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.
Forget-me-not Lakes (Wyoming) is within the scope of WikiProject Lakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lake-related articles on Wikipedia, using the tools on the project page. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LakesWikipedia:WikiProject LakesTemplate:WikiProject LakesLakes articles
Brunton, I am opening this discussion to ask you to please consider self-reverting. The material you reverted is important information that belongs in this article, and I'm not about to edit war over it. There was no copyvio issue, and I am baffled over your mention of it. The two tributaries involved in the study originate from Forget-me-not Lakes and Rimrock Lake. IOW, some of the samples collected in the study originated in the lakes that created the tributaries – same water, invertebrates, detritus, etc. It's easier to collect samples from the lake's tributaries (streams, creeks, etc.) than to dive in the lake for them, especially a cold glacial lake at high altitude. Liken it to pricking your finger to get a blood sample vs surgical removal of blood from the left ventricle of your heart. The study found little variation in the sampling at altitude, which included the tributaries originating from Forget-Me-Not & Rimrock Lakes; therefore, that study belongs in the article; there would be no tributaries without the lake. Your reason for reverting made no sense. The research began because of concerns that (my emphasis) High elevation ecosystems are predicted to be strongly impacted by climate change. Invertebrate residents of high elevation streams and lakes have little area to move to in response to increasing temperatures. IOW, the lake and its tributaries are a high elevation ecosystem, and the names of those ecosystems do not have to be stated repeatedly in a sampling; common sense tells us the lakes are integral part of the study because without those lakes there would be no tributaries. I do not know where the idea originated that we cannot use our editorial judgment when paraphrasing or including summaries of a study, research, a book or a book chapter, etc. as long as we present it in context; i.e. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. I am pinging MONGO as he is the author of the article but because he has full time job in RL, I hope you act without waiting. Atsme💬📧 15:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It’s really just a passing mention, saying that the lakes feed into one of a couple of dozen tributaries of one of the watercourses actually involved in the study. I don’t think that makes the study in question close enough to the subject of this article to include here, although, as I said, the information could be included at Grand Teton National Park which actually includes the study area. Trying to include Forget-Me-Not Lakes as part of the study area is precisely the sort of exercise of editorial judgment we should be avoiding.
As for the copyvio, here are the first two sentences from the “abstract” section of the source:
”High elevation ecosystems are predicted to be strongly impacted by climate change. Invertebrate residents of high elevation streams and lakes have little area to move to in response to increasing temperatures.”
Here’s the opening of the removed section:
”It has been predicted that high elevation ecosystems will be strongly impacted by climate change. Invertebrates of high elevation streams and lakes have little area to move to in response to increasing temperatures;”
That’s too close to the source for me to be prepared to revert. Brunton (talk) 16:00, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The lakes are only mentioned in passing as part of a larger description of the study area, and I don't believe it meets the WP:DUE WEIGHT requirement. This could actually be misleading to the reader as it implies that Forget-me-not Lakes have some special significance to the study and vice versa. I'm not sure that this single source warrants inclusion anywhere on Wikipedia, but if secondary coverage is found (did any newspapers report on this?) it would be more appropriate as part of an article on Grant Teton or the bodies of water within it rather than mentioning in on each individual lake or stream article. –dlthewave☎ 16:35, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Brunton, that's quite a [stretch]. It was a very short sentence included in a much longer sentence in an entirely different paragraph. Earwig showed -0- copyvio. If it bothered you that much, you could have tagged it or better yet, rearranged a few words instead of reverting. Collaboration is about building and improving articles. The change was simple: In response to temperature increases, invertebrates that occupy lakes and streams at high elevations have limited areas in which to move; ... It also appears that the university is cooping with government partners to create this free public database per this list, and I'm not seeing any copyright notices on the website or in the study, but that really doesn't matter anyway.
Dlthewave, passing mention has nothing to do with inclusion of that material – N is already satisfied per GEOLAND, the AfD is over, and now it is time to expand the stub so it can be classified as a short article. What I think might help this collaboration is for you to see these glacial lakes from a slightly different perspective, rather than as something you need to delete. They are not your average everyday lake where you take the family waterskiing. These are aquatic ecosystems that were formed by glaciers, and they are now part of a very important climate change study; i.e., the canary in the coal mine. High elevation lakes in the Grand Tetons have minimal anthropogenic impact, which makes them an ideal study site. The streams, creeks, and tributaries are like arteries carrying blood throughout the body; they are all connected, so when you draw samples from a couple of lakes, creeks and streams at one altitude, those samples represent all the lakes, creeks, and streams in that general vicinity at that altitude (and the samples did show little variation at altitude). That is why it is called sampling. Forget-Me-Not Lakes and its tributaries are a big part of this study – not just passing mention – the mention established the named Study sites – see the last paragraph on page 5. It requires common sense and some critical thinking to figure this out and grasp the concept of the study relative to Forget Me Not Lakes as an aquatic ecosystem. Perhaps it appears obvious to me because of my longtime career teaching about conservation, the environment and endangered species. What I added to the article are general statements relative to what those samples represent to all of the aquatic ecosystems in the study without having to name each one individually – it's the impact factor: High elevation ecosystems are predicted to be strongly impacted by climate change. That information is unequivocally DUE, and I will be adding it back with more information. If you want to help build this stub, then help me locate more sources. NEXIST Atsme💬📧 22:18, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[stretch]. It was a very short sentence included in a much longer sentence in an entirely different paragraph. Earwig showed -0- copyvio. If it bothered you that much, you could have tagged it or better yet, rearranged a few words instead of reverting. Collaboration is about building and improving articles. The change was simple: 