Talk:Redwood National and State Parks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star Redwood National and State Parks is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 17, 2008.
This article is part of WikiProject Protected Areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected areas worldwide. It may include the protected area infobox.
WikiProject California This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Peer review This Geography article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Former featured topic candidate Redwood National and State Parks is part of the National Park Service series, a former featured topic candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the topic for featured topic status.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a group related to the the study of World Heritage Sites. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] bring to featured article level

The tallest trees on earth need a better article. I hope others will assist me in my attempts to get this article to featured article level.--MONGO 09:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I had a look. Feel free to revert or remove any or all of my changes. I think it reads better now though, and without losing any information. Hope you agree. --Guinnog 09:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
That's fine...I need all the help I can get.--MONGO 09:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Cheers. I think it is looking better all the time. Also check out Save-the-Redwoods League, which I'm sure you can add to. I started it to fix a redlink on this article. Fascinating stuff. --Guinnog 10:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that....I was going to do it...I kept telling myself...but just kept putting it off.--MONGO 10:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Know what you mean. Here's another one to check; I don't have much knowledge of the terminology of US politics, so may have made mistakes in my creation of John E. Raker which eliminates another redlink. Please check when you can. Thanks.
Looks fine to me..I've only done one bio stub myself...so I thank you for this one.--MONGO 14:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. Final redlink eliminated with creation of Franciscan Assemblage. Now I am going to kick back and watch the World Cup with a beer! Best, --Guinnog 14:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

That's a lot quicker than I work..I must be getting old. Thanks for all the help.--MONGO 14:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
It really has been a pleasure to help on such an interesting and informative article on one of my favourite places. I would have uploaded some of my photos of the area, but the ones there are very good already. --Guinnog 14:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From my talk page:the History section

Thanks - I was fixing it as you were, so we had a copyedit. I'm going to try a slightly different approach.Sam 16:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

A couple tweaks made and a paragraph split out - see what you think. Sam 16:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't see the point of breaking out the gold rush into its own paragraph. It's too short, for one thing. More importantly, the logic of having the gold rush narrated in both the first and the second paragraphs was surely that it needed mentioning in the contexts of its impact on both the native peoples (=the first paragraph) and on the redwoods (=the second paragraph). If anything, I would rather integrate what are now all three first paragraphs, so as only to describe the gold rush once, than break it up like that, I'm afraid. Frutti di Mare 16:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC).
Yes, Gold Rush should be altogether, that would help it quite a bit! The two sentences now in the second paragraph do need to be fleshed out, but I found the "traditional Indian life" and "Decimation of Native Americans" to be two different concepts that did not read well together. I don't see the third paragraph as focused on impact on the Redwoods, since it includes fur trading, but I would see all of it improved by moving to a true chronology instead of jumping back and forth. Thanks. Sam 17:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
It's chronological now. Check it out, please. Frutti di Mare 17:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC).
Well, not quite, but I suppose it's only from 1850 on that there is any research into the state of the native peoples, so it can't be helped that that gets some mention ahead of time. Perhaps there could be less of it, though. Frutti di Mare 17:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC).
I think that reads better. I don't think a perfect chronology is needed, and in historical articles I've argued against them, but I think the general chronology here helps lead the reader through a pretty packed section.
I would break out as a separate paragraph the thought the last two sentences, that start moving on to the deforestation/preservation discussion, but I think I like short paragraphs more than others. "Is known to have thoroughly investigated" has also been nagging at me, but I don't have a better suggestion right now. Sam 17:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] International Biosphere designation

Anybody have a source? This, linked from UNESCO Biosphere website seems to raise questions as to whether RNSP is actually in the biosphere. Niteowlneils 02:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking this over...the U.S. Government website states that the park is a biosphere reserve...bottom of their page:[1], but I believe that the biosphere reserve is for the northern California coast ranges...and area that includes the park.--MONGO 02:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
The map[2] has two dots that both go to the coast ranges...the lower one appears more to be related to Redwoods...maybe their website is area specific rather than site specific...--MONGO 02:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I've been poking around more, and it seems like there must be at a minimum, overlap. Sure wish I could find a map showing the actual boundaries of the Biosphere--all I can find are ones with a dot at the middle/research station/hq/whatever. EG At least one of the Lat/Long combinations here lands pretty close to the parks (the seconds are guessed, so I wouldn't expect a perfect hit). Niteowlneils 03:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I trust the federal website. I think the biospheres are more like "zones", I don't know why both of those dots go to Coast Ranges...the one definitely looks like it intends to go to Redwoods...they have Corum, Montana seperately linked as a Biosphere reserve, so I find it no surprise that they would feel the tallest trees on Earth and the rare surrounding ecosystem would also be worthy. Thanks for asking as I want all the information in this article to be accurate.--MONGO 03:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
On the page for the Coast ranges[3], it states that the webpage hasn't been updated since 4/23/2002, and I saw another [4] that states that the page was last updated in 1992! I think they need a new webmaster.--MONGO 03:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Filmed" = director?

George Lucas "filmed" the Endor scenes for Return of the Jedi...

"Filming" the scenes implies that he was the director of the movie. He was not - Richard Marquand was. Lucas was the cowriter and executive producer of RotJ. If he did some uncredited second unit shooting then I guess the statement would be true, although there was obviously more than just second unit stuff filmed for the Endor scenes and that statement leaves out Marquand and the regular crew. Perhaps it needs to be changed to something along the lines of "Scenes from Return of the Jedi were filmed..." without giving a specific individual's name.—Preceding unsigned comment added by LwsP729 (talk • contribs)

Will take care of it.--MONGO 13:14, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TFA? How about Arbor Day next week?

I have nominated this FA to become TFA on MainPage on U.S. Arbor Day next Friday, April 25th. Please see User talk:Raul654#TFA ideas for April 21st, 25th & 29th. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 01:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Mentioned on your page about the option of "Sequoia" instead, the genus name of the coast redwood, since it's not USA specific.ThreeWikiteers (talk) 06:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture complaints

Two points to make:

a) How come there are two pictures of the trees in the fog (sections 'flora' and 'fire management')? They both basically show the same thing and basically have the same caption except.... b) the second has the worst caption I've ever read: "Fog is persistent during the summer, as seen here, and the majority of fires are during the fall." A good picture of a controlled burn would add to the 'fire management' section and would fix the double-fog-picture-problem.

Any thoughts? I was surprised to find problems like this (especially the terrible caption) on a featured article...

P.S. also I think it'd be cool to have a picture like this http://www.image-archeology.com/Chandelier_Tree_Giant_Redwood_PC_002.jpg to show the relative size of the trees. M.nelson (talk) 02:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pacific Ocean coast?

Hello, in the current revision (as of this writing), the first sentence says:

The Redwood National and State Parks (RNSP) are located in the United States, along the Pacific Ocean coast of northern California.

Isn't this redundant? California doesn't border any other bodies of water. Why not "[[Pacific Ocean|Pacific]] coast" (which would still be a bit redundant but would help people who are unfamiliar with the state) or "[[Pacific Ocean|coast]]" (which is less redundant but also potentially more confusing)? Other ideas would be welcome. --Kyoko 15:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll just get rid of it. Brutannica (talk) 00:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Avenue of the Giants

No mention of Avenue of the Giants, in the middle of the Redwoods of Humboldt County. Plus, please refrain from tree-hugging, which this article drips of tree resin. Happy highways, everyone, thanks for putting it up on the front page. Off to gold panning American River, kudos :) Kidshare (talk) 22:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)