Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mackinac Island

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 01:59, 24 July 2007.

[edit] Mackinac Island

previous FAC

Self nomination This GA failed its previous FAC due to copyediting concerns. I addressed the specific concerns raised and went through the entire article myself. The "Etymology" section had a significant copyedit by another user. However, it has been listed on the league of copyeditors FAC proofreading page for well over a month and I've asked three other editors to take a look at it. None, even when provided with a link to the old FAC to see the specific concerns, have been able to find anything more than a couple minor things or a typo. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 20:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support: Well written, correct grammer & spelling, etc. --Random ^{Say it here!} 20:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support read this during the last FAC and everything looked alright... my 2 concerns were addressed. --W.marsh 02:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comments, if you please....

• The jump between 'The road encircling the island and closely hugging the shoreline is M-185, one of the few highways in the United States without motorized vehicles.[11] The island has numerous candy shops that line the streets of the village. is really jarring. Are numerous candy shops really a distinguishing feature of the island for that matter? Many touristy places tend to have candy shops. If they are then try and lead the reader in, for example The village is mostly geared towards tourism and retail, particularly numerous candy shops or something like that.
• 80% of the island is wild, and a State Park at that, and no mention is made whatsover of the wildlife, ecology or conservation of the island. Something of an omission I feel.
• Does info about the economy exist? I imagine it is mostly tourism but it is still worth mentioning.
• The layout of the article, starting with general geography, then history, then geology, then etymology, then culture, seems erratic. Etymology can probably be dragged into history, which can sit next to culture, with geology and geography nearer the front (with the hopefully created natural history section).
• see also's are un-FAish and Historic places might look better as a series of paragraphs with a line about each and their importance?

• Just some thoughts. the article is good but slightly disjointed and in need of some more info/better organisation. Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • To address some comments: The number of candy shops is relevant as the island is famous (regionally) for its fudge. I will look at the organiztion of the Description section - I never did like that section. There isn't a whole lot of wildlife, its mainly a state park for historical reasons. I did find a source that discusses ecology though, so that should be added soon. As for economy, the most I could probably add without just listing demographic percentages would proabably be a sentence near the end of the history section about current economy (as History already discusses past economy). If I can find a source for it, I will add it. I will try to restructure it. My original intent was an order-of-importance type arrangement, though I'm not sure how culture ended up at the end. Etymology could be a subsection of history. I'm thinking something like:
    1. General Description
    2. History (with etymolgy added as a subsection)
    3. Historic places (to keep History together)
    4. Culture
    5. Ecology
    6. Geology (while this chronogically would go first, IMO, its the least important)
  • As for historic places, if I can write it without going into unnecessary detail on each place (as each building has its own article except for The Agency House of the American Fur Company) and without it sounding too choppy, I will try to proseify it. As for See also, it can proabaly be trimmed a bit to remove ones that are already linked in the article, but I looked at other FAs and many have See also sections. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 15:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I've restructured the article, trimmed the See also section, and added a section about ecology, including terrain, mammals, birds, flowers, and trees. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 18:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've looked over the changes and it looks better. The overall sequence isn't what I would have chosen but it is at least rational now. The inclusion of information on candy shops makes sense the way you describe it here, do include that rationalisation in the article and like I said make it so that it doesn't jar as badly while reading. I'm glad you've included a section on the ecology but the source is pretty awful - anything that describes a bat as a species (rather than an order) is pretty ghastly. I have located a journal article on the vegetation of the island and will use it to improve that section and I hope to find some more info on the birds too. FYI you capitalised a lot of generic bird and plant names that should be lowercase, only bird species should be uppercase.

Some more things I want to bring up... Regarding see also's - yeah some FAs have them but they should be avoided if at all possible. Straits of Mackinac Shipwreck Preserve can be worked into the ecology section, Mackinac Island Town Crier possibly into the culture section, and the bridge has nothing to do with the island and doesn't need to be in this article.

Mackinac Island Honor Scouts is of dubious importance and is quite a large section for such a seemingly trivial thing. Please explain or discuss the significance (to scouting or the island's culture).

Like I said this is good and with some more work it can be featured. I'll do some digging on the natural history (my area of speciality) and improve that section, perhaps you could ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Geology for a pair of eyes to glance over that section just to make sure its okay. Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ecology is not exactly my strong point, as you could probably tell. The source used for that section is also used elsewhere in the article (though I don't know if it was all written by the same person, the name I'm using is just who they say to credit) it's generally accurate (we did find one other misinterpretation of an event in history) but it is written more for common knowledge. Its helpful as it is condensed and contains a lot of info in one place. As for the scouting part, it should probably be here as it would be tough to write an article on just that. I can proably trim a lot of the excess stuff and just leave the parts that are historically and culturally relevant. Also, as far as birds and plants go, is it better to leave the common names in or should the actual species names be used? Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 23:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unclear. I meant the common names of specific species. Blue Jay is a species, and therefore capitalised. But owls, hawks, warblers etc are just types and are uncapitalised. Capitalisation of common names only really applies to birds, it's an ornithological convention. As for the scout thing, trimming sounds good. I think I can see that it is important to scouting and deserves a mention, just try and explain that. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've trimmed the scouting part and added some info about the island's newspaper to bring the See also section down to one entry (for now). I've been doing a little research on the economy as well. The only source I've found that isn't just a sweeping generaliztion as part of a much larger article covers the entire county. of which the island is just a small part of. Geology has been checked and expanded by a member of the WikiProject. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 22:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I've expanded the Historic places section from a bulleted list to 1-4 sentences about each place. I wish I could write equally about some, but many seem to be on the register mainly because they are really old, some don't have many sources. Another editor has finished off the see also section, adding info about the underwater preserve to ecology. All that remains is the Description section. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 01:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

• Fixes needed, seems to have WP:MSH problems, as the article title is repeated in several section headings. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:01, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Fixed now, removed Mackinac from Etymology heading and Mackinac Island from Honor Scouts heading. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 00:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
• And, finally, the Description section is cleaned up. I moved a few things around so it makes more sense (at least to me, but it is 11:30 PM local time). The general order of the description section is: Basic geography, population, accessibility, travel on the island, parks, which leads to hotels, leading to downtown, and the candy shops. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 03:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• 'Oppose until the writing is fixed. Somewhat improved. It's a good article, and not hard, frankly, for someone fresh to go through it. Here are examples of why it all needs a massage. (One thing I see is too great a concern for lexical variety.)
  • Area to three decimal places? Right at the opening? Use one decimal place.
  • "In the late 19th century, the island became a popular tourist attraction and summer colony. Much of Mackinac Island has undergone"—No, spell it out first, abbreviate to "island" second.
  • All English speakers hyphenate "well-known".
  • Its ban on numerous cultural events? And the three items are not properly presented in that list, anyway.
  • "The island is approximately 13 kilometers (8 mi) in circumference and about 9 square kilometers (3.5 mi²) in total area. The highest point of the island is the historic Fort George (officially called Fort Holmes since 1815), which is 97 meters (320 ft) above the lake level and about 270 meters (890 ft) above sea level." Sorry to nitpick, but are you making a subtle distinction between "approximately" and "about"? Just use about (once). After the three decimal places a few sentences back, first we don't need a repetition of the area; and you haven't rounded the sq. km correctly. And then we have "about 270 meters"—how much more accurate can we get in this context?
  • Paragraphing of "Description" needs rejigging. Merge the first two, and then don't start with "It".
  • "during the winter"—one redundant word. Tony 02:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've fixed all the specific things you mentioned. As for having someone go through the whole article, I'm not sure how to go about that anymore. It has been on the WP:LOCE FAC proofreading list for over 2 months and has been on the top for most of that time. I have asked 3 editors to go through it, none have found anything more than minor typos. If you would like to go through it and make changes, that would be much appreciated. If you'd rather not edit it yourself, you can post problems here or email them to me if there are a lot. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 01:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Had a look-see at random in the middle of the article. I don't find the prose very enticing.

Every summer, a minimum of [at least?] 50 Michigan Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts at any one time, [stray comma] live and work on the island in alternating [alternate?] weeks. The program began in 1929 [add comma after year] when the state park commission [title? should have initial caps] invited eight Eagle Scouts, including young Gerald Ford, to serve as honor guards for the Michigan governor. In 1974, the program was expanded to include Girl Scouts ... Mackinac Island contains a wide variety of terrain, including fields, marshes, bogs, coastline, boreal forest, and limestone formations. The environment is legally preserved on the island by the State Historic Park designation. In addition, [remove previous two words, and then "About half of"] approximately one-half of the shoreline and adjacent waters off Mackinac Island, including the harbor (Haldimand Bay) and the southern and western shore of the Island [remove last three words—what else would it be of?] from Mission Point to Pointe aux Pins, is protected as part of the Straits of Mackinac Shipwreck Preserve, a state marine park.[45] As the island is separated from the mainland by three miles [metric equivalent, please] of water, few mammals inhabit the island [island x 2?], except those that traverse the ice during the winter months. Bats are the most abundant mammals on the island [remove last three words]. Crossing the water is no obstacle for bats [them?], ["because"?] there are plenty of [rather informal here] limestone caves serving as homes for the bats, and there are many insects on the island for the bat to prey on. The island is also [remove "also" as ambigious and redundant] frequented by migratory birds, [remove comma—there a quite a few stray commas throughout the text] on their trips between their summer and winter habitats. Eagles and hawks are abundant in April and May [ADD comma after "May"] while smaller birds such as Yellow Warblers, American Redstart, and Indigo Bunting are more common in early summer. Near the shoreline, gulls, herons, geese, and loons are common. Owls, including Snowy Owls and Great Grey Owls, come to the island from the Arctic to hunt in a [the?] warmer climate. Other birds, such as chickadees, cardinals, Blue Jays, and woodpeckers, live on the island year-round.[46] Mackinac Island also [remove "also", unless you want to weaken the flow] contains over 600 species of vascular plants. Flowering plants and wildflowers are abundant on the island [remove last three words], including Trillium, Trout Lily, Spring Beauty, Hepatica, Buttercups, and Hawkweeds in the forests and Orchids, Fringed Gentian and Jack-in-the-Pulpit along the shoreline. The island's forests are home to many varieties of trees, including maple, birch, elm, cedar, pine, and spruce.[rather a lot of "including"] Tony 14:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

All suggested fixes made as well as a few others. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 01:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• Support: I've read the article, and I made several minor tweaks myself - these adjustments were more on subtle stuffs like lack of "the", overuse of "its" in the intro, simple logic &sequence problems, etc. The article is both broad and deep in coverage. (Wikimachine 02:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC))
• Support: Rlevse 02:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
• Support well done. Sumoeagle179 10:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• Strong oppose per Tony and:
  • "note the silent "c"" Do we really need that? I think people will notice it by themselves.
  • What exacactly is a "strategic battle" as opposed to a non-strategic one? Does the term refer to the way the battle is fought?
  • "The population grows considerably during summer, accommodating an average of 15,000 visitors per day." The source says "as many as" 15,000 not an average of 15,000. The same goes for the infobox.
  • What happened on the island before the 17th century is only covered by two sentences in the whole article, one in the lead, one in the history section. This is the main reason for my oppose.--Carabinieri 17:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Two sentences on most points in the interior of North America before 1600 is fairly impressive. There has been an archaeological dig on the island, but its subject is the French fort, not the Native American presence. What sources do you have in mind? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
      • I don't what sources cover this topic, it's not the reviewer's job to find sources. But looking through Amazon the book by Thomas Piljac and Pamela Lach seems to deal with the island's early history. This website also seems to contain some information on the topic, though I don't know to what extent it's reliable. Here is a bibliography on Mackinac County that might include some books on Mackinac Island history.--Carabinieri 23:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
        • I made you first 3 suggested fixes. I also am not sure about the reliablity of that website. It seems to be mostly a collection of oral tradition, slanted heavily toward one group. Some of it does not seem to be specific to the island either. Much more of the history after 1700 is documented and covered in multiple sources and that is why it is given more weight. This is similar to other articles. Germany has 2 sections that together cover 100 BCE to 1806 CE and 5 that cover 1814 to 1990. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 15:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
          • Those were just some sources I was able to find in a quick five-minute search on the internet, I didn't vouch for their reliability or usefulness. I do, however, believe that the time before the Europeans arrived is a really important part of the Americas' history and should therefore get an appropriate amount of coverage.--Carabinieri 22:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Okay, I've added 3 more sentences about the island before European exploration. It is from a reliable source and is a mixture of archaeology and legend. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 23:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your help. Although I think this is still way too little, I'll let it pass. I do, however, have one last concern. The article relies heavily on websites promoting tourism on the island in one way or another. According to WP:RS "[a]rticles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources". Promotional sites are not third-party. Specifically, I'm concerned with footnotes # 2, 3, 7, 8, 14, 15, 20, 21, 30, 36, 37, 38, 40, 47, and 49. I don't doubt any of the information given in the sources. The problem is that if an article is primarily based on such sources, it will inevitably tend be one-sided or give certain aspects undue weight. Is there any way you could incorporate more scholarly or journalistic works into the article?--Carabinieri 01:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Some of those, 2, 3, 20, and 30, while published by a tourism-centered site, are written by a historian who has written books about the island. I also would not be too worried about the ones used for history, there isn't too much to slant there. I will look around for some others though. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 02:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
    • I've replaced the "movies" ref with one from IMDB. Its not exactly journalistic, but it is more neutral than a chamber of commerce website. I added refs to the part about writers referring to Tocqueville's visit, Fuller's book, Thoreau's visit, Hale's stay, Woolson's stay, and Twain's lecture to replace #38. These are from various sources, including universities and Frommer's guide. (I moved them to the end of the paragraph as there were so many). Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 20:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
• Support well-written and well-referenced. AW 04:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.