Talk:Pituamkek National Park Reserve

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pituamkek National Park Reserve article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Canada: Prince Edward Island / Geography Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Prince Edward Island.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Pituamkek National Park Reserve is Canada's newest national park, protecting a chain of barrier islands used for fishing and hunting by the Mi'kmaq for 4,000 years?

Source: Kristmanson, Helen. "Pitawelkek: A 2000-Year-Old Archaeological Site in Malpeque Bay". Island Magazine (84). PEI Museum & Heritage Foundation: 2–14 – via Island Archives, University of Prince Edward Island.

Reviewed:
Comment: PEIsquirrel is my alt. I don't know why the template is saying 0 past nominations (maybe I used my alt? I have 5 according to my user page) but QPQ should be required. I'll take care of that shortly.

Moved to mainspace by Ivanvector (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: New enough, long enough, sourced and neutral, Earwig detects no copyvio issues other than long names and quoted passages, the hook is interesting. I am awaiting the QPQ as mentioned by the nominator. Ivanvector I want to clarify with you the value of "4,000 years" mentioned in the hook. I see a value of 3000 years as mentioned by "suggest the possible presence of a drowned site dating within the Woodland Period (which spans from about 3000 years ago to the recent historic period)." but I'm not sure whether the "to the recent historic period" is inclusive of an additional thousand years or not, I am not familiar with the terminology enough to make my own determination. Ornithoptera (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]