Talk:Pahaquarry Copper Mine
Appearance
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Assessment notes
[edit]I have assessed this as Start Class for a few minor reasons. I would probably call this a C-Class article except for these items:
- Duplicate entries in the Bilbliography and Further reading sections
- The sections seem to be in an unusual order - History, then Geology, then Legends would make more sense to me
It's a good article, and I learned from reviewing it. I only make the suggestions above as ideas for improvement. I would have gone ahead with changes, but list based references are not in my skill set. I find them incredibly difficult to work with, and I am always worried about removing the wrong duplicate that may be needed. Jim Miller See me | Touch me 19:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Article Needs:
- Wider list of references (for instance, no mention of history as reported by Decker, Stickney, Hine, Snell).
- Discussion of the substance of folk tales regarding Dutch miners and why they are incorrect.
- Better discussion of the history of the mines
- Look at the mine today
- photographs.
- See also - Old Mine Road, DWGNRA, counties, various related historical information
Forgot to sign. --ColonelHenry (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class New Jersey articles
- Low-importance New Jersey articles
- WikiProject New Jersey articles
- C-Class Mining articles
- Low-importance Mining articles
- WikiProject Mining articles
- C-Class National Register of Historic Places articles
- Related-importance National Register of Historic Places articles
- C-Class National Register of Historic Places articles of Related-importance