Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Parks of the United States/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 02:21, 6 May 2010 [1].

List of National Parks of the United States edit

List of National Parks of the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Reywas92Talk 21:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

Here's a list of America's 58 National Parks complete with dates, areas, and descriptions. Some of the description lengths are different, so tell me if you want more for certain ones. There are some statistics and history in the lead, but I am happy to research something else. Completely my own work, it's based on my previous FL List of National Monuments of the United States, though my record is a little better, having been to 8 of them. (Wikicup) Reywas92Talk 21:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Resolved comments from NMajdan
Comments
  • Check the disambigs.
    • Done. Thanks
  • The conversions are missing from the acreage amounts in the lead.
  • 100-mile - Needs the parenthetical conversion.
  • 489 m & 4000 feet long - Again, needs the conversion.
  • I think the last paragraph needs to be reworked. There is no need to say "they are listed here" with here being wikilinked; the link should be worked into the sentence more directly.
    • Changed the first one. I think the second is more like a see also at the top and I can't think of a better way that is still obviously pointing to related article.
  • US-Mexico border - Should be an en dash per WP:DASH.
    • Done
  • No alt text. I believe this is no longer an FL requirement, but I just wanted to point it out just in case.
    • I believe that is correct.
  • Several more instances of measurements needing the parenthetical conversion (beyond the ones above) per WP:UNITS.
    • Conversions added
      • Didn't quite get them all: 51 million acres, for an average of 895 thousand acres but a median of 317 thousand acres.; bad template usage in "Capitol Reef"; 489 m.—NMajdan•talk
        • Got it, thanks.
  • The reference for American Samoa doesn't make any mention of it being the southernmost national park.
  • The reference for Biscayne doesn't mention any of the threatened animals.
  • The reference for Bryce Canyon doesn't back up the settlement sentence nor does it mention hoodoos.
  • Going through the references for the first several entries showed a lot of inconsistencies between the descriptions and what is actually verified by the source. I suggest you go back through and verify all of what you say in the descriptions is correctly sourced. I will continue my review after this is done.

This has the potential to be a good list and a meaningful one for the project. However, I am going to have to withhold my support for now until the sourcing issues are resolved.—NMajdan•talk 14:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All references are to the main NPS page for the park. Information is sourced either from that homepage or in its subpages (History & Culture and Science & Nature). All of your examples are also in those subpages but the identical link is not repeated. Reywas92Talk 21:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm.... I really don't know what the policy is in that situation. I would assume every statement needs an accurate citation so all of those sub-pages would need to be cited. However, I'd like to get input from other reviewers before asking you to do that.—NMajdan•talk 13:30, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did the same thing in my previous FL. I just don't think it makes any sense to have one link for some parks to the main park page but many repetitive links for others even though it's all to the same small set of subpages. In this case the source link to the park home represents the History and Science subpages as well. Reywas92Talk 19:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I still have a bit of a problem with the references, but since I can't find this method to be in violation of any MoS guideline, I have no other reason not to support.—NMajdan•talk 13:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Reywas92Talk 18:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Why is 'National Park' capitalized? 'National park' is a common noun, although each individual national park is undoubtedly a proper noun.
    • Changed
      • The title of the list still uses caps. Arsenikk (talk) 11:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • In this case it's proper like United States National Park. It's consistent with FL List of National Parks of Canada.Reywas92Talk 13:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • You are confusing me. You agree that 'national park' is not a proper noun and should not be capitalized in the prose, but insist that it should be in the title. As you pointed out, it is inconsistent with the FL List of national parks of Sweden. Please avoid WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. What do you mean by "it's proper like United States National Park"? Is that an institution? Of course every individual national park is a proper noun, and the United States National Park Service (an organization) is a proper noun, but when referred to as a collective group, 'national park' becomes a common noun. Arsenikk (talk) 21:50, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
            • Otherstuffexists is for deletion arguments, not consistency comparisons. In the US, all 392 areas of the National Park System are considered national parks, as they are federally-owned parks run by the National Park Service. While that would be just a common noun, each of these 58 is a United States National Park, capitalized to indicate that these are the official National Parks, not just national parks. For this reason I think parts of the lead should be re-capitalized. Reywas92Talk 22:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
              • I do not follow your reasoning here. As I see it now, I feel the article should not be promoted, but you insist on your view. Perhaps other reviewers have an opinion on the matter? If not, I will tend towards an oppose. Arsenikk (talk) 22:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
                • Opposing based solely on this minor point seems a bit harsh. That's just my opinion, of course. Anyway, I think it is very difficult to decide in this case. The park system is called United States National Park, so based on that, the current name seems fine to me. But Arsenikk did have a point, too. So, I don't really know what to do in this case.—Chris!c/t 01:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
                • I do not really know who is right here, but I want to note that all other lists of national parks in US are capitalized. On the other hand, in the category's title "national parks" are not capitalized. Probably there is some reason why they named such. Renaming this list would mean making titles of the lists inconsistent. This issue should be discussed separately from this review, because it is beyond its scope. Either all lists should be renamed or none. Ruslik_Zero 08:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
                  • The U.S. Department of the Interior, on its website, capitalizes terms like "National Park Service" and names like "Yellowstone National Park", but when referring to the parks as a whole or a group, the term "national park" is not capitalized. See here for an example. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 16:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Based on the link provided by KV5, looks like Arsenikk was right. So, I think this article should be renamed.—Chris!c/t 17:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • That's because that link refers to national parks in general, not the just the 58 National Parks. The new quarters program has National Parks, National Historical Parks, and other designations, including some that are not even NPS. I have seen both usages elsewhere, but in my opinion, with the ambiguity of park terminology this should be capitalized to distinguish this type. Anyway, I can't move the page because there's a redirect in the way, so if everyone else wants it lowercase someone else will have to move the article. Reywas92Talk 18:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early in the lead, there is a section of a few sentences where the term 'National Park' is repeated almost endlessly: "...National Parks. All National Parks are operated by the National Park Service, an agency of the Department of the Interior. National Parks must be established by an act of the United States Congress. The first National Park...".
    • I'm not really sure what to say; I think "national" must be there to distinguish from any generic park.
      • Try using terms like "it", "they" etc, or try restructuring the information. It's okay, just not featured-standard prose. Arsenikk (talk) 11:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sentence "Alaska and California, each with eight, have the largest number of National Parks, followed by Utah with five and Colorado with four." provides first a number and then explains the number. This forces the reader to guess the end of the fragment.
    • Changed
  • Once one reaches the millions, is it not common to use square miles instead of acres?
    • My source had it in acres though I can convert it if you really want.
  • Why is the metric area provided at a different significance than the imperial?
    • The acreage is exactly what my source says. I do not think the km2 needs to be drawn to four decimal places.
      • If the source uses it, it must be okay, I guess. I'm just concerned about the poor people who have to convert from acres to sq mi (us metric users have it easy converting from ha to km2. Arsenikk (talk) 11:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have said all the claims in the descriptions need to be referenced, although I think a bulk referencing (all at the end) for each entry would suffice. (per NMajden above)
  • Some animals are listed in singular, others in plural.
    • I have made them more consistent; some sets refer to the animals in general and others to the species
  • 'Tributaries' is an uncommon enough word that it should be wikilink.
    • Changes
  • 'Chihuahuan Desert' and 'Rattlesnake Springs' should be wikilinked.
    • Relinked former, latter does not have article
  • 'Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park' should probably have an endash, since it is a disjunction between two parks.
    • Changed
  • In Grand Canyon, be consequent in using digits or words within a sentence.
    • Changed, though "a mile" is only an approximation and isn't quite "1 mile".
  • Values in Great Sand Dunes description need to be converted
    • Changed
  • "The only area accessible by road is Exit Glacier, while the rest is viewed by boat tours." sounds a bit awkward. Perhaps "while" is the wrong word?
    • Changed
  • In the Mammoth Cave description, there is a missing { or }.
    • Changed

Arsenikk (talk) 16:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thanks! Sorry about the delay, I was on vacation last week. Reywas92Talk 21:10, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Oppose for the following reasons:

  • A few national monuments are no longer designated as such, having been redesignated or disbanded. I find this sentence strange. Why does it talk about monuments? The article is about parks, not monuments. Can it be a typo (monuments -> parks)?
    • Fixed.
  • In a desert climate millions of years of erosion have led to these structures, while the ground has life-sustaining soil crust and potholes. Sorry, I do not understand the last clause in this sentence. Please, clarify.
    • Clarified
      • I still do not understand, what is "life-sustaining soil crust and potholes, natural water-collecting basins". How are potholes in the ground connected to arcs? Ruslik_Zero 18:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed. They are just other features the park has.
  • It has the world's richest fossil beds from the Oligocene epoch and wildlife including bison, bighorn sheep, black-footed ferrets, and swift foxes why some animals are plural and some single? The sentence should also be split in two.
    • They are all plural. The plural of bison is bison. Fixed
  • Named for the Bend of the Rio Grande along the US–Mexico border, this park has part of the Chihuahuan Desert, ancient fossils, and cultural artifacts of Native Americans. I suggest a split: "Named for the Bend of the Rio Grande along the US–Mexico border, this park includes a part of the Chihuahuan Desert. A wide variety of Cretaceous and Tertiary fossils as well as cultural artifacts of Native Americans exist within its borders."
    • Changed.
  • The park is divided into four districts by the rivers. I suggest: ", which divide the park into four districts."
    • Changed.
  • monocline protruding from the earth that shows its geologic layers. It is not clear what shows geological layers: monocline or Earth?
    • Changed.
  • This northernmost park protects part of the Brooks Range and has no park development. What does this mean "no development"?
    • Clarified.
      • What is "human development"? The land seems to be inhabited. Ruslik_Zero 18:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • There are no roads, park buildings, etc. That's why I had park developments before. Reworded.
  • Ecosystems vary on the north and south rims and elevation within the Sonoran Desert. Quite a meaningless sentence, in my opinion.
    • Clarified.
      • It is still adds no new information (ecosystems always vary widely) and should be removed. Ruslik_Zero 18:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Removed.
  • It has some of the country's darkest skies What does it mean Darkest skies"? The skies are everywhere about the same (not counting other planets, of course) Probably, it should be cleanest skies?
    • Clarified; No, it means there is less light pollutions which is not based on cleanliness.
      • It has some of the country's darkest night skies and animal species including Townsend's big-eared bat, Pronghorn, and Bonneville cutthroat trout. Skies and animals are not logically connected to each other. If I am not mistaken this called a run on sentence. (should be split in two sentences) Ruslik_Zero 18:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • No, that is not a run-on. The park has dark skies and the park has animals. They are in one sentence to avoid having two short and choppy sentences. Changed though.
  • They were formed by sand deposits of the Rio Grande on the San Luis Valley, and the park also has alpine lakes, six 13,000-foot mountains, and ancient forests. This sentence should be split in two sentences.
    • Changed.
  • Hosmer's Grove of alien trees, and native Hawaiian Geese. You should decide what form you use: plural or singular.
    • What do you mean? There is one Grove and there are many geese.
      • I mean that in this context it should refer to the species, in other words it should be Hawaiian Goose. Ruslik_Zero 18:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed.
  • This is the least-visited National Park (Kobuk Valley). How about Gates of the Arctic?
    • What do you mean? Kobuk Valley is the least visited.
  • Formed by glaciers, there are tall bluffs, rock gardens, islands and bays, and historic buildings. Were historic buildings also formed by glaciers?
    • Changed

My general impression is that the text requires polishing at places. Ruslik_Zero 18:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • I just took a quick look at the lead paragraphs and my first impression was that it was really choppy. The first few sentences in particular are really short and could be reasonably combined. Additionally, the descriptions for each National Park has no standard. Gates of the Arctic, for example, talks about human development while Glacier Bay describes its wildlife and landscape. I think that each park should have a paragraph that incorporates all of three things: wildlife, landscape, and a short history (such as the Sand Dunes). --haha169 (talk) 04:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • No. I wrote the descriptions incorporating the most important aspects of the parks. Every park is different and must not have the same repetitive elements. It is notable that Gates has an untouched environment, and it is notable that Glacier Bay has these wildlife and glaciers. Many parks do not have noteworthy wildlife but are known for their geologic features and landscapes, or vice-versa. I combined a couple sentences in the lead. Reywas92Talk 20:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I think this is ready to be promoted. The prose and the table look great. Everything is referenced.—Chris!c/t 20:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mm40 (talk)

  • Would it be possible to make a map of country labeling all the parks? I thought I saw one somewhere. Or can you make one of those maps using Google Earth? Sorry if you have no idea what I talking about
    • There is a link at the bottom of the page that will make a map on Google Maps or Bing.
  • I don't like "and the first national park" in the first paragraph. I would expect "and" after a comma to expand on the idea previously stated, not give a separate idea
    • Changed.
  • "in 1890. In 1916" the repetition of "in <year>" sounds odd. Perhaps you can make the second part read "The 1916 Organic Act" or "The Organic Act, passed in 1916, ..."
    • Changed.
  • The sentence beginning "National parks usually have a variety of" doesn't make any sense to me: the natural resources protect the resources? Huh? Also, "large areas of land or water" should just be "large areas"
    • Changed. That's what my source has.
  • Ref 2 has a different date style: "Month date, year" versus "Date month year"
    • Changed.
  • 6/27/2005 in ref 5 should be written normally

More to come later. Mm40 (talk) 23:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm busier that I thought. I'll probably post comments on the talk page if this is promoted before I get a chance to review it properly. Mm40 (talk) 11:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_National_Parks_of_the_United_States/archive1&oldid=1142527455"