Talk:Saguaro National Park/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Knope7 (talk · contribs) 16:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

I'll review this article. My first impression of this article is that it is nicely organized. I like to be thorough which can take a little time but I do not anticipate major issues with this article. Knope7 (talk) 16:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Knope7. I'm slow to respond partly because I was traveling during part of July and had limited Internet access. I'm back now and working through your suggestions one by one. Finetooth (talk) 17:34, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I think I've responded to all of your suggestions thus far. Happy to consider any others you might have. Finetooth (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Looks like all of my previous comments have been addressed. I previously left off mid way through the article. My remaining comments are related to the Recreation section.
 * I recommend adding "as of 2017" for the hours the park is open. I think scheduling is something that could change at any time and putting a time frame is helpful to orient the reader.
 * I would also recommend eliminating the second to last paragraph about the ranger guided parks. The source cited for the first sentence appears to have been updated. I suspect ranger programs are subject to change periodically. I don't think the article really needs that detail. Maybe instead something about ranger programs generally being offered without mentioning a specific program. You might even be able to use an outside source for that, if you would like to go that route. I do think that the section is informative enough and can stand as is with that paragraph removed.

That's all I see. Sorry for the delay. With the final tweaks to recreation, the article should be good to go. Knope7 (talk) 04:01, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I took your advice on both issues: added 2017 and deleted the second-to-last paragraph. Finetooth (talk) 15:32, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Everything looks ready to go, . Great work! This article is thorough and well written. If looking for a place to improve this article in the future, I would recommend moving away from having so many sources published by the National Park Service. Based on my review of the sources, I think the sources are sufficient for this state. This article is very carefully sourced and accurate. I was also very impressed by the images. Overall a really nice article and I am happy to pass it. Knope7 (talk) 03:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words and for your good advice. Finetooth (talk) 04:24, 29 August 2017 (UTC)