User:1013-Marty/archive

My Project
I have decided to write my wikipedia article on Itasca State Park. There is currently a stub for it, but I feel that more information is needed for one of Minnesota's more notable state parks. The significance of Lake Itasca, and the start of the mighty Mississippi requires a longer entry in wikipedia than the current stub. Through the University's online catalog I was able to find numerous books on campus that would allow for access to large amounts of information on Itasca State Park.

Related subject formats: Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite National Park, Glacier National Park, Fort Snelling State Park, Voyageurs National Park

Related subject links: Glaciers, Bison, Burial mounds, Native americans, Jacob V. Brower


 * Thoughts from Josh. Marty, this sounds like a good project, and I'm pleased to hear that you've done an initial search of the library's online catalog to see that there will be enough information for you. This stub is already a little longer than 200 words, so I will expect your final article to come in toward the middle or higher end of the 1500-2000 word range. I see that four out of five of the models you've found are national parks, which presumably have more written about them than state parks. Have you found other strong state park articles that you can use as models? If you have any questions about your project proposal, write me a note here, and write "QUESTION FOR JOSH" in the edit summary box when you hit the "save page" button. I'll stop by later to answer. 1013-josh 20:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Workshop: Itasca State Park
Workshop Guidelines

Thanks for the expansion to the Itasca State park article, I modified the initial sentence to define the subject. Tell me when you are done expanding the article and I'll do some copy editing. Right now the 1st thing I can see is that the article needs more wikilinks. If you have any Qs leave a note on my talk page. -Ravedave 18:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Itasca State Park, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know where you can improve it if you see fit. 1013-josh 22:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this article is coming along quite well. I recognize you have a special challenge working on a cross-group collaboration, but I'm interested to see what you will make of it. So far I'm pleased to see that it's caused you to include information that most people probably wouldn't think to put in a state park article but that is nevertheless relevant, such as the information about climate. It also forces you to be very detailed. I think your flora/fauna section is really a model for what state park articles should strive to do in terms of documenting the biological life. I think the history section could be expanded. As this was the first Minnesota state park, the debate surrounding its creation would be interesting, and you might do more research in that area. Brower is a fascinating figure in Minnesota's history, and the creation of Itasca State Park was really a milestone in the state's history. At that time, very few governments were setting aside land for conservation. If you can help tell that story to the reader, I think it would be an engaging entry into the article. One section that seems missing to me is a section on the headwaters themselves. I'm assuming this information is covered elsewhere, at Lake Itasca for example, but as the park was founded largely to protect the headwaters, it might be interesting to hear a little more about them here. I think it may also be useful to include a section on park facilities and current uses that gives a sense of itslayout and management. You could revise the "Recreation" section to include this. The article needs a rewrite to bring it in line with Wikipedia's policy on Neutral Point of View. Many sections seem more like promotional copy for the park than an encyclopedia article. Sometimes this is obvious, i.e. "ATVing, and more!" Other times it's more subtle, as in "An estimated 500,000 visitors experience what Itasca State Park has to offer annually." That's a fair statement, and it's relatively neutral, but still the language "what Itasca State Park has to offer" has an undercurrent of sales pitch to it. You should strive for a more formal encyclopedia tone. As you go about your final revisions, you may find that the websites you have don't really provide enough information, and it may prove useful to look at THEIR bibliographies and follow the flow of information closer to the original source. Finally, the article could use a heavy dose of wikilinking. You may want to contact the folks at WikiProject Minnesota for more feedback. 1013-josh 08:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You're on the Main Page!

Hi Marty & Lisa, your article was featured on the Main Page of Wikipedia in the "Did You Know?" fact box for 6+ hours this morning. You may have had some strangers stopping by your article as a result, so check the page history. 1013-josh 17:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, your introduction paragraph has a lot of good information but it seems a little disorderly, it seems like just a string of unconnected sentences about the park. I thought that the history section was informative and well done. It seems to do a good job of covering the history of the park. I also thought that the flora section was a good source of information. You should probably list all fourteen of the endangered plant species if possible. The fauna section is also good in my opinion and similar to the flora section, I think you should list the six rare animal species. Your climate section is well organized and informative. It didn't leave me with any questions about the climate in the park. Same deal with your recreation section. I thought it was informative and complete. Overall the article was very informative. One thing that I noticed is that a lot of words are repeatedly linked to other wikipedia articles. From what I've seen, articles generally only link the first occurrence of the word.1013-Brendan 18:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Marty and Lisa, I really like the entire article you two have written. It contains many great details about the park from landscape to history. I also think that the inclusion of climate was an interesting idea. I also like the recreation section but agree with Josh with the NPOV issue. I think you should keep that section but work on changing it to fit the policy. I thought the biology and ecology section was very well developed. I also liked the first two paragraphs (intro and landscape sections). Your footnotes aren't formatted the correct way. You have them as "works cited" and not as "footnotes." I also noticed there are a few red wikilinks that need to be fixed or don't exist and need to be taken out. Overall, I feel that you two have a great start. Everything in the article flows and works together. Good work! 1013-Jeff 21:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Marty and Lisa, The two of you have done a really good job of incorporating both of your ideas and research into one article. It really flows well. The research of the history, types of wildlife, and recreation is thoroughly laid out. If someone was actually checking out Itasca State Park to visit, he or she could have a pretty good idea of what to expect as far as what to do, see, and the weather. That's definitely notable. I corrected some inconsistent grammar, mostly comma placement. Some areas still need to be cited. The history section especially needs some more citation. Another thing is that most of the lists start with "include". You may want to extend that vocabulary. One option for some revising is that you could rearrange some topics. It may not be a big deal, but my first impression when reading was that the history section should come before the landscape section. That was the only thing that really jumped out to me. I am going through some other articles for your topic, but won't have any information for you until tomorrow. I know my part is supposed to be finished, but I don't mind helping! You have a great start! Good topic! 1013-shae 03:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey Marty, Your article looks great! There is a ton of information on your page, but it doesn't seem like you were just adding things to make the word requirement. All in the information is important. In the history section, I was confused when you brought up the Douglas Lodge. It seemed out of place, especially because I didn't know what it was. Although, at the end of you article in the Park Facilities section you explain what the Douglas Lodge is. I'm not sure if it is necessary to mention it in the history section. But other than that I think you article looks great!! You guys did a good job. Good luck with your final project. 1013-whittney 17:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lisa and Marty, Wow! you're article is really good! You both have a great amount of information on Itasca State Park. The quality of your information is phenomenal in its description of the park, its location, and other helpful information for those who know nothing of it. The flow of your paper is really good, however, in some sentences it would be helpful if you have citations ( I hate them I still have none on mine) but I know that is a big factor when writing on here so just list some citations for really specific sentences. Other than that you have a great start to your paper and good luck on the finished one! 1013-rey 18:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Participation: Marty
I added comments on each person's paper in their workshop section. I also added wikilinks to Whittney's and Jeff's articles.1013-Marty 20:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I moved parts of Whittney's introductory paragraph under a new heading of history where it fits better. 1013-Marty 20:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I moved the other facts section of Jeff's paper into the main body. 1013-Marty 20:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Homework
Homework is done. 1013-Marty 18:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am done with homework2 editing King Kong. I added a few sentences in the plot describing Kong's capture. 1013-Marty 03:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good work. I like your fancy King Kong link, using the tips we learned in class. Remember to add a comment to the edit summary box to make it easier for other users to follow your changes. You may want to add the film page to your watchlist so you can see what becomes of your changes. As you can see here you've been already reversed by another Wikipedia editor who found your addition "extraneous." Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? That's Wikipedia for you! As Mayor Edward Koch says in Style Wars, "Time will tell." 1013-josh 06:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I consent to continuing with Itasca State Park as my research project on Wikipedia. 1013-Marty 16:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, great! Let me know at any time if you change your mind and would like to switch to an off-line research assignment. 1013-josh 18:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

My starting draft for my paper is complete. 1013-Marty 06:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good work. Good luck with this joint project with Lisa. I'll expect 1500+ words from you two on Friday, and a final draft of 2500-3000 words. Let me know how it's going. 1013-josh 19:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm done with the homework for friday. 1013-Marty 05:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good work. I think you're ready to transfer over to the mainspace. I prepped your draft for the move -- combining the two sections and adding images and categories from the stub article -- and I'll help you copy it over in class. 1013-josh 15:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Josh, I believe we are done with our final project. 1013-Marty 14:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Notes from Josh & the Class
Hey Marty, good topic. I've been to Itasca State Park and it's awesome. One of my favorites. Anyway, yeah, just wanted to write on your discussion page just for the heck of it. Good luck with the rest of your project! 1013-andy 05:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I just posted some helpful research links; don't miss them! 1013-josh 21:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Marty, I signed my homework section this morning at 8:40 telling Josh that we are finished with final revisions after I did one last round of minor corrections. I think we made a great team and the paper went very well. Thanks for letting me share the topic!1013-Lisa 13:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Notes from Wikipedians
Wikipedians, if you're commenting specifically about the Itasca State Park article, feel free to chime in in the "Workshop" section above.

Welcome!
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Geniac 13:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style