Talk:Mount Leona Fire

Before going live
as the most recent contributors to the List of Washington wildfires or specific articles, I'm hoping you'll give this draft a look. Its my first attempt at a wildfire article and I want to make sure Im not missing anything I should be covering.-- Kev min  § 15:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It looks ready to me; I just made a couple of minor adjustments a minute ago. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why you asked me, I am hardly an expert :-) Although I agree, the draft is already ready for mainspace, I went ahead and made quite a few copyedits and tweaks (which you are of course entirely free to reject). Some of them are toward US usage, such as using "that" not "which" for restrictives. Some are MOS, like putting refs after punctuation and not using "th" in dates, and I think my added hypens are MOS too. As you will see, I flipped a few things and tried to clarify some things, including adding that the Forest Service did finally sell salvage rights, which I didn't see actually stated in the text. Along those lines, there's an estimated area burned in the infobox; is that in the article text? When was it declared fully contained? And more generally, the Fire and Progression sections seem to me to overlap, with the paragraph that begins "It was reported on September 1" belonging at the end of Progression not Fire; notice how the Sleepy 91 sub-fire is introduced twice? I went ahead and added the 91 in the Progression section to match the Fire section. I'm not familiar enough with fire articles to know whether there's a fixed formula, but I'd be tempted to cover almost all of those two sections under something like "Progression and firefighting" after a very brief "Fire origin" section. Less importantly, the section on salvage logging just ends; was there a second auction or not? ... As I say, take or leave. I'm sorry to have such an aggressive red pencil. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * , thank I'm always open to edits and improvements, thanks for all your improvements as well.  I've been looking at this article and the sources enough over the last couple weeks that I've gotten a bit blurry on what information i may have seen but am still missing from the draft! :-) Im still looking to see if any reports exist for the 100% containment and fully extingushed dates, but due to it happening in 2001, there are only news paper reports and no incident response paper trails on line, unlike modern fires with daily tracked webpages from management teams.  I suspect we may only be able to say it was contained in September 2001. I think only one salvage sale happened, based on the testimony from Vaagen in 2005.-- Kev  min  § 18:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)