below. Stedil (talk) 03:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Lead

• "sporing activities such as fishing." Is sporing the right word here? I'm not familiar with the term as it relates to fishing, see spore. Stedil (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Fixed It should be sporting. 420Traveler (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Geography

Sunken Islands

• Do the two references in the "Sunken Islands" section support the information in this section? I don't see any connection to Cooperstown or any mention of James Fenimore Cooper. Stedil (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Fixed Forgot to add the source initially. 420Traveler (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Bays and Points

• "The next bay north of Blackbird Bay is Muskrat Cove" The "Cooper's Otsego County" reference says that Muskrat Cove and Blackbird Bay are the same.
  •  Fixed Added correct source. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• I don't see any mention of Waterlily Bay in any of the references in this section.
  •  Fixed Add source. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• Do we need to have a sentence that tells us that Muskrat Cove had muskrats, or that Waterlily Bay has waterlilies? Seems redundant.
  •  Fixed I agree. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• "About 1 mile (1.6 km) further north is Three Mile Point." The other points have GNIS refs, but this one doesn't. I see it listed on the map at the end of this section, but if you're going to provide a GNIS ref for the others, it's best to be consistent.
  • There is no GNIS reference for this point, so I used a map source. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• "It is the location of a park maintained by Cooperstown." Is this an important detail?
  •  Fixed I agree. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
• "outlet is Point Judith is a projection" is this sentence missing a "which" after "Point Judith?" It otherwise doesn't make sense. Stedil (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Fixed I agree. 420Traveler (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

History

Natural History

• Most of the first paragraph is close paraphrasing of the reference, which should be avoided. Rephrase. See Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing for more information and suggestions for how to fix this.
  •  Fixed Should be fixed now, let me know if not. 420Traveler (talk) 04:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
• The same is true for the second paragraph. I ran earwig's copyvio detector and found some more later in the article. It would save some time in this review if you would find any other spots where the text in the article exactly matches or almost matches the source and rephrase these passages so that they are entirely "in your own words." Technically, I could quick fail this review on these grounds alone, but I do not think the issues are so extensive that they cannot be fixed reasonably quickly. Another section that earwig flagged was "Geology." Stedil (talk) 05:43, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Fixed Should be fixed now, let me know if not. 420Traveler (talk) 04:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
    • The issue in this section appears fixed, but I'm seeing a few more further down the article. I'll point them out as I continue the review. Stedil (talk) 14:27, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Human History

• The link in this reference, "MacDougall, Hugh Cooke (1989). "Council Rock Park". Cooper's Otsego County" redirects to the cooper's society homepage. It needs to link directly to the book, if it's hosted at the Cooper society webpage.
  • There is no book link so I changed link. Should be good now. -420Traveler (talk) 01:49, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
• paragraph beginning "the first steamboat on Otsego Lake" has text close paraphrased from the Biological Field Station ref. Rewrite required.
  • Should be fixed now.
• "to develop their water quality agendas." This is vague and copied from the BFS ref. Rephrase.
  •  Fixed
• "It encompasses the physical and social sphere of the lake." What does this mean?
  •  Fixed

More to come. Stedil (talk) 22:37, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

@Stedil: Ok ready when you are. -420Traveler (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I can be a bit of a slow reviewer due to a busy schedule, but I'll be continuing this review soon. Stedil (talk) 18:05, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Geology

• The ref for the first sentence is a dead link. Archive or replace, if possible.

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 05:49, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

• The 2nd paragraph is close paraphrased, and in places directly copied, from the ref at the end of the paragraph.

@Stedil: should be fixed now. -420Traveler (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• The first sentence from the 3rd paragraph is close paraphrased, and copies the technical language "chemically eutrophic and morphometrically oligotrophic."

@Stedil: should be fixed now?, I cant remove the words "chemically" or "morphometrically" because they are important in describing this. -420Traveler (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• I think it would be beneficial if the 3rd paragraph didn't copy the sentence structure of the reference. What I mean is that the same ideas are presented in the same order as in the reference (the 3rd full paragraph in the reference). This can constitute a type of close paraphrasing, even if the word choice is different. From WP:Close paraphrasing#Avoiding: "Don't paraphrase information in the same order it was presented from the source." Try to distill that paragraph down to its main idea; what is the purpose of that paragraph? What is it trying to say about the geology of the lake? Stedil (talk) 22:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Stedil: pretty sure I fixed this, let me know -420Traveler (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Watershed/Conservation and Management

• I've placed a dead link tag on the last ref of the first paragraph of the Watershed section. Archive or replace, if possible.

@Stedil: I think it is working now -420Traveler (talk) 15:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

It was still dead, but I found a replacement using info from the reference. Stedil (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• The first three sentences of Conservation and Management are close paraphrased. Once again, the sentence structure and order are copied. Changing certain words to synonyms is not enough to avoid close paraphrasing.
• I decided to fix the sentence starting "in 1935" to show an example of how to fix the issue of sentence structure duplication and copying of technical terms. Use this example as a guide to help fix the rest of this paragraph, in which most of the sentences have close paraphrasing issues. Stedil (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks -420Traveler (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• The first reference in the "invasive species" section is dead. I've placed a dead link tag.

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• noting also that the "pollution" section has the same issues with mirroring the sentence structure and organization as its sources, as mentioned above. I was unable to check most of the "invasive species" section due to the dead link. Stedil (talk) 23:52, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I tried to fix this, let me know if its ok. -420Traveler (talk) 16:18, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Recreation

• "Since the disappearance of alewife" Is there any more information about this? When and why did they disappear? Why did their disappearance establish a more "balanced ecosystem?"

Added some info, cant find why they disappeared. -420Traveler (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• Is there a reference for the Mount Wellington nickname and appearance from Lakefront Park? Stedil (talk) 00:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

 Fixed -420Traveler (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

I've finished my initial review of the article. For the "Appearances in Literature" section, the prose is sufficient for GA, though it is a bit repetitive. If you're interested in making the prose in this section closer to FA quality, I would suggest eliminating the formulaic "(place) is the location," and "in the novel (name of novel)" phrases. Diversifying the sentence structure, or condensing these ideas into a 1-2 sentence summary might help. Let me know when you've completed all the action items above. I'll read through the article again once everything is addressed to make sure no new issues arose. Again, apologies for the delay. I'll see if I can get this wrapped up soon, pending your changes! Stedil (talk) 00:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Stedil & 420Traveler, what is the status of this review? --Usernameunique (talk) 23:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Usernameunique Almost done. Will finish within a few days. -420Traveler (talk) 00:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

420Traveler, checking in—it's now been a few weeks. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Usernameunique will get to it in next couple days. Would have got it done way sooner but the reviewer took a long time to review and plus I work a real job. -420Traveler (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Let me know when you're finished. All changes look good so far. Stedil (talk) 21:19, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

420Traveler has addressed all issues, and the article now passes all GA criteria. Thanks for your work on expanding and improving this article. Stedil (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)