Talk:Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park

Improvements needed

This article is lacking much information about the park. I've added to the geology section, but there are several other areas that need either to be added or improved (IMHO):

• Climbing (routes, difficulty levels, interesting info)
• Driving tours
• Camping
• Hiking
  • Intercanyon (going down to the river)
  • Rim trails
• History
  • Pre-Columbian
  • First European contact
  • National Monument status
  • National Park status
• Wildlife
  • more than just birds are needed, plus more on Peregrine Falcons would be good
• Plant life
  • more than just a list of what can be found

I'm sure there are more topics that could be added. I'll be working on this article as I have time (though I don't have much now-a-days), but feel free to add to it! I don't feel the article currently gives a unknowledgable reader enough information about the park.

--Benwildeboer 19:23, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

GA review comments

Well, here they are:

• Between values and units, use non-breaking spaces which look like  .
• "The more developed south rim entrance is located 15 miles (24 km) east of Montrose. The north rim entrance is located 11 miles (18 km) south of Crawford and is closed in the winter. " - make one sentence by adding "...while..." instead of the full stop.
• "The park is 47 mi² (122 km²) in size. The entire canyon is approximately 48 miles long, 12 miles of which are located in the national park." - reads very choppy, can you re-organise to flow this better?
• Don't wikilink the 122 in the 122 square kilometres.
• Why only wikilink the odd unit, I'd be consistent and wikilink each of them for the first time you use them.
• Citations need to be positioned according to WP:CITE, in particular the first use of [1] needs the space to be removed, first uses of [3], [4] & [5] need that and the full stop removing after it.
• "The entire area underwent uplift during the Laramide orogeny between 70 and 40 million years ago. The Gunnison Uplift is an example of this event. This raised the Precambrian gneisses and schists that make up the canyon walls." - three short sentences, can you flow them together to improve the prose?
• Ref [6], [8], [9], [10] - remove the space before them and full stops where applicable.
• Disambiguate Ute.
• Could wikilink "independence" to United States Declaration of Independence for context.
• Don't use single-sentence paragraphs, such as "The area was established as a U.S. National Monument on March 2, 1933 and made into a National Park on October 21, 1999. [8]" - flow intro prose, even if means making a single paragraph. The same applies to the Biology section.
• Numbers less than 10, write them out (so four instead of 4).
• "Many of the climbs are difficult and should only be done by advanced climbers. The canyon is an area known for its seriousness and traditional climbing values." - "...should only be done..."? Not pleasant reading. "...an area known for its seriousness..." - strange sounding place! So no-one has fun? I think I know what's trying to be said, so I think a reword in order.
• "traditional climbing values.[11]
• "Rafting opportunities also exist in the canyon. In the national park itself, several impassable stretches of water block navigation, making rafting nearly impossible. However, rafting is available in the National Conservation Area located west next to the park.[12]" - too many short sentences and almost a bit advert-like.
• Last reference is an external link since it's not referenced within the article like the others...
• Trim the external links - an article of this length doesn't need five and if anything's that relevant then add it to the article and cite.

So, the article's on hold for now, attend to these issues and let me know when you're ready for me to come back and re-review. All the best... The Rambling Man 16:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've made several minor changes and now consider it to be a good article. The Rambling Man 09:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 22:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Park area

What is the area of the park? In the text it is stated as "47 mi² (122 km²) in size", while in the infobox it is "Area: 32,950 acres (133 km²)". Neither is footnoted. Which one is correct? Qblik talk 18:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Rail transport connection

There are some details of the canyon's connection to the D&RGW at [1]. I'm sure more could be added, but there is absolutely nothing in the article text right now about the former line through the canyon. Slambo (Speak) 11:44, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061103160834/http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/inventory/publications/reports/blca_cure_gre_rpt_view.pdf to http://www2.nature.nps.gov/geology/inventory/publications/reports/blca_cure_gre_rpt_view.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

The canyon deserves its own article

This article is about both the national park and the canyon itself, since there is no article about just the canyon.

However, given that 75% of the canyon is located outside the boundaries of the park, shouldn't the canyon have its own article? 75.163.140.80 (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that is what annoyed me as well and brought me here. For example, the whole Denver & Rio Grande railway not even touched the national park, it diverted from the canyon at the todays rail bridge near Cimmaron (see photo) far outside the park. Almost every part of the former gorge railway now lies under water in the reservoirs (which are not even mentioned), except for a mile that now serves as the "pine creek trail", see www.nps.gov/blca/learn/historyculture/railroad.htm Nevertheless, this has nothing to do with the national park, thus either the lemma has to be changed or some of the sections need to be moved to a new lemma about the gorge, the river or similar. 47.71.46.26 (talk) 11:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

You make very good points 47.71.46.26. The canyon has many parts and there is much to do. I for one would follow your lead if a new Gorge lemma was made. Cordially yours. RRFWTommartin (talk) 14:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. Unfortunately, I have no clue how to do that, my WP knowledge is limited to most simple editing (and English is not my native language). 47.71.46.26 (talk) 19:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I might try to start a whole-canyon article in my userspace, based on the sources present in the park article. Suggestions about broader sources would be valuable. I'll post a link when I get something running. Acroterion (talk) 22:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Adding a little info about the first descent

Just added some more citations and cleaned up a bit about Torrence's two attempts to descend the Gorge. He learned a lot on the first try, and managed with better gear to make it the next year. RRFWTommartin (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)