Talk:George Washington and Jefferson National Forests

Untitled
I was unable to locate the creation date of this forest.--MONGO 09:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on George Washington and Jefferson National Forests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120127093301/http://www.ccclegacy.org:80/camp_roosevelt_history.htm to http://www.ccclegacy.org/camp_roosevelt_history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Why is this a single article?
Why are two national forests, each with its own details, covered by one article? I'm not seeing why this makes more sense than Brooklyn and Queens or Navajo Nation and Hopi Reservation or Laos and Cambodia. Largoplazo (talk) 11:54, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * probably because they are now administered as a single entity.--WilderAddict (talk) 13:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see: https://www.fs.usda.gov/main/gwj/about-forest. The subject of the article is not so much the forests as the single entity now comprising the two of themthe name of which continues to characterize them as forestS, hence my confusion. Thanks. Largoplazo (talk) 15:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I've made an edit in the lead that I believe will add clarity and precision. Even if they're being administered together, though, it seems to me that the two forests ought to have their own articles, as does any large forest, and most of the content in this article is already segregated into material covering one or the other. It would make sense to push all that content into freestanding articles and then let this article link to them while retaining all the content that applies to the administrative unit as a whole. I'm considering drafting the new articles and a reduced version of this one. Largoplazo (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The forest service conducts separate reviews for the two forests, so separating the two forests would make some sense. Combining the two forests under one supervisor was probably a result of reducing administrative expenses.--WilderAddict (talk) 20:48, 14 December 2020 (UTC)