Talk:Plum Island (Massachusetts)

Problem links

 * Friends of the Parker National Wildlife Refuge
 * Plum Island
 * Plum Island website
 * Friends of Plum Island Light
 * Joppa Flats Education Center & Wildlife Sanctuary

I took these out. This was a difficult decision to make, because the organizations they represent are all non-profit. However, I reasoned thusly. Note that the two sites I left in are not the same at all; one is a scholarly reference and the other is a mass.gov site. First, these sites are organizational sites. They do not talk or talk minimally about the island itself and its features. For example, you do not read about the birds of Plum Island on the Joppa Flats site, you do not read about the lighthouse at the lighthouse site, etc. These sites describe an organization and its activities. Second and more importantly they all ask for money either as a donation or by purchasing items the organization has for sale. This article is not an advertisment for organizations with something to sell, no matter if non-profit and no matter how worthwhile the item. These sites are sociological in nature. WP is or tries to be informational. If you looked up under United States Army in any other encyclopedia you would not expect to find there recruiting material for the army. I'm sorry, you would not. Similarly the reader with an interest in Plum Island would not find in any other encyclopedia advertisments to buy books or take tours or requests for contributions. It is true, WP requests contributions. As far as I know, it does not allow the requests of others.The term "commerce" includes any exchange for money. As altruistic as they may be, they are commercial sites in the sense of soliciting money in exchange for goods and services. If you have any arguments here is the place to voice them.Dave (talk) 03:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Great Marsh rewrite
Someone undertook to rewrite this paragraph adding some links as notes. I don't mean to rain on your parade but from the point of view of an experienced editor there are several things wrong with it. Great Marsh is the marsh, not the barrier islands. The marsh is the grasslands with the creeks. I believe I had it there as a subsection under ecology. Thus ecology contains all those subsections improperly placed under Marsh. Second, the links are not encyclopedic and do not cover the topic. The only one that might have been relevant is dead now. The others are simply brochure material - visit Crane's Beach, only ten dollars type of thing. In the first place, Crane's Beach is not part of Plum Island. I get the point that Great Marsh extends south to Annisquam. We did not define Great Marsh nor is there an article on it. It is worth mentioning so I will leave that statement. By the way WP frowns on raw URL's. They like "cite web" or the equivalent. I would fix it for you but the refs are not encyclopedic. However I would argue that this short paragraph is general geographic knowledge and does not need a ref. The reader has a map with the article - click on the coordinates - and the map makes everything clear. It is only a matter of stating that Great Marsh goes south to Annisquam. However, it does not do that continuously. Plum Island Sound ends at the Ipswich. South of there are other estuaries and pockets of marsh. Speaking of a single estuary is wrong. There is none. So, I'm going to fix these things. If you really need a ref defining Great Marsh I am sure we can find one easily. Ideally it should be in a separate article. Also Crane's Beach should be separate, and also Castle Hill, unless it be included in ye old Crane's Beach.Branigan 15:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Number
The number of permanent residents of Plum Island should be given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.162.31 (talk) 12:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems to be about 1,000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.162.31 (talk) 12:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

nothing about the plans to sell the island?
I just saw on the Commie Courant that US Senator Blumenthal is against selling the island for commercial interests but there is nothing here about it. Why not? --24.177.6.38 (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This fly-by comment by a non-member seems totally off the wall. Why should there be anything about it? I never heard of it. I think maybe you like to shock people. That's a double-pointed sword.Botteville (talk) 13:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC)