Talk:Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Id4abel (talk · contribs) 15:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Done A few bold claims need citations, which are marked with ^{[citation needed]} to make them easy to find. The vast resources already cited may very well already have support for those claims, so this might just be a matter of copying existing citations. Abel (talk) 15:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only ones I see are in the Fauna section. The citation at the end of that paragraph speaks to all three sentences. Do you really want me to repeat it on each sentence? Nsteffel (talk) 16:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was able to correct some after reading more of the article. BirdLife International Important Bird Area remains.Abel (talk) 17:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The same existing reference on that paragraph states it is "One of 100 globally important bird areas by the American Bird Conservancy." I guess this may be a slightly different program so I reworded it. I think the multiple repeated references to the same source looks a bit silly, but if that's what you think it needs that's okay. Nsteffel (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the wording about the Bird Conservancy matches the source, all three sentences match the same source, when before only the first two matched the source. Now that all three match, you can delete the first two citations as the third citation now covers all three sentences. Abel (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done Some text is vague and now marked with ^{[clarification needed]} to make them easy to find. Abel (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I edited several of these to hopefully be clearer. For the clarification you asked for on the section related to hiking trails, what is your specific concern? Nsteffel (talk) 16:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

→‎Hiking: two types of trails or three types?Abel (talk) 17:09, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I still do not really understand what you are requesting clarification on. There are three types, do you want that sentence reworded somehow to be clearer that multi-day loop and long distance backpacking are two distinct types of trail? Nsteffel (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the wording the three types are not at all obvious, yet the sentence needs that clarity. Abel (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the recent edit with much more general wording any better? Otherwise I would welcome your own suggestion. Nsteffel (talk) 02:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar would have fixed it, but that solution was equally valid so problem solved. Abel (talk) 17:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]