Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Tree Hill Nature Center

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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 Miyagawa (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Tree Hill Nature Center

[edit]
(
)
Minor note: The review of Super O/S still awaits a check mark. The review has been completed. History2007 (talk) 14:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Mgreason (talk). Self nom at 15:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Long enough and new enough, but I have some other concerns. I found the article very hard to read. I get the impression that it was cobbled together from the lists of dates on the website, plus other sources, without sufficiently integrating the information form different sources so as to create a new coherent whole. For example, much of the article is historical in nature, and there is a lot of emphasis on dates, but the "story" moves chronologically from 1971 to 1975 to 1998 to 1970 to 1975 to 1971 to 1974 to 1976 to 1975 to 1977 to 1987 to 2011 to 2002 to 2004 to 2007 to 2008 to 2009 to 1946 to 1993 to 1996 to 1997 to 2009. Some of the jumping around in time is reasonable, due to topical organization, but it left me feeling dizzy. Some of the content also seems trivial. Now that you've slept a few times since writing this article, you might consider doing some reorganization. When giving an historical account, try to make it chronological, at least mostly. In other places, reconsider whether all of the dates are needed. Reconsider whether details such as the degrees held by the first director or descriptions of website redesigns are truly encyclopedic.
  • I've removed some unnecessary details and distracting dates which I believe makes the history section more readable.Mgrē@sŏn 15:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
  • The hook fact(s) are not clearly included in the article, and to the extent they are there, they aren't sourced. The "non-profit control" part of the hook is in the lead section, but it's not supported by the source cited at the end of the paragraph.
  • I'm not sure what you're looking for. The Tree Hill Nature Center website shows that the organization collects admission, sells memberships, schedules and presents classes, lectures and events. They offer the amphitheater for rent to groups and have their office and staff on site.
  • The article does not explicitly state that this is a city park.
  • I added a reference containing the park's details from the Parks & Recreation webpage on the city's website. The lead now states, "The city park opened in 1971."
  • As far as state ownership goes, the article says that ownership of the original tract is held the Florida Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (TIITF), but it's not clear that's "state government" or that they own the whole park. --Orlady (talk) 02:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • The "Original" subsection, which says ownership of 30 acres is held by TIITF further states that TIITF is controlled by the Governor and Florida Cabinet. That says "State" to me. The state doesn't own the whole park. The 10 acres where the amphitheater is located are owned by the city and leased to the nature center. However, the wilderness preserve and majority of land is owned by the state.
  • The above-described changes address the "city park" part of the proposed hook. However, the other two elements of the hook still are not supported. The fact that the Tree Hill Nature Center website includes information on admission fees, etc., does not indicate that the organization controls the park, and the article does not say that either. The article also does not cite a source for the statement that Tree Hill Nature Center is a nonprofit. As for state ownership, the fact that the governor and cabinet form the board of the TIITF does not in itself demonstrate that the land belongs to the state. It does appear from the website http://www.dep.state.fl.us/lands/ that the land under TIITF jurisdiction is state land. However, if the fact about state ownership is going to be on DYK, users in Idaho or Ireland or India (people who may know nothing about Florida's government) should be able to find that information explicitly stated in the article -- it isn't there right now.
I've thought about possibilities for an alternative hook. One possibility would be something on the arts activities at the nature center. For example:
  • ALT1... that Tree Hill Nature Center, a natural preserve in Jacksonville, Florida, started an arts program that includes an artist in residence, art workshops, sale of artists' work, and concerts? --Orlady (talk) 04:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
  • That is fine with me. Mgrē@sŏn 15:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
  • ALT1 is in the article and supported by a source (but I had to edit the article to accomplish that result). My review found a some close paraphrasing, in addition to some nonencyclopedic trivia; I've done a good bit of editing, in addition to Mgreason's work, to address those issues. IMO, the article still has problems, but I think it's finally ready for the main page. --Orlady (talk) 01:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Tree_Hill_Nature_Center&oldid=1020478644"