Talk:Stanley Park Ecology Society

UBC FarmWonders Proposal

Hey Ali,

I created the sandbox for us to work on our proposal and page for FarmWonders. Take a look and feel free to edit what is there as we will submit that as our proposal tomorrow. Let me know if you have any questions, thanks.

JThandi10 (talk) 03:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Rosie

Hi Justin and Ali, This looks like a fine project. Once you have a draft you might contact the Society and ask for feedback from them - they might know of other activities that should be included. Rosieredfield (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Images

I don't know how to move the image up into the conservation section. If you can move it than move it. If not that is fine.

Acfredrikson (talk) 20:49, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Aaron

Hi I'm assigned to review your wikipedia page. Overall it looks pretty great, but a little vague in parts. I'll give detailed feedback by section.

Opener - reads like an advertisement for the organization. Strive for neutral language, and avoid vague metaphors like "connect people with nature". What do they actually do? Link to articles like restoration ecology or trail maintenance or something to indicate real actions. Also, specify Stanley Park, Vancouver, Canada for an international audience.

Conservation - Explain more about the natural oasis, and how it is critical habitat located in the city. International audience. Name more than just one species, and elaborate on what they actually do.

Animal conservation - The first three sentences are vague fluff. You don't need to talk about coexisting with coyotes because it has its own section. Stanley park Society has nothing to do with listing species at risk so that sentence seems misleading. Adopt a nest also has its own section. I'm not sure this section should exist.

Co-Existing with Coyotes - This section is really good. Could use another citation.

Adopt A Nest - elaborate. I assume wealthy people adopt known wildlife nests in the park, and their money is used for conservation. Be clear and expand on this.

Plant Conservation - you don't name a single plant, or a single program, or a single action. Overwhelmingly vague. You bring up the stump, but that thing is dead already, and has more cultural/historical value than natural value. Talk about biodiversity, ecosystems, mention specific plants, talk about the threatened Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic zone.

Stewardship - Good introduction

Revitilization Project - Pretty good, but maybe rename the heading to "HSBC freshwater initiatives" because right now its what the paragraph is about

Beaver Lake - Mention that logging happened in the 1930s. Clean up the sentence explaining logging impacts. You mention trails, roads and invasive species, but nothing about how these problems are being remediated.

Invasive species - You only talk about ivy busters/eco-stewards in this section, so maybe change the section heading to reflect that. Also, use the current name of that program except when explicitly referencing the past.

Public Art - What is a cob building? Is this the only thing they have done? How does public art fit with their goals? I am pretty knowledgeable about eco projects and I don't understand the significance of this section.

OptimizeThis (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Laura

Hey, I have also been assigned to give you feedback, so here are my suggestions.

- internal link to Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation (Vancouver Park Board) - Perhaps adjust sentence: "Working alongside of the Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation, the SPES nurtures, maintains, and develops Stanley Park's nature and wildlife" to "Working alongside the Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation, the SPES nurtures, maintains, and develops the natural ecology of Stanley Park". - consider revising sentence: "Including over 200 bird species, the Great Blue Heron being one of them" I suggest naming a few more birds present - consider revising sentence: " The SPES use animal species monitoring providing necessary information about the park species in order to create and update new conservation practices" - internal link to City of Vancouver - I suggest a more neutral point of view for the CwC program - internal link to Bald Eagle - specify what plant species are present in the park - what plants are invasive - internal link to invasive species - perhaps move invasive species topic to be closer to the initial discussion in the Plant Conservation section? - there is a picture of Lost Lagoon, but it is not mentioned anywhere in the text - consider adding categories section at the end - I recommend editing the sentences, as some are worded awkwardly, as noted above - perhaps add a map of Stanley Park to show where the ecology centre is located? - overall, really interesting topic :)

Lauraje (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

feedback from Andy

This is a great page filled with information. These are my suggestions to make it even better.
I feel that the sentences (in the beginning of the page) are a little choppy and do not flow together. For example, under Conservation:Wildlife conservation is the act or actions taken to protect and preserve animals and plants as well as their natural habitat. Stanley Park is an urban oasis.
In addition, punctuation use can be improved throughout. For example, under Introduction:The SPES is always encouraging people to get involved, through volunteering, donating, becoming a member and more.
Lastly, I think a little bit more citations will make the page even stronger. I find that most subheading starts off with a statement that requires a citation to back up. For example, under the Revitalization Project,In 2012, the SPES received an eco-donation of $50,000 by HSBC and created the HSBC Freshwater Initiatives. The goal is this initiative was to aid the aquatic systems of Stanley Park, including the famed Lost Lagoon.
There is a citation near the end, does it apply to all the statements in the paragraph? If so, you can add to the end of the sentences.

Overall I enjoyed reading the page.

Feedback from Adam

Hey guys, great page! Here's my suggestions: - Overall there are too many small simple sentences that could be mushed together with punctuation. - Their*** in last sentence of Conservation heading. - A little more explanation about the Adopt a Nest project would be helpful! - Stewardship heading could be made into a more simple word, as some might not understand the meaning. Other than that, all of the information included in that heading is very well put together! - Everything that could be linked to another Wikipedia article is there. - A couple more pictures about the Stewardship initiatives could be included on the page itself. -You could provide a little section about the history of why it was created and by who etc. - Really interesting topic, definitely deserves a wikipedia page!!

--Adamberson510 (talk) 19:48, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Ruth

This has the makings of a great page but you need to make some changes:

• Your introduction sounds like a blurb from a leaflet promoting SPES and a collection of vague and subjective sentences i.e. “the SPES nurtures, maintains, and develops Stanley Park's nature and wildlife”. You need more concrete, objective statements with numbers and references. How about including more history of SPES??

• Information about Stanley Park does not go here. The whole first paragraph in the conservation section does not belong on this page and should be removed. The last sentence can go in the introduction.

• You talk about CwC in the Animal Conservation section not in the CwC section. Wrong section

• “As there were a growing number of attacks by coyotes over Vancouver”. Numbers? How many? Reference??

General

• You have lots of vague statements. You need to include numbers and references (lots more than the ones I have listed above) and less subjective terms. For example, every time you use the word ‘many’ try and replace this with an actual number.

• There is a massive lack of references throughout the article.

• You need to do some more digging to get some more objective references rather than just use the first few you find from a google search. Is there any controversy around SPES?? Have all their projects been successful?

• You need links to other Wikipedia articles such as Stewardship, Species at Risk Act and many more

With these few improvements this will make an great article that will be on Wikipedia for years to come!!

RuthVancouver (talk) 21:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Rosie

The reviewers' comments are very good - you should address them all in your revisions. In particular, try to make your writing more precise and less like a press release ('neutral point of view').

This is an article about the Society, not about the ecology of Stanley Park, right? So provide a bit of information about the park, and then lots more information about the Society - do they have meetings? members (how many)? governance? fees? newsletters? a meeting place? staff? What are the three facilities you mention in the first paragraph? The Stanley Park page says they look after a building on Lost Lagoon. Is the work mostly done by volunteers or by staff?

You should add a sentence about the SPES to the long Stanley Park page, with a link to your new page.

Rosieredfield (talk) 01:40, 28 March 2014 (UTC)