From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Cleanup Tag
Thanks for your cleanup tag on the article. Could you please be more specific as to how to edit the section in question? The information is accurate (taken from the official website for the park) so we are not sure how to edit it to meet your criteria. Also would you please cite the relevant policy on length of subsections (as I do not know that policy)? Perhaps something like the Facilities and recreation section of Little Pine State Park would be more acceptable? Thanks, Ruhrfisch 19:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- there are various little tidbits that just aren't very encyclopedic "Winter brings the ice to Lyman Run Lake," for example. The overall prose in these sections could also use some improvement (Another reason it looks taken directly from government material). I had originally done a full-blown clean-up, but wiki crashed and I just gave up.
- As for the sections, it's a recommendation from Wikipedia:Guide to layout that turns out with astonishing regularity in WP:FAC evaluations: "Just as for paragraphs, sections and subsections that are very short will make the article look cluttered and inhibit the flow. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading, and in these circumstances, it may be preferable to use bullet points." (although in our case, bullet points are hardly any good).
- Personally, I don't like the bold in Little Pine State Park too much, but it does look like an acceptable compromise (I would also consider reorganizing the material so that related material is placed together (e.g. camping and picnicking) Circeus 20:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I will admit that not all of the sentences and paragraphs are all that good. I want to explain the purpose for having the different topics divided into sections as they are. I think that they make the gathering of info about the State Parks easier for the user. If Joe Hunter wants to read about the hunting rules at Lyman Run State Park all he needs to do is click on hunting up at the top and it will skip straight to the paragraph about hunting. If High School Kid Jones is doing a research paper about the Civilian Conservation Corps in Pennsylvania he can click on that link and skip right to it and not have to read about Major Lyman and his wives. Get it? Dincher 21:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Personally, I would just use the "search page" function of my browser. Besides, if "Joe Hunter wants to read about the hunting rules at Lyman Run State Park," wouldn't the park's website be more practical to look at? I can't help seeing this info taking half the page as a bit crufty. It also makes the ToC far too large for the overall size of the article.
- I also notice that the page does not even clearly state what makes this area worth protecting, or even how it came to be a park in the first place! The last part of the history jumps from CCC to the PoW camp to the state park, but when exactly did the park become a state property? Was it sold by the descendant of Lyman or were there intermediate owners?
- A similar problem (ToC inflation-wise, at least, I haven't investigated Olen Bull much) plagues the recently front-paged Ole Bull State Park, although nobody appear to have batted an eye when I removed the headers in Archbald Pothole State Park. Both these article are also better on the history level. Circeus 00:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
If somebody wants to do the research and find out more about the history of Lyman Run State Park, feel free to do it. Removing the headers on Archbald Pothole State Park makes sense. I did not have a problem with that. The history is basically centered on the Pothole itself. The history of Lyman Run State Park is more clearly divided into seperate sections. First Major Lyman, then the Lumber Era a major part of PA History ( It is my opinion that there are so many state parks in the boonies of PA because the lumber barons were able to get sweetheart deals from the PA Legislature for what was at the time largely useless land ), and finally the CCC/POW camp that stood where the park is now. Dincher 02:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I think one problem is that there is not much information besides the official state park webpages available for most of the 121 or so Pennsylvania state parks. Some of the web pages just have more detail about history, etc. than others. DCNR also does this for the state forests in PA. If someone is local, then a local print history might give more info but no one in this discussion is a local for this park. Pennsylvania's forests were almost all clear cut in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The state decided to buy as much bare land as they could, usually for $1 an acre, and the state forests were born of this. The CCC planted trees and built picnic areas and dams at scenic locations on this state land and then they often became state parks.
- I have double checked and this is not cut and paste from the park's official webpage (not copyvio), but it is the main source. So the complaints go back to the source - there is not as much history as desired, but there is a lot on current facilities and recreation. I will try to polish the style a bit and tweak the headers. Ruhrfisch 15:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
