This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot(talk | contribs) at 06:18, 3 February 2024(Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Islands}}, {{WikiProject California}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 06:18, 3 February 2024 by Cewbot(talk | contribs)(Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "GA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Islands}}, {{WikiProject California}}.)
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Headreach Island had 175 acres (71 ha) of farmland in 1923, but by 1974 was mostly marshland or underwater?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Where is the line drawn for writing an independent article for an island, as opposed to including it in an article on the group of islands of which it is part? Please ping with reply, Cheers,· · · Peter Southwood(talk): 08:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbsouthwood: Well, if I just wrote an article for everything that had a GNIS entry and a recognizable presence on a satellite map, I'd be up a few thousand from where I'm at now ;^)
In all seriousness, I try to follow the guidance given by WP:NGEO; I will only bother to go all the way on writing an article if I can be reasonably sure in my ability to find reliable sources that give actual information about the island. There are a few (I'm looking at Fern Island (California) here) which definitely exist, but not quite enough to pass GNG, or know anything about them beyond coordinates, elevation, etc. As my skills improve, I've been finding it easier and easier to write solid articles (for example, Fox Island (Detroit River) was in my "unexpandable permastub" list until a couple days ago). As for this specific article, there is indeed some overlap with Tule Island; I think this is more attributable to the speed at which I'm going through my "list of articles to expand" than to a lack of citable material that's distinct between the two. jp×g13:30, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply JPxG, My query is not about the notability, more about assessment of how likely the article is to become reasonably substantial within a reasonable time, rather than remaining a stub, versus the option of inclusion as a section in the containing geographical unit, with a redirect with possibilities for later expansion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood(talk): 14:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I assume that in this case, you're referring to the complex formed by Headreach Island, Tule Island and Fern Island? jp×g14:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
