Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Colton Point State Park


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:26, 11 October 2008.

Colton Point State Park

 * Nominator(s): Dincher and Ruhrfisch

We are nominating this article for featured article because we believe that is represents some of the best work that wikipedia has to offer regarding state parks. It follows three FAs as models (Black Moshannon State Park, Worlds End State Park, and Leonard Harrison State Park - its sister park) and has undergone an extensive peer review (thanks to Juliancolton and Finetooth). We also want to thank Pat for information on Henry Colton, and all reviewers here for their input. Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC) Comments - sources look good, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * What are you doing here? Get back to peer review! :P Anyhow, images all meet criteria. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 03:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking the images - I will work on some peer reviews next (I take this an actionable request) Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm being sarcastic :P god knows you've done enough PR's for twenty wiki-lifetimes... :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 15:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I knew - just forgot the emoticon ;-) to show it (and I had neglected PR a bit to get this ready too) Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks as always for your reference check and all of your work at FAC and PR Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - As ususal, an excellent article on an interesting subject.--Jackyd101 (talk) 16:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your kind words and support Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support. Dincher (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Sources look good. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  17:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much (and for your peer review)! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Questions: I do apologise to the nominators, but I need a bit of help! What does "situated on the west rim of the Pine Creek Gorge" actually mean? Does it mean within the gorge on its western side, or outside the western boundary of the gorge? I know the map ought to tell me this, but the map doesn't show the limits of the gorge, only the creek. Also the words "Colton Point State Park" are squeezed into a small corner of the pale area of the map, but that can't be he whole area of the park. I'm sorry to trouble you, but can one of you help a poor befuddled Brit lost in the depths of rural Pennsylvania? Brianboulton (talk) 17:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The park is on the slopes and at the top of the gorge. Will look at the map next. Dincher (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Colton Point State Park is the cream colored area on the west side of Pine Creek. Dincher (talk) 17:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Sorry for the confusion and thanks for pointing this out. Colton Point State Park is the ivory colored region west of the creek in the map in the article. The ivory area to the east of the creek is the neighboring Leonard Harrison State Park. On the same map, brown is private land and green is state forest. For a map with topographic contours (sadly beyond my capabilities as a mapmaker), see the official park map here, which is listed as the first "See also". It also shows both parks together.
 * As for geography, the park extends from the creek in the bottom of the gorge up to the rim and part of the plateau to the west. The park's man-made facilities (picnic shelters, overlooks, latrines, etc.) are almost all on the plateau above the gorge - the overlooks on the map are on the rim itself and the picnic pavilions are all very close to the rim. Only the Turkey Path trail descends into the gorge itself. The word "situated" was added in Peer review - it used to just read "is on the west rim of the Pine Creek Gorge". Referring to the parks as being on the west or east rims of the gorge is pretty common in the literature. Any suggestions on making this clearer are greatly appreciated, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 17:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm beginning to get the picture, although I daren't use the official park map link you suggest, as my computer goes into meltdown for some reason whenever I try to take it into PDF. Before I settle down and read the whole article, I wonder if there isn't just a bit too much general information about Pine Creek Gorge in the first section, especially the last paragraph which isn't about Colton Point State Park at all? The adjoining map is fine, but the text refers to many locations which aren't on the map, and the map refers to places not mentioned in the text. Hence my geographical confusion. A bit less information on the gorge, and a bit more on the location of the park within the gorge, would in my view help. But I'll get on with the rest of the article now. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The park is within several overlapping layers of protected areas. The oldest is its status as a state park, then it became part of a National Natural Landmark, then a State Natural Area and then the State Scenic River. Scenic River status also protects much of the walls of gorge within the park: quoting Owlett (p. 80), "Under the state system, the width of the protective corridor only encompassed the land visible from the opposite shoreline, instead of protection from ridge to ridge. [as the federal system would have done]. The problem is how to make this clearer without greatly expanding the section. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I tweaked the first sentence of the Scenic River paragraph to read Within the park, Pine Creek and the walls of the gorge "visible from the opposite shoreline"[11] are also protected by the state as a Pennsylvania Scenic River.[12] to make it (hopefully) clearer. Is this better? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment: Would this work to make the park boundary more clear? "It is on the west side of the Pine Creek Gorge, also known as the Grand Canyon of Pennsylvania, which is 800 feet (244 m) deep and nearly 4,000 feet (1,219 m) across at this location. The park extends from the creek in the bottom of the gorge up to the rim and across part of the plateau to the west." Finetooth (talk) 21:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply Thanks to both of you - I have made the chaqnge Finetooth suggested in the first paragraph of the lead, and also tweaked the park map caption to hopefully make that clearer. As for the emphasis on the Pine Creek Gorge, that is the main reason for the park's existence and the main reason people come to the park. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Support: My previous confusions have been largely allayed by some thoughtful rearrangement of the content. I still have a few issues, but not of sufficient importance for me to withhold support from what is a thoroughly researched and beautifully presented article. The large panorama was a joy to behold - I wish I was there. Anyhow, a few inevitable quibbles:-
 * Bearing in mind the title of the article, the first three subsections of the History section are really the park's prehistory. That's OK, but I found the "lumber" section in particular rather long, and wonder if that much detail is really necessary in the park article. It's quite a long time after the lead before we meet the park again.
 * I will work on trimming it a bit - I am always amazed at the ecological holocaust the Gorge has recovered from and we may have given a bit too much detail to show what was lost. A similar comment came up at Peer review, so time to get out the chainsaw, as it were. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I trimmed a bit and moved three sentences on spars to a note. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:21, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Couple of tiny points in the lead: "...who cut the timber..." Is "the" necessary? And there is a slight ambiguity in the sentence "The CCC built the facilities at Colton Park before and shortly after its opening", in that "its" could be thought to apply to the CCC. The sentence could be amended to read "before and shortly after the park's opening".
 * Edited per your suggestions. Dincher (talk) 01:07, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * History (Modern era): This reader would be interested to know why the start date for work on the park is so vague - "either in 1933, or in June 1935". Why the lack of precision - it's not that long ago. Some people alive today might even remember!
 * My educated guess there is that work began in 1935. Considering the sources. The PADCNR work is largely PR and the work of the Millner fella would be more precise. It's his job to be precise DCNR wants to tell a good story. Many of their articles about PA state parks that were constructed by the CCC give 1933 as the starting date. Dincher (talk) 01:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, two reliable sources give two different dates. I agree on the 1935 date as being much more likely - I also read that the CCC (which began nationwide in 1933) worked on improving Leonard Harrison first, then worked on building Colton Point, which seems more consistent with 1935. Would it make sense to just use the 1935 date? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think so; nothing really gained by having the two dates, unless you want to say: "...in 1935 (1933 according to some sources)", but pesrsonally I'd just give more likely date. Brianboulton (talk) 09:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1935 it is. Dincher (talk) 10:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on a monumental article. Brianboulton (talk) 23:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Finally, its probably that Brit thing again, but "concession stand" doesn't indicate to me what was operated by the CCC up to 1953. I assume they sold things, but a few more words of explanation would clarify.
 * They sold food and drink and souvenirs / trinkets - I will add a phrase next. Thanks, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the wonderful comments, support and good advice. I will leave the other two comments for Ruhr to ponder and answer. Dincher (talk) 01:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks too for your kind words and support and help. It is a wonderful park and I am glad the article does it some justice, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Support as of this version Comments on this version &mdash; Jappalang
 * Thanks for the support and the thorough review, suggestions, etc. Dincher (talk) 02:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Lead
 * "Colton Point State Park is a 368-acre Pennsylvania state park in Tioga County, Pennsylvania, in the United States."
 * I would be surprised if a Pennsylvania state park is not in Pennsylvania... Perhaps, "Colton Point State Park is a 368-acre state-protected park in Tioga County, Pennsylvania, in the United States."  The link to the "List of Pennsylvania state parks" does not seem necessary in light of the navbox and infobox.
 * There are 120 Pennsylvania State Parks articles, four of which are FAs, all of which start with a version of this sentence. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, although I would not be convinced by an "other articles do this too" argument, establishing a consistency for a topic (Pennsylvania State Parks) is convincing. Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "and have led to the entire park being listed as a historic district"
 * Noun plus -ing correction attempt: "and have led to the park's listing as a historic district"
 * done, thanks

Native Americans
 * "including one just north of the park near what is now the village of Ansonia."
 * Could "is now" be rephrased? The language would not be precise if Ansonia was merged into another town five–twenty years from now.
 * While I understand your point, I do not see this happening. Ansonia is an unincorporated village and does not have a sepearate legal or political existence. As such it has been there over 100 years. If you insist, we will change it to "as of 2008" or some such wording (eeek! a word ending in "ing" (and another one) ;-) Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Do not fret, it is but a suggestion (the whole precise language issue is still debated on, so I would hardly call this a "must-act" when considering settlements. Fads and other more temporal stuff, however...).  Anyway, if you do wish to change (and avoid "as of"), would "near what would later be the village of Ansonia" be acceptable?  If not, I am willing to ignore this.  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That works for me - thanks and hope I did not come across as grouchy - I really appreciate all of your careful work and suggestions on this FAC, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Native Americans almost entirely left Pennsylvania, although some isolated bands of Natives remained" (contradiction: regardless, even though)
 * Suggestion: "Native Americans almost entirely left Pennsylvania; however, some isolated bands of Natives remained" (contradiction: nevertheless)
 * done, thanks

Lumber era
 * "The first lumbering activity to take place close to what is now Leonard Harrison State Park occurred in 1838"
 * It sounds a bit funny... as in "The first lumbering activity occurred in 1838", treating the activity as a natural phenomenan than a man-made activity... Suggestion: "The first lumbering activity close to what is now Leonard Harrison Park was in 1838 when [...]"
 * done, and changed it to Colton Point, thanks


 * "the General Assembly passed a law allowing splash dam construction and clearing of creeks to allow loose logs to float better."
 * Noun plus -ing correction attempt: "the General Assembly passed a law which allowed construction of splash dams and clearing of creeks to allow loose logs to float better."
 * changed to " the General Assembly passed a law which allowed construction of splash dams and creeks to be cleared to allow loose logs to float better" to get rid of both -ing forms, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "In 1879 Henry Colton, who worked for the Williamsport Lumber Company, supervised the cutting of white pine on the land that became the park, which was then owned by Silas Billings."
 * Suggestion: "In 1879 Henry Colton, who worked for the Williamsport Lumber Company, supervised the cutting of white pine on the land owned by Silas Billings; this land would later become the park."
 * done, thanks


 * "When that burned in 1905"
 * The subject (lumber) never switched to the mill, I believe... hence, it could have been misread as "when that lumber on fourmile run burned in 1905". Suggestion: "When that mill burned in 1905"
 * thanks for the good catch, done


 * "which became a fire hazard, so much of the land burned and was left barren."
 * Could it be rephrased as "which became a fire hazard. As a result, much of the land burned and was left barren."  Instead of reading it as "so, much of the land" (conjunction&mdash;therefore, much of the land), I read it as "so much of the land" (exaggeration&mdash;Very much of the land); hence, my short span of confusion here when I consider the comma that separated the clauses.
 * done, thanks


 * "Disastrous floods swept the area periodically and much of the wildlife was wiped out."
 * Perhaps "disastrous" can be dropped? Floods could be beneficial, and in this case, the reader can judge the effects of the floods (the eradication of wildlife ) for themselves.
 * One of the floods of the era was the Johnstown Flood that killed over 2000, but I can see how disastrous might seem POV, so it is dropped, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Conservation
 * "one of the first to criticize Pennsylvania lumbering and its destruction of forests and creeks."
 * Suggestion: "one of the first to criticize the Pennsylvania lumber industry and its destruction of forests and creeks."


 * "almost all of the virgin forests"
 * For a more formal tone, how about "almost all the virgin forests"?


 * "after a 6-mile buggy ride, he then had to hike 7 miles"
 * Drop the "then"; the sentence already started with "after".


 * "At least he reached 'The Point',
 * "At least" (implying he could have gone further&mdash;which did not get elaborated&mdash;but did not) or "at last" (end of his journey)?
 * All done, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Modern era
 * "The CCC was founded by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression, and created jobs for unemployed industrial workers of Williamsport, Jersey Shore and Wellsboro."
 * I am not too sure, but I think it is a violation of parallel structure to adopt an active for the first clause then a passive for the second. How about "The CCC, founded by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression, created jobs for unemployed industrial workers of Williamsport, Jersey Shore and Wellsboro."?
 * sounds good, thanks (and done)


 * "The work of the CCC at Colton Point is still visible today and is one of many examples of the work of the CCC throughout northcentral Pennsylvania."
 * Consider more precise language. Their work might not be around 20, 40 years from now.  In fact, as noted later, some of their works no longer survive (what about later)?  Generally I think "now" and "today" are frowned upon.  Suggestion: "The CCC's work at Colton Point is one of the many examples of their activities throughout northcentral Pennsylvania."
 * Changed to "Much of the work of the CCC at Colton Point is still visible as of 2008, and is one of many examples ..." Is this OK? One of the unusual things about the park is how little it has changed since the CCC built it. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "In 1936, the same year the park opened, Larry Woodin of Wellsboro and other Tioga County business owners began a tourism campaign"
 * Drop "same", it seems redundant.
 * Dropped, thanks


 * "while pavilions 2 and 5 have log columns supporting a pyramidal roof."
 * Noun plus -ing correction attempt: "and pavilions 2 and 5 each has log columns that support a pyramidal roof."
 * Changed to your version, thanks


 * "The CCC also built six rustic latrines with clapboard siding and gable roofs in the park"
 * Since we are focused on the park, there is no need for "in the park", right?
 * Well the CCC as a whole built way more than 6 latrines ;-) but I see your point. Dropped "in the park", thanks


 * "Three overlooks were constructed by the CCC, as was a rectangular gable-roofed maintenance building with wane edge siding and exposed rafters made of logs."
 * Suggestion: "Additonal structures constructed by the CCC include three overlooks and a rectangular gable-roofed maintenance building with wane edge siding and exposed rafters made of logs."
 * Not sure what was wrong with the other version, but it is changed to your version, thanks


 * "Workers used locally-found, natural materials in construction that minimized interference with the natural surroundings"
 * "Workers used locally-found, natural materials in construction that blended with the natural surroundings"
 * Changed, thanks


 * "As of 2004, the park does not have telephone or electrical lines, but does use solar cells for limited electricity needs."
 * Suggestion: "As of 2004, the park does not have telephone or electrical lines, although it uses solar cells for limited electricity needs."
 * Done, thanks


 * "changes in the rail line"
 * Should it not be "changes to the rail line"?
 * It should and now it is, thanks


 * "Conrail abandoned the section of the railroad passing through the gorge on September 21, 1988."
 * Noun plus -ing correction attempt: "On September 21, 1988, Conrail abandoned the section of the railroad that passed through the gorge."
 * Attempted no more, now changed, thanks


 * "Another Times story on the West Rim Trail in 2002 cited the park as a starting point for hiking it and noted the beauty and wildlife found there."
 * Suggestion: "Another Times story in 2002 cited the park as a start point for hiking the West Rim Trail and noted the beauty and wildlife found there."
 * "Start point" sounds really odd to my ears. If you insist, we will change it, but I have not done so yet Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It is okay not to consider it; I just felt that the West Rim Trail was too far from "it". On further reading, I think "found there" could be ambiguous: the trail or the park (I presume it should be the park)...  Suggestion: "Another Times story in 2002 noted the park for its beauty and wildlife, and cited it as a starting point for hiking the West Rim Trail."  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Changed to your version, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Colton Point and Leonard Harrison were each part of the twenty-one state parks chosen by the DCNR Pennsylvania Bureau of Parks for its "Twenty Must-See Pennsylvania State Parks" list. They are the only two parks treated as one unit for the list. The DCNR describes the parks together,"
 * It seems abrupt to see the article state twenty-one state parks for a "Twenty [...] Parks" list. How about "DCNR Pennsylvania Bureau of Parks treated Colton Point and Leonard Harrison as one state park in its "Twenty Must-See Pennsylvania State Parks" list. It describes the two parks together,"?
 * No. It does not say they are one state park and gives separate links to their separate official web pages. I cannot change the fact that the DCNR is unable to count, but they did publish a list titled "20 must see parks" with 21 parks on the list. It took a lot of work to come up with this wording and I do not see your suggestion as an improvement (much as I appreciate your effort). I have replied to everything to this point, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, darn officials should take up arithmetic lessons. Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Pine Creek Gorge
 * "and added public access points to reduce abuse of private property."
 * How does the addition of public access points to a state land help to reduce abuse of private property? A bit of explanation perhaps?
 * Added by trespassers to this sentence. Dincher (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay... so the intent is for people to enter the park through the public access points instead of traipsing through private property to get to the park. Perhaps "and added public access points to reduce incidences of trespass on private property by park visitors."?
 * Not quite - the public access points are for the creek, which is a state scenic river through the whole gorge. So this applies to access to the whole length of the creek (not just the mile or so in the park), not access to the park. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh... so how about:
 * Suggestion A: "and added public access points to reduce incidences of trespass on private property by visitors to the creek."
 * Suggestion B (after thinking on how do you protect against an activity): "It refused to allow dams to be built on the creek or power plants to draw water from the stream. The state also added public access points to allow people to visit the creek without trespassing on private property."
 * Suggestion C: "No dams were allowed to be built on the creek, nor water to be drawn from it by power plants. To allow people to visit the creek without trepassing on private property, the state added public access points."  Jappalang (talk) 06:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all of the suggestions, I used A with the word "trespassing" from C, i.e. and added public access points to reduce trespassing on private property by visitors to the creek. Is this OK? Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Geology and climate
 * "gorge itself formed only about 20,000 years ago"
 * Drop the "only"; the statement started with an "although".
 * Done and thanks


 * "near the present village of Ansonia,"
 * Suggestion: "near what would later be the village of Ansonia,"
 * Done, thanks


 * "and the lake's glacial meltwater overflowed the debris dam, which caused a reversal of the flow of Pine Creek."
 * Suggestion: "and the lake's glacial meltwater overflowed the debris dam, reversing the flow of Pine Creek."
 * Clear and more concise, thanks


 * "While the gorge and its surroundings appear mountainous, these are not true mountains: instead years of erosion have made this a dissected plateau, causing the "mountainous" terrain seen today. The hardest of the ancient rocks are on top of the ridges, while the softer rocks eroded away forming the valleys."
 * Suggestion: "Although the gorge and its surroundings seem to be mountainous, the area is a dissected plateau. Years of erosion have cut away the soft rocks, forming the valleys, and left the hardest of the ancient rocks relatively untouched on the top of sharp ridges, giving them the appearance of "mountains"."
 * Works for me - thanks


 * "Five major rock formations are present in Colton Point State Park, from the Devonian and Carboniferous periods."
 * Suggestion: "Five major rock formations present in Colton Point State Park are from the Devonian and Carboniferous periods."
 * Changed to your version, this section done I think, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Ecology
 * "The forest was up to 85 percent hemlock and white pine, with the rest hardwoods."
 * "The forest was up to 85 percent hemlock and white pine; hardwoods make up the rest of the forest."
 * Done, thanks


 * "Many animal species that are now vanished inhabited the area."
 * More precise suggestion: "The area was inhabited by many animal species, most of which have vanished by the end of the 20th century."
 * While I understand this sentiment, the sources do not specifically support most species now being extinct. There are still over 40 species of mammals in the Gorge today, so would something like "The area was inhabited by a large number of animal species, many of which have vanished by the end of the 20th century."? Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that sounds better. Please put it in.  Jappalang (talk) 06:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It is in, thanks Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Pine Creek was home to large predators such as Wolves, Lynx, Wolverines, Panthers, Fishers, foxes and Bobcats; all save the last three now locally extinct."
 * Why are "foxes" non-capitalized and "Wolves" capitalized? Furthermore, the last clause is an incomplete sentence. Suggestion: "all are locally extinct except for the last three as of 2007."
 * The MOS convention followed is that species names are capitalized, while genera are not. See MOS "In articles that cover two or more taxonomic groups, a consistent style of capitalisation should be used for species names. This could involve the use of: ... title case for common names of species throughout (per WP:BIRDS) and lower case for non-specific names such as eagle or bilberry, which may work well for articles with a broad coverage of natural history;" Changed to your suggestion for last phrase, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All right, although I have to say it still sets up some confusion (me not being an biologist and all...). In light of this, I rearranged the list a bit to place those non-capitalized terms at the rear instead of in the middle (aesthetic reasons).  Please revert if this messed up the meaning or intent of the original structure.  Jappalang (talk) 06:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I am confused over the capitalization of the species here... per Naming conventions (fauna) and per Manual of Style, I think it is acceptable for all the non-birds to be not capitalized.
 * See above please, and the talk page for this at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Archive_102 Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "The virgin forests cooled the land and streams. Centuries of accumulated organic matter in the forest soil caused slow percolation of rainfall into the creeks and runs, so they flowed more evenly year-round. Pine Creek was home to ..."
 * Each of the first two sentences seems to be disconnected from the sentence following it. Could the flow be improved?
 * I tweaked these four sentences so they now read The virgin forests cooled the land and streams. The creeks and runs flowed more evenly year-round, since centuries of accumulated organic matter in the forest soil caused slow percolation of rainfall into them. Pine Creek was home to large numbers of fish, including trout, but dams downstream on the Susquehanna River have eliminated the shad, salmon,[c] and eels once found here by blocking their migrations.[2] Habitat for land animals was destroyed by the clearcutting of forests, but there was also a great deal of hunting, with bounties paid for large predators. Is this better? Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "dams downstream on the Susquehanna River have eliminated the shad, salmon, and eels once found here."
 * Can it be briefly expounded on why dams would eliminate the fish?
 * They migrate to the ocean and back - dams stop most of this. Will try to add something, stopping for the night now. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Add once found here by blocking their migrations. with migrations linked to Fish migration. Thanks, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

State Natural Area and wildlife
 * "Within this Natural Area, all logging, mining, and oil and gas drilling are prohibited, and only foot trail access is allowed."
 * Suggestion: " Within this Natural Area, logging, mining, and drilling for oil and gas are prohibited. Furthermore, only foot trail access is allowed."
 * Changed. Dincher (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Despite the logging, there are still some old-growth hardwoods and hemlocks on Fourmile Run."
 * I think due to "despite", "still" can be dropped.
 * Still has been dropped


 * "The current population of deer in Pennsylvania are descended from the original stock introduced beginning in 1906, after the lumberman had moved out of the area."
 * Suggestion: "The current population of deer in Pennsylvania are descended from the original stock introduced since 1906, after the lumberman had moved out of the area."
 * Changed. Dincher (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Despite the fears of anglers, their diet is only 5 percent trout."
 * Suggestion A: "Despite the otters' diet of 5 per cent trout, anglers fear the animals would deplete the game fish in the gorge."
 * Suggestion B: "Although trouts make up 5 per cent of the otters' diet, anglers fear the animals would deplete the game fish in the gorge."
 * The fears preceded the reintroduction of the fishers, the studies followed their reintroduction. Thinking of a way to say this better - thanks for pointing out the problem, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reread the original in Dillon and I did not recall this correctly. I used a tweaked version of A, namely Despite the otters' diet of 5 percent trout, some anglers fear the animals would deplete the game fish in the gorge. Thanks, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "They are generalized predators and will hunt any smaller creatures in their territory, including porcupines."
 * Suggestion: "They are general predators, hunting any smaller creatures such as porcupines in their territory."
 * General predators doesn't sound correct to me. Generalized sounds better. Dincher (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I am not certain of the distinction either (I based it on the greater Google hits for "general predator", which of course may not be correct form). Can someone provide a third opinion?  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I checked both refs on fishers - ref 59 (DCNR) does not use the words "general" or "generalized" in conjunction with predator, but ref 60 calls them a "generalized predator", so I think that is what we should go with. Ruhrfisch  <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I can accept assurances from one of the sources. Jappalang (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "Gypsy Moths, which eat all the leaves off trees, especially oaks"
 * I think "all" can be dropped; "off" would suggest the removal of the leaves from the trees.
 * When you take your shirt off do you take off all your clothes? Not always. Dincher (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Another point. The caterpillars in question do strip the leaves from the trees. They are left bare. The word all is important in getting this point across. Otherwise one might think that just some of the leaves are eaten. Dincher (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, the key point is that the caterpillars will strip all the leaves in the trees no matter what, right? If that is the case, there is no issue with this (my initial assumption was that the caterpillars only ate their fill and would cause severe but not total devastation of the leaves).  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Important Bird Area
 * "The woodlands are inhabited by the Ruffed Grouse, Pennsylvania's state bird, and Wild Turkeys."
 * A likely problem with serial commas: there is the ruffled grouse and wild turkey, but what is Pennsylvania's state bird? How about "The woodlands are inhabited by Wild Turkeys and Pennsylvania's state bird, the Ruffled Grouse."?
 * Changed. Dincher (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Trails
 * "Colton Point State Park has some challenging hikes in and around the Grand Canyon of Pennsylvania, with 4.0 miles of trails that feature very rugged terrain, pass close to steep cliffs, and can be very slick in some areas."
 * "Challenging" is subjective (and not the opinion of the source either)... problem is that if this is dropped, it could likely mean the elimination of the first clause... so, "Colton Point State Park has 4.0 miles of hiking trails that feature very rugged terrain, pass close to steep cliffs, and can be very slick in some areas."


 * "Turkey Path is a difficult trail"
 * Likewise, "difficult" is subjective and not mentioned by the source.
 * I have been on the trail. I dare say that the only creature that would not find it to be difficult would be a mountain goat. Dincher (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This source "Hiking Pennsylvania" on Google books gives the Turkey Path 5 boots, or its "most difficult" rating. I can add it as a ref if this is OK. Perhaps "Hiking Pennsylvania" rates Turkey Path as a "most dificult" hiking trail"? Ruhrfisch  <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:V would prefer a verification from a published reliable source (if several hiking guide books stated or classed the trail as difficult, that would be good). I am not challenging your claim, but I wonder would other hikers have a different view.  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I added the ref to challenging and difficuly and left the text as it is. Dincher (talk) 22:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "However, there is also a Turkey Path from Leonard Harrison State Park on the west rim of the gorge down to a point on Pine Creek just downstream of the end of this trail."
 * Is this the same path (i.e. Turkey Path runs through both parks) since the Path connects the two parks...?
 * It is. See the map. Dincher (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... so it is not original research if the article just states that the path (as one) runs through both parks instead of saying "However, there is also a Turkey Path" (therefore a different path)? If not, can it be phrased that way?  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have thought about this point for quite some time. I don't understand what the issue is? It seems pretty plain to me that it is essentially the same path. Dincher (talk) 23:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the confusion arises from the DCNR officially calling them two separate trails of the same name (probably to avoid saying that hikers should ford / wade across Pine Creek, which can be dangerous, esp. when water is high). Other sources tend to refer to them as one path though. Again different reliable sources say different things on the same topic. We tried to show this, hope this helps make it clearer. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I apologise that I did not explain my concern clearly. What happens is this: on reading "Turkey Path is a difficult trail", I immediately had "Turkey Path (Colton Point)" in mind (using Wikipedia naming terminology).  The subsequent text talked on this subject. I then read "However, there is also a Turkey Path from Leonard Harrison State Park".  This made me think of "Turkey Path (Leonard Harrison)"; that would in effect means two Turkey Paths (imagine if you write a Wikipedia article, that would be two different articles), which might not be the same path.  What I was trying to clarify was: are these two paths the same (in Wiki-terms, why not delete-merge the two articles into just "Turkey Path")?  If they are, then instead of "However, there is also ... ", the sentence should have read "The path continues further downstream across the creek into Leonard Harrison State Park ...".  Are there no sources that can confirm the two paths are one and the same?  Jappalang (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Found this page in Fergus' Natural Pennsylvannia. I think that source conclusively states they are the same path (hinted at by the other sources).  Jappalang (talk) 00:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Added it thanks. Dincher (talk) 01:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I tweaked it to read Turkey Path is a difficult trail,[62] 3 miles (4.8 km) long (down and back within the park), that follows Four Mile Run down the side of the canyon, descending over 800 feet (240 m) to Pine Creek and the rail trail at the bottom of the gorge.[9] [...] The park website classifies it as a "down and back trail" since there is no bridge across Pine Creek.[9] However, the Turkey Path continues in Leonard Harrison State Park, going from a point on Pine Creek just downstream of the end of the trail in Colton Point up to the Leoanrd Harrison overlook on the east rim of the gorge. According to Owlett and the DCNR Pine Creek Rail Trail map, the creek can be forded with care when the water is low, and the Turkey Path connects the two parks.[16][23][40] Is this OK? I also note the Leonard Harrison State Park official web page calls the Turkey Path a "difficult trail" here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch  <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "When the West Rim Trail opened in 1982, it was only 21 miles long and ended just south of the park, but it was extended 9 miles north in 1985, passing through Colton Point."
 * I think "only" is an unneeded emphasis and can be dropped.
 * Only is gone. Dincher (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Camping and picnics
 * "Camping is a popular pastime at Colton Point State Park, with 1,989 persons using the rustic camping facilities in 2003. The campsites are rustic, which means that there are no modern amenities like flush toilets or showers."
 * Awkward explanation of "rustic", and I see noun plus -ing. Suggestion: "Camping is a popular pastime at Colton Point State Park; 1,989 persons have used the camping facilities in 2003.  With no modern amenities like flush toilets or showers, the campsites take on a rustic nature."


 * "An Organized Group Tenting area can accommodate up to 90 campers. This is for use by organized youth or adult groups, and 1,490 campers used these facilities in 2003."
 * Suggestion: "An Organized Group Tenting area, intended for organized youth or adult groups, can accommodate up to 90 campers. 1,490 campers used the area in 2003."


 * "The park has approximately 100 picnic tables and five CCC-built picnic shelters which can be reserved. Some 15,379 picnickers used the park in 2003."
 * Suggestion: "The park also has approximately 100 picnic tables and five CCC-built picnic shelters which can be reserved. These facilities were used by 15,379 picnickers in 2003."
 * Done, done and done. Dincher (talk) 21:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Hunting, fishing, and whitewater
 * Is the hunting and fishing seasonal?
 * Yes, but I don't think we need to spell out when it is permitted. The seasons vary by the game in question, etc., Perhaps we could change it to seasonal hunting, but then one might as for the particulars of the season. Dincher (talk) 10:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, that might be opening a can of worms when unintended. Jappalang (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * "which is Class 1 to Class 2 whitewater"
 * Should it be clarified as classification... "which is classified as Class 1 to Class 2 whitewater" or is this suggestion redundant...
 * Classified it is. Dincher (talk) 21:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Nearby state parks
 * "Colton Point State Park is entirely within Shippen Township"
 * "Entirely" seems redundant.
 * You are correct. Fixed, corrected, etc., Dincher (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Images
 * Image:Pine Creek Gorge Cabins Crop.JPG
 * Is this cabin "Wetumka" or "Osocosy"?
 * Reliable sources sadly do not say which it is. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Just my comments, opinions, and suggestions. I must say that some sections really engrossed me, and I had to frequently tear myself from it. This is a good start. Jappalang (talk) 07:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your very careful reading and comments, I will make most of the changes and reply to those where the changes are problematic today (busy in real life). Just wanted to get an initial thanks and reply in, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No problems. Do rebut if my suggestions would make things worse or are faulty in assumption.  Jappalang (talk) 03:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All queries (and my nutty suggestions) have been resolved. Remembering the engrossing time I had reading it, I am fully backing this article for Featured Article.  Jappalang (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for all of your careful; work - this is one of the most thorough reviews I have ever seen at FAC and the article is better for it. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Support All my concerns were addressed in the article's PR. –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  18:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your peer review, edits, and support - any chance you're related to Henry Colton? ;-) Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 18:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed I am, though I doubt he's the correct one. :-) –Juliancolton <sup style="color:#666660;">Tropical <sup style="color:#666660;">Cyclone  01:29, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your support. Dincher (talk) 19:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Support, now that the dust has settled. As noted above, I peer-reviewed the article. I thought it was impressive then, and it is more so now. I'm especially impressed by the close attention to detail in this article. I could give many examples, but two will suffice. The main map's little picnic tables showing locations of picnic shelters is one. The other is the richly-detailed explanation of the gorge geology. Finetooth (talk) 03:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kind words, peer review, edits, and support. Glad someone noticed the picnic tables on the map. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support and kind words! Dincher (talk) 10:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.