Wikipedia:Peer review/Lake James (Indiana)/archive1

Lake James (Indiana)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to improve it to a Good Article. I could not find a good "template/other lake article" to pattern this article after. This lake is very popular in the Fort Wayne - Southern Michigan - Toledo region—so I think it is important to upgrade this article. Thanks, TwoScars (talk) 16:34, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Finetooth comments

On a first read-through, I see this as an article with clear FA potential, and I encourage you to think about that as the next goal beyond GA. It's pretty close to GA already. The prose quality is high. The article is broad in coverage, and the coverage is approaching comprehensive, I believe. I have concerns about a few of the images and/or the way they are licensed, and I'm working on a short list of nitpicks. It will take me a while to read more carefully and write down my thoughts. I will post them here when they are ready. Meanwhile, I found two FAs about lakes that you might consider as models: Chew Valley Lake and Lake Burley Griffin. Since neither is in the United States, they won't be exact models, but they look very useful anyway. More later. Finetooth (talk) 02:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll add my comments in installments as I find time to work on them. Finetooth (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to review this article. I know there are people waiting to see the final version. Thank you so much. I have a work deadline June 5, so I may be slow to respond in some cases, but I would like to get this article to GA, or even FA. TwoScars (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Lots of good ideas. I probably will not be able to get to them until Saturday or Sunday—working about 11 hours per day right now. TwoScars (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

No need to hurry on my account. Finetooth (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Infobox

• The general reference, "Lake Diagnostic Study Steuben County, Indiana", which I assume is the reliable source for the quantities, names, and other data in the box, should be linked to the source.

The url for this source is http://lakejames.org/pdf/FullToOverflowingFinal[2].pdf. The "[2]" appears to confuse Wikipedia, so I had to comment it out. Is there a way around the problem? TwoScars (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, the brackets cause the confusion. In any case, that particular document, mostly about boating capacity, does not support the statistical claims in the infobox. However, the Aquatic Enhancement document, pages 22 through 24, does support most of the claims. I added a ref to it that links to the relevant item in the bibliography. Finetooth (talk) 01:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

• I'd suggest moving the map into the infobox to see how it looks. It can go into the "image_bathymetry" slot in the infobox, as in Chew Valley Lake. As it is, the map now overlaps a main text section boundary, which is a layout no-no.

Moved map. TwoScars (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Finetooth (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

✔I like it there too. TwoScars (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• The infobox mentions three inflow creeks and one outflow creek. If any of these have names, you should include their names. Others can be identified as "unnamed", if you have a reliable source for that.

Plan to address inflows and outflows in the Geology and climate section. TwoScars (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Many lakes have been assigned a trophic state index based on the nutrients in the water. If you can find a reliable source that names the trophic state of Lake James, you should add it to the "type" line in the infobox, which can still include "Glacial as well.

Page 126 of the Diagnostic Study says 46 for Lake James in 2005—Mesotrophic ("intermediate level of nutrient enrichment"). TwoScars (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Excellent. Finetooth (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

✔Discussed under Geology and climate. Is Geology and climate a good section heading, or would Geography be better? TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• Lakes have a catchment area, which means the same thing as drainage basin or watershed. You should try to find a reliable source that gives the size of the Lake James basin and add it to the "catchment area" line in the infobox.

I'm pretty sure I can find this in one of the sources already used, although it may be for the entire James Lake Chain. TwoScars (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

✔Done. TwoScars (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• If you can find a reliable source that gives it, you should add a quantity to the "residence time" line in the infobox. Also referred to as the lake retention time, it's a measure of how quickly the water in the lake is refreshed.

I can get that. TwoScars (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I can find this in one of the sources already used. TwoScars (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

✔Added to the Water subsection under Geology and climate. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• The article's lead image, the one of the beach house, is washed out. I'd like to see a much sharper image in this position. If you live near the lake and can take your own high-resolution photos, that would be great. If not, you might consider using File:Potawatomi Inn Pokagon State Park.jpg in the infobox rather than the beach house or looking around for even better images, if any exist that are appropriately licensed. Finetooth (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I live near the East Coast, and have not been to the lake since the 1990s. Our family photos either have people as the main focus, or are old B-W. I'll try to find more pictures, but it has been a challenge. TwoScars (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah. I like to take my own photos when possible, but it's not always possible. You're a long way from James Lake. Me too. Finetooth (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Switched the two Pokagon pictures. Will try to get a new picture for the Today section—may take a while. There are all kinds of Lake James sandbar pictures on the web, but I don't think they can be used—and they may be little too wild for Wikipedia anyway. TwoScars (talk) 00:26, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks much better to me now than before. The beach house works OK in its new location near the bottom. Finetooth (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Images

• The good news is that the licenses for the two "Mr. Harmon" images look fine to me as do the railway schedule, the old-timey photo from your father's collection, and the woodpecker. I replaced a dead URL on the bluegill license page with a live one to the source image, and I think that license is now OK too. However, the news about the other three images is somewhat less good.

• The two Pokagon images that appear in the Early Chicago Encyclopedia are not licensed appropriately for use on Wikipedia. File:Leopold Pokagon.jpg is flagged at the Commons for review. Its license lacks author information, a description, and a date of original publication. The Early Chicago Encyclopedia claims copyright for all of its contents, and this might be true in the case of the Leopold Pokagon image. Can't tell. To use that image on Wikipedia, you need to show that its use does not violate copyright. The Simon Pokagon image, File:Simon Pokagon.jpg, has a license that says, "Simon Pokagon, potawatomi, Portrait is from Chief Pokagon's book 'Queen of the Woods'(1899). (It also appears in the Chicago encyclopedia.) This source information does not provide the page number on which the image appears. It would be really helpful if you could track down a copy of Queen of the Woods to see if the image is there and then add the page number to the license on the Commons. It think it's possible, even likely, that this book also includes the Leopold Pokagon image; if so, you would have proof that the Leopold Pokagon image is no longer under copyright, and you could fill in the missing license data. I tracked down basic info on this book through WorldCat, and the first edition was copyrighted in 1899 and published by C. H. Engle in Hartford, Michigan, in 1901. Here is a link to the WorldCat page. I then added the name of the publisher and the publication date and full title to the license page on the Commons. This might be good enough for GA but probably not for FA. The book might be available through interlibrary loan. The two images would be nice to use, but it might be hard to prove that the Leopold one is not a copyvio.

I'm not set on the two Pokagon images, although they are nice to have. I thought that since they were already on Wikipedia, they were OK. I'll see if I can find more on them this weekend, or find replacements. I think it is good to have some type of image for the Pokagons or at least something related to the Potawatomi. TwoScars (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Things on Wikipedia, including the Commons, are not necessarily OK to use. People upload images with the best of intentions, but they may not be familiar with licensing requirements. The problems remain until someone sees them and attempts a fix. Finetooth (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

The image of Simon Pokagon is between pages 33 and 35 of his book "O-gî-mäw-kwě Mit-i-gwä-kî: (Queen of the Woods)". The page is not numbered, but I will use page 34. There are actually two portraits: a painting with Simon in "tribal attire", and the photograph. Both are between pages 33 and 35. Google Books has a copy. There is another version of book, a 2012 reprint, also available. TwoScars (talk) 17:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• The quite useful map, which looks good in the infobox and provides essential information, needs a link to the USGS source map, if possible. What USGS map is this? If you or someone else modified the USGS map, that should be noted and explained. It appears that the road names and numbers, for example, might have been added to the original. Also, one of the map conventions on Wikipedia is to upload PNG or SVG versions of maps rather than JPGs. (See WP:WPMAPS for an explanation of the map conventions.) I can convert the JPG version to PNG and re-upload, if you like. Finetooth (talk) 17:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

All I did was bring up the map on the USGS web site, and snip it to a JPG file. No other modifications were made. Linking to USGS web pages is not normal. OK with me to convert to PNG. TwoScars (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Um. Fact-checkers at FAC and quite possibly at GAN will want to click through to the source map from the licensing page. That's where I would put the URL. I don't know off the top of my head where to find the source map. Finetooth (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I added these instructions in the description of the map:

• Go to http://geonames.usgs.gov/

• Click "Search Domestic Names"

• Enter "Lake" for feature name; "Indiana" for State, and "Steuben" for County. Click Send Query.

• Be patient – the USGS system is slow. Feature Query Results will come to your screen.

• Click the first feature, probably Booth Lake.

• On the right side of the next screen, click "GNIS in ESRI Map" A map will appear.

• Unselect "Show Cell Boundary" in the upper left part of the screen.

• Use "+"-key to zoom in. Use curser to move map. Lake James is nearby, and part of what the USGS calls the "Angola West" section of the map. TwoScars (talk) 14:44, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I just got "smarter". The USGS site says "Stop! Do not bookmark or copy/paste this URL before reading"—that is what I meant about the "linking is not normal" (for USGS). However, this url will get enable one to skip the first 5 steps: http://geonames.usgs.gov/apex/f?p=gnispq:3:::NO::P3_FID:436929 TwoScars (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I was able to follow your earlier instructions, actually, and to see where the map came from. I hate to say it, but this leads to a further tangle involving copyright questions. The USGS has obtained permission from various entities to republish proprietary map data gathered from those entities, which may have put restrictions on how the data is used. One of these entities, noted in the lower right-hand corner of the USGS map, is the Environmental Services Research Institute (ESRI). When I click through to the ESRI "Copyright and Trademarks" page, I see that its legal department says in part, "Esri grants the recipient of the Esri information contained within the esri.com Web site the right to freely reproduce, redistribute, rebroadcast, and/or retransmit this information for personal, noncommercial purposes, including teaching, classroom use, scholarship, and/or research, subject to the fair use rights enumerated in sections 107 and 108 of the Copyright Act (Title 17 of the United States Code). All copies, whether in whole or in part, shall include the appropriate Esri copyright notice." The problem here is that the Wikimedia Commons does not accept images with a "noncommercial" restriction in the license. Even though a wing of the Federal government has published something, it's not necessarily true that the publication is solely the work of a government employee and therefore in the public domain. It might not be, and it appears to me that the USGS-ESRI map is not. DeLorme, another entity cited by the USGS as a data source, may also have put restrictions on how the USGS can use the data. I'm no authority on copyright law, but my usual approach to these questions is very cautious, and I seek solutions that involve zero risk of any kind of copyvio. Early in my Wikipedia career, I had an unfortunate encounter with a private entity whose map work had been legally reproduced by NASA. I mistakenly thought that because NASA was the publisher, I could legally reproduce the map on Wikipedia. A considerable fuss ensued, and my upload of the map, to which I had made further alterations, was removed from the Commons. I'm telling you all this negative and possibly boring stuff because I feel obligated to give you a heads-up and some kind of explanation. It should be possible to create a map free of copyright problems by using a simple locator map based on U.S. Census Bureau maps, something made from Open Street Maps, or something else. I'm willing to pursue this further, if you like. Finetooth (talk) 16:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, please pursue this further. I can always get a map from a pre-1923 book, maybe even from one of the older sources that I already have, but I prefer a map that shows how close the interstate highways are to the lake. What about the second choice, the "USGS The National Map"? TwoScars (talk) 12:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I tried to find the answer in FAQs and articles related to the USGS map services but without success. Just now I sent an e-mail to the USGS asking specifically about the Lake James map and more generally about the USGS map in ESRI. It may take a couple of days for the USGS to reply. I'll let you know if, when, and what I learn. If I don't get an answer, or if the answer is unclear, I'll ask someone at the Commons. Finetooth (talk) 15:31, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I wrote to the USGS and got an immediate but hedged reply suggesting I ask someone at GNIS. I tried this but after four or five days have not received a reply. This morning, I posted my question to a very knowledgeable editor at the Commons, and I'm hoping he will know the answer. Finetooth (talk) 16:16, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi again. Today I got responses from the GNIS and the editor at the Commons. Since they are fairly long, I won't reproduce them here, but you can see them at User_talk:Finetooth#USGS_map_question. In my mind, at least, some doubt remains about my interpretation, but I'll give some thought to alternative maps just in case I'm right. Finetooth (talk) 17:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for all your research. Does the National Map have similar problems? Following the same steps for the first map, one can select "USGS The National Map" instead of "GNIS in ESRI Map". I could use that map and add a few labels. Another, but less desirable, option that I can think of is to find an old pre-1923 map and clean it up a little. TwoScars (talk) 20:18, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Unlike the ESRI map, no symbols suggesting ownership by any non-USGS entity appear on The National Map, as far as I can see. Virginia Tech, on its page explaining the map, has marked the resource with a green globe symbol that means "Freely accessible database, available to anyone without restriction". I can also find quite a few maps on the Commons that cite The National Map as a source; e.g. File:Leesville Lake from USGS.png or File:Kootenays WV regions map.svg, which cites The National Map as one of several sources. Finetooth (talk) 21:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

It helps avoid copyright issues if the map is in some clear sense "your" map, your colors, your choice of typeface, your inclusion of an overlay of roads or other features not necessarily copied from a single source. Finetooth (talk) 21:27, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I may have a second choice, although it is not as colorful. It is in Wikimedia now—here. TwoScars (talk) 02:19, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I think this one serves the purpose and avoids the troubling copyright questions. Finetooth (talk) 15:09, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I had another thought while I was poking around looking at lake maps. It would be useful to add a locator map that shows where the lake is in relation to a larger geographic area. I didn't find any lake articles with two maps in the infobox, but Round Lake (Michigan) shows how it can be done with a separate template that would be easy to cut-and-paste. The green dot position is determined by the coordinates. Just a thought. Finetooth (talk) 15:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaced ERSI map with map from National Map—definitely not as colorful of a map. Also added a locator map. Tried to get a locator map with the USA in the lower corner, but did not work. TwoScars (talk) 21:46, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

When I get time, I'll convert the first map (the one based on The National Map) to PNG, and I'll make a stab at a composite locator using your second map (the green dot map). Finetooth (talk) 23:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

@TwoScars::I uploaded the PNG version this morning, then I created a File:Indiana map with national inset.png locator map specific to this article. I'll leave it to you to decide whether this is an improvement before installing it. If you spot any errors or would like me to modify it (font, color, or something else) in some way, just let me know. Finetooth (talk) 21:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I added it, replacing the map without the USA. Looks good—thank you very much. TwoScars (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Glad you like it. Finetooth (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Lead

• The lead should be a succinct summary of the main text. This lead is fairly complete already, but I would suggest adding a brief mention of the plants, animals, and fish, as well as the railway.

✔Added mention of boating and fishing, and the railway. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• The lead should include no information that does not appear in the main text sections. With this in mind, I'd suggest adding the location of the Potawatomie Inn to the "Description" section. I'd also suggest adding this material, expanded and re-worded to avoid exact duplication to the "Description" section: "Much of the development consists of cottages and homes, and some of the cottages were built over 100 years ago. Two additional lakes of significant size, Jimmerson Lake and Snow Lake, are connected to Lake James. Water from these lakes flows west, and eventually reaches Lake Michigan." Specifically, I'd elaborate on the development, if possible including statistics about the acreage, number of cottages and homes, and percentage of shoreline that is privately owned. I'd add the approximate locations of the sandbar and the Christian camp. Also, I'd give the details about the course of the water from Lake James to Lake Michigan. If this is too complicated or over-long, it could go into a note at the bottom of the article, but I think all of this information should be included in the "Description" section. Finetooth (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Plan to work on this, may take another week. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Description

• In addition to the additions I mention above in the Lead comments, I'd add the distance to Angola in this section and also say in which direction Angola lies.

✔Added that to the description section, and will add to lead too. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• I'd also mention the James Lake Chain and then list all of the components of the chain including the lakes and connecting waterways from the upstream end to the downstream end.

✔Added James Chain section. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• I'd include a description of the James Lake Chain watershed here too. There's a good summary on page 12 of the Aquatic Enhancement & Survey study. I see that not only Angola but Fremont, Indiana, and Kinderhook, Michigan, are in this watershed. There's a nice USGS aerial photo with the watershed outlined on page 13.

✔All now in James Chain section. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• "All three basins also have sunken Islands, and an island in the lower basin remains above the water level." – I assume the lower-basin island is the Kemery Island mentioned in the infobox. If so, I would use its name here too in the main text. If you can add details about the size and shape of Kemery Island, that would be good. Is Kemery Island used for anything such as boat docks, parties, suntanning? What is the RS that gives the name of the island? I can see it on bathymetry maps in the Aquatic Enhancement study, but I can't find its name on the maps.

Probable source is one of the older books, I'll check. The island actually has a cottage on it, although I have rarely seen it occupied. TwoScars (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

✔In Description section now, although I'm wondering if it should be under Geography or Geology and climate. TwoScars (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• Is the sandbar worthy of further description? Finetooth (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The sandbar is worthy, but we have to be careful. Google Lake James sandbar party, and you will see what I mean. TwoScars (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It may be too dull rather than too naughty to include as an external link, I would say, though other editors might want to include it. Finetooth (talk) 18:07, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Geology and climate

• This looks fine except that the phrase "and the fishing was great" struck me as odd. When I clicked citation 13 to see if the Indiana Department of Natural Resources supported the claims in this sentence, I found myself on a general fishing-report page unrelated to James Lake. Can you fix this? The aside about the quality of the fishing at that moment should probably be deleted, but the statistics about the ice thickness need a reliable source.

For now, commented the entire sentence out. The Indiana Department of Natural Resources updates the same URL for its fishing reports, meaning the report I cited has been replaced (probably the next day or week). (That is why I had "and the fishing was great"—it was from a fishing report.) I have e-mailed the IDNR for help. I would like to get something more recent for the ice cover/ice thickness to replace the sentence commented out. TwoScars (talk) 16:24, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The IDNR says it has no ice thickness reports, but sent me ice thickness estimates from a local fisherman who fishes often on Lake James—nothing I can use for Wikipedia. I'm going to have to search some fishing reports in newspapers and hope I get lucky, but I am not optimistic. TwoScars (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Railway

• "In 1928, the property was sold again, and became the Lake James Christian Assembly." – It's not clear what is meant by "property" since the railway property was linear and mostly not right at the lake. Could this be clarified or made more exact? It most likely means the resort property at Paltytown and not the entire railway property.

Notes and references

• I found and fixed minor glitches in all of the redlinked "Cited works" except the last one. It doesn't seem to correspond to anything in the main text and could probably be safely deleted. It doesn't have an URL, but I found something similar here that might be of use in the future.

External links

• It's probably best to delete any external links that refer to Wikipedia articles already linked in the main text.

Removed the Lake James Association since it is in the reference section. TwoScars (talk) 16:24, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Removed Pokagon and the Christian Assembly too. TwoScars (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Removing a few more today. TwoScars (talk) 20:18, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Other

• If you take this to FAC at some point, you'll want to add a section detailing the contents of the lake water, mentioning the pollution around the sandbar and elsewhere in the lake, giving government statistics about nutrients and invasive vegetation, and mentioning anything else related to water quality, trends, and mitigation efforts.
• This is the end of my review. As I said above, I think the article is close to GA quality already and, except for the image license problems, should be relatively easy to spiff up. Please let me know if any of my comments are unclear or if you have questions. Best of luck with this interesting article. Finetooth (talk) 17:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty much done with improvements except the following: Railway section - miles need metric version; Water section - cubic feet per minute needs metric version. Other (long-shot) possibilities: map of bottom of first basin that shows the 3 largest tributaries (might be hard to fit); better pictures (difficult to get currently); Bledsoe's postcard (probably would not fit well, and I prefer to keep the Spring Point picture somewhere, since it is mentioned in the text and shows cottages from nearly 100 years ago). Any other thoughts or suggestions, or have I missed anything? Thanks for all your help! TwoScars (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks very good to me on a quick read. I'll read it through carefully again today and post my thoughts here. I converted the flow statistics and the railway lengths just now. I notice that the lake size and the park size are given as more-or-less identical: 1,200 acres (490 ha). This coincidence is supported by the sources but might appear to readers to be an error. It might be worthwhile to mention this coincidence directly in the "Description" section or in a note. More later. Finetooth (talk) 16:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I made a few minor proofing changes but found only one remaining issue that's really worth mentioning. It has to do with organization of the material, which seems comprehensive or nearly so. These are just things to consider:

(1) Move "History" up to just below "Description".

(2) Since "Geology and climate" has very little about geology and much about the lake chain and water flow and quality, rename it "Watershed". Then move the "James Chain" subsection to just below the opening paragraph with the stuff about geology and rename the "Water" subsection "Water quality".

(3) Move the climate material into its own section called "Climate".

(4) After "Climate", "Plants and animals" can stay where it is, and so can "21st century", but I think "Recreation" would be a better head than "21st century".

I was enthusiastic about the article to begin with, and it has improved substantially since then. Very nice job. Finetooth (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Reorganized—it makes sense. More difficult with the pictures. Had to comment out Simon Pokagon. TwoScars (talk) 00:37, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Looks good. Certainly ready for GAN. If you eventually take it to FAC, please let me know. Finetooth (talk) 02:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)