Talk:Brown County State Park

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / Indiana (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Protected areas (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brown County State Park/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Peripitus (talk · contribs) 07:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


At first glance this article looks good. I'll comprehensively read through over the next day or so and leave comments below. - Peripitus (Talk) 07:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to look over Brown County State Park. I work full time, so sometimes I cannot respond as quick as I would prefer, but I will respond to all comments. TwoScars (talk) 22:26, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I've done what I can on copyediting the article, rather than list trivial issues here, hopefully not introducing any grammatical errors. There are some textual and other issues left that may need some attention.

  • The lead is a trifle scant and needs some information from the "natural resources section". Other than that it seems to adequately summarise the article
Will work on that over the next few days. Probably adding to the third paragraph after the first sentence. TwoScars (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Added more discussion of the trees, etc. in paragraph 3. TwoScars (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • "During the 1920s, Bright believed". I've read the linked reference and don't think it covers this part in the way you've expressed it. I think that the time section of this should go.
Removed "During the 1920s", and added "By 1926" to match reference. TwoScars (talk) 17:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • horseman campers - what are these ? I worked it out later on but perhaps "horse-riding campers" would be better
"Horsemen's Campground" and "Horsemen's campers" are the terminology used in the Brown County trail map. Another map calls it the "Horsemen's Camp". I have reworded "Large trucks and recreational vehicles must use the western entrance, and horseman campers (only) must use the southeast entrance." to "Large trucks and recreational vehicles must use the western entrance. Campers bringing horses must use the southeast entrance, which leads to a specialized campground with hitching posts known as the Horsemen's Camp." TwoScars (talk) 17:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
  • is nationally known - would "widely known" be closer to the references intent ?
I have no problem changing it to "widely known". Wissing says "The 49-mile drive is through the dramatic hills and valleys of Brown County, nationally known for its scenery and artist colony." on the top of page 57 of his book. Another source (not cited) says "Probably most popular is the nationally-famous Brown County State Park, a mecca for Indiana artists." The 1975 Indiana Outdoor Recreation Plan (also not cited) says "Brown County State Park, the largest in Indiana at l5,492 acres, is nationally recognized, and popular at all seasons." Let me know—I have no problem changing "nationally known" to "widely known" if you still think I should change it. TwoScars (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
If the sources back up the wording I think it should stay. - Peripitus (Talk) 10:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
  • "Brown County State Park is the home of a wide variety of trees." Don't think this is needed as the remainder of the paragraph adequately conveys the concept.
Removed that sentence. TwoScars (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Any reason that the climate box is collapsed by default ? It's not obtrusive when expanded.
I have two poor reasons for collapsing it. First, I just learned how to collapse them, and was eager to use that knowledge. Second, I think the newer type of climate box is ugly—and some people have been changing the old ones to the newer (ugly) style. I can change it if you prefer. TwoScars (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
No particular preference. The information is there and the show button works. I'm just more use to it not being collapsed by default - Peripitus (Talk) 10:19, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
  • have you considered combining repeated references to reduce the number of [x] marks in paragraphs ? References 2, 3, 5, 15, 16, 17 and others are repeated for consecutive sentences. Personally I prefer just a single reference mark at the end of all sentences in a single paragraph that are backed by the same information.
Yes, I also prefer fewer reference marks, but some reviewers demand lots of references. I'll comment some of them out during the next few days. TwoScars (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Commented out numerous consecutive references. TwoScars (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I'll work on this over the next few days. TwoScars (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
This has been fixed. The Weather Channel appears to have stopped posting weather history, so I have changed the source to weatherbase, and updated the numbers. TwoScars (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I can't see any issues apart from the above. The images are correctly licensed and appropriate, references are reliable and the ones I can check back up the text. The article is interesting, well written, broadly covers the subject and doesn't leave any information gaps of significance. - Peripitus (Talk) 11:37, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Done with edits unless you can think of some more, or feel some of the issues addressed are not satisfactory. Removed the word "accommodations" because word processor did not like it—using "places to stay" instead. Fixed a few other minor spellings too. TwoScars (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

That all seems good. I'm just finishing a last read through but so far can't see any issues - Peripitus (Talk) 19:55, 4 February 2015 (UTC)