Talk:Dry Tortugas National Park

Should this article be merged with Dry Tortugas?
Seems like they should be merged. But which one should go, and which should stay? -  Marc Averette 22:32, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that the two articles should be merged. One treats a national park, which is (in effect) the product of government and environmental policy on the part of a specific country, the United States. The other treats a geographical and natural feature, the islands themselves.

Even though the Dry Tortugas are a relatively minor geographic feature, I do think it's important to recognize them on their own terms. On the other hand, especially for an American audience, it is very important to promote the National Parks system as a means of ecological preservation and as an educational "device." Moreover, the park itself contains important historical features, such as the fort, which have little to do with the islands' scientific aspects.

Obviously the two topics are closely related and complement each other; but I'd be uncomfortable if they were merged - just as I would if (by way of example) the standalone article on Lake Baikal were to be reincorporated into "National Parks of Russia", or some such. Pufferfyshe (talk) 10:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe the articles should be merged. One article refers to a geographic feature (essentially the end of the Florida Keys), and the other describes the national park that resides there. I think it makes sense to keep them separate. 24.174.107.143 (talk) 05:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * OpposeFor the same reasons as above, these are two distinctly different subjects, its like saying-"we should merge the Death Valley article with the Death Valley National Monument (now a Park) article. When can we de-tag this article or, when is a consensus reached?

Marcia Wright (talk) 04:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Marcia Wright. Also the park includes the waters around the islands. Or would you merge Manhattan into New York City? --Matthiasb (talk) 18:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose per JB. As per above comments. However, there is a great deal of overlap between the Fort Jefferson article and this one. Perhaps the FJ content here could be summarized and a link made to that separate article? -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.65.34.246 (talk) 20:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Update-Dec 5, 2008 -I have gone ahead and removed the merge tags from both articles. Marcia Wright (talk) 02:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Reverse osmosis
Deleted this reference from discussion of the building construction. This process may be used in the park I don't know (reference?) but in any regard it wasn't used when soldiers were garrisoned here. Its large scale experimental test was in California in 1965. Perhaps someone could find a source for its present use and incorporate the statement back into discussion of the modern park? RegardsTrilobitealive (talk) 21:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

=images=

The appeal of the article could be enhanced by adding images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verbal.noun (talk • contribs) 13:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dry Tortugas National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150306020554/http://www.nps.gov/drto/planyourvisit/upload/Dry%20Tortugas%20National%20Park%20Bird%20Checklist.pdf to http://www.nps.gov/drto/planyourvisit/upload/Dry%20Tortugas%20National%20Park%20Bird%20Checklist.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:06, 14 September 2017 (UTC)