Talk:Yellowstone National Park

As of 30 April 2023, this article is a good article. (compare to current). This means the community feels it is written well. You may see the discussion that promoted the article here.

.

• Hello, I hope you all will notice that my latest edit is: (In Qur'an: "Until, when he reached the far west he saw the sunset on a hot spring of water which has a black clay, and he found near it a people". < .ref>Qur'an 18:86.</ ref >.)

• As you see here: It is NOT WP:OR because it is a quote from Qur'an. And, it has 100% WP:RS because if any reader on Yellowstone wants to know what does major religions say about Yellowstone he will look for descriptions of places in its holy or text books. So, if he or she wants to know what does Islam say about Yellowstone he/she will look at Qur'an as No.1 source to know such a thing. Qur'an is 100% WP:RS about what does Islam say about anything. So, my edit is WP:RS and NOT WP:OR .

• Now, does that verse talk about Yellowstone literally or through descriptions? Yes it does for sure. This very clear. No doubt about it. Why? Because Yellowstone is the only place in the (far west) that has (a hot spring of water which has a black clay) and (it is large enough so you can see the sunset on it) and (there were people living near it in the ancient times). If you, or anybody in the world can tell me of any place in the far west has these descriptions other than Yellowstone I will stop this edit. Lkmen (talk) 18:49, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

---

This is original research and personal interpretation not supported by independent reliable sources. It is not acceptable in any wiki. Macdonald-ross (talk) 22:47, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

GAN comments

Lead

• It was the first national park in the world. wouldn't it be better if you would say "It was also the first national park in the world?
• The link for President needs to be US President
• Yellowstone has been declared to UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1978 you've covered this in the sentence before. But the year could be added.

History

• "He was John Colter, a trapper." can you further explain what he trapped?
• "so Yellowstone still wasn't a famous place." - was not
• Also can you please provide sources to all claims

Geography

• Link sea level
• Yellowstone is still geologically active, and is monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey - can you tell the readers what is means to be active?

Please fix these issues. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 17:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed. Thank you! --weltforce (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Comments from Osiris

• The lead talks about things that aren't in the body. It should be a summary of the main points addressed in the sections below.  Fixed 15:13, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• Use capitalisation consistently. Unless it's the proper noun ("Yellowstone National Park"), "Park" and "National Park" (as in "the Park" or "first National Park") should be lower case ("the national park"). When it comes to animal names, either capitalise the names (as in "Boreal Chorus Frog") or don't ("Prairie rattlesnake"). I personally don't get why animal names are ever capitalised (to me, names like "Black Bear" look awkward). It's up to, but just make sure you do it consistently.  Fixed 15:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• To avoid confusion, use "Native Americans" instead of "Indians".  Fixed weltforce (talk) 15:19, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• Make punctuation consistent. You've written "8,000 feet" (with comma) and "8500 years" (without). In the visitors statistics, you've used both commas (2,5 million) and full-stops (1.45 million) to represent decimal points. Manual of style says commas are used to separate figures of 5 digits or more (for figures of 4 digits, it's up to you whether you use a comma to separate the first digit - but keep it consistent). To represent decimals, full stops are used (not commas).  Fixed 15:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• Some words are italicised that probably shouldn't be. Examples are Beartooth and environmental protection. I'm not sure that the names of laws or acts are usually capitalised either, but I could be wrong on that.  Fixed 15:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• Display units consistently. In some cases you put metric units first (with the imperial units in parentheses), but then later on you do it the other way around. Since it's U.S. geography, you should probably use imperial units first across the page, but must keep the metric conversions.  Fixed 15:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• National Park doesn't need to be linked in the related pages section, since it's already linked in the article itself.  Fixed 15:24, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• There is a dead link that needs either fixing or replacing.  Fixed 15:36, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• The references need a cleanup. Format the dates consistently. There are three different formats competing here: August 10, 2006 vs. 2010-01-17 vs. 28 February 2007.  Fixed 16:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• The last 4 references need details. Who wrote them? Who's the publisher? When were they published?  Fixed 16:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
• With the images all on the right hand side, you might consider staggering them... some on the left, some on the right?  Done 15:36, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

That's all for now. I haven't actually read it through, so if you can fix these I will give a more thorough review afterwards. Osiris (talk) 10:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! I will fix them a.s.a.p. --weltforce (talk) 14:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Fixed all! Thank you! --weltforce (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. About the images - see an example at en:Yellowstone National Park#Geology for what I mean by "some left, some right". According to the Manual of Style, text should not be squished between two objects. I'm still seeing two dead links that will need either fixing or replacing.

It looks like this nomination was closed, but that's okay -- you can just nominate it again when you're happy with it. I would recommend simplifying the language further, perhaps seek a copy-editor. Osiris (talk) 04:44, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thank you for the link. I will restyle the pictures. The two dead links: 1 is working and the another I marked with dead link template. --weltforce (talk) 07:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, but you'll still need to fix them. I've found a crawler on wayback for this one, so that's fixed. Nothing for the others, so they will probably need replacing. Osiris (talk) 08:02, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I rearranged the pictures now; please take a look on them. But what do you mean with crawler on wayback and that?? --weltforce (talk) 15:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

GA review

lead

• It was the first national park in the world. - Needs a reference.  Fixed --15:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
• The park contains about half the world's geysers. - Needs a reference.  Fixed --15:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
• It also is a home for grizzly bears, wolves, bison and elk. - I think home to is more correct in that case.  Fixed --15:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

History

• were still living there - Seems to be a rather complex passive form.  Fixed --weltforce (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
• He was John Colter, a trapper. - This sentence doesn't make much sense in the context. In the sentence before you speak of several people and then this sentence implies it was only him. It needs some clean up.  Fixed --weltforce (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
• This area was Yellowstone. But nobody believed him, so Yellowstone still was not a famous place. - Better put that into one sentence, sentences that start with but aren't really good language.  Fixed --weltforce (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
• For the next sixty years only a few other trappers traveled through the area – but the same thing happened to them - A comma instead the hyphen would be better, and the but doesn't sound correct. Maybe something like ...the area and the same....  Fixed --weltforce (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
• on March 1, 1872, United States President Ulysses S. Grant signed a law... - that could use a reference.
• So from 1886 to 1917 the US Army ran it. - Needs a reference.
• In general, there are quite a lot passive forms in that section, I think that should be changed.  Fixed --weltforce (talk) 14:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Geography

• It is about 3,500,000 square miles (9,100,000 km2) large - Needs a ref, and something like It covers an area of ... probably sounds better.
• All the numbers in that section should be backed up with references.
• These are mountain ranges of the Middle Rocky Mountains - When you write middle upper-case, then you should include it in the link to show that it belongs together.
• since the last huge explosion - Maybe since its last...?
• A sentence starting like The most famous always needs a reference.

Continental Divide

• Stuff written there need references.

Geology

• The caldera is the largest volcanic system in North America. - Needs a reference.
• It was 1000 times larger than the Mount St. Helens eruption - Was there only one eruption of Mt. St. Helens? Of the smallest eruption or the biggest one?
• Yellowstone is still a geologically active volcano; what means that a eruption is expected in future. - Why the semi-colon and maybe what means that eruptions are expected...?
• For three months in 1985, 3,000 minor earthquakes occured in the northwestern section of the park. - Needs a reference.
• Everything after the sentence above needs references.

Animals

• The first sentence needs a reference.

Bison

• Bison once numbered between 30 and 60 million throughout North America; Yellowstone is one of their last strongholds. - Why the semi-colon? Make two sentences of it and add references please.
• The next sentence needs a reference.
• Yet again, all numbers need references.
• APHIS - What is that? Better write it out or link it.  Fixed 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Wolves

• If you cite something, you of course need to give the reference, otherwise it could be seen as a copy vio.
• canine predator - that is not simple and therefore needs a link.
• The result... - Needs a reference.
• A survey conducted in 2005... - needs a reference.

Bears

• A section with only one sentence looks odd. There should be something added.

Elk

• The first sentence can be divided into two instead of a dash. - The number also needs a reference.
• The northern herd has become... - needs a reference.

Other predators

• The first sentence needs a reference.

Fish

• The first sentence needs a reference or is that covered by the references of the next sentence?

Climate

• −13 °C (8.6 °F) in January and 27 °C (81 °F) - I would switch it, we talk about something American and they use °F and so we should mention that firstly. That should then be done with all temperatures.  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• Sudden temperature increase or decrease in the middle... - Needs a reference.
• All the temperatures should be backed up by a reference.
• There are many thunderstorms during the afternoons. - Only during afternoons? That really needs a source.
• Years should not put in brackets, use ... in year. instead.  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Tourism

• Why is Cody not linked but the others are? Also that part needs a reference.
• More than 2.8 million tourists have visited Yellowstone since 1990. - Looking at the table, please explain why you chose to say 2.8 million?
• in the winter to enjoy snow attractions - Sounds like a travel guide. Maybe to see?  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Environmental protection

• The first sentence: The point of [...] was always and important point... - That is rather poor language. Also the sentence implies that people create the park by hand. That sentence just sounds weird. Also, it needs a reference.
• famous? Really? Never heard of him. Such words are always a bit POV-ish.  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• But when...' - However, when...  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• wasn't - no such short cuts.  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• So the hunting of such "protected" animals has been forbidden with that law. - Needs a reference.
• The next sentence starts with "But".  Fixed --@intforce 18:51, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
• The last big fires were the "Yellowstone fires of 1988". - Those fires are probably worse a link. Also that needs a reference.
• The following numbers should all get a reference.
• So after 1988, people use not to fight the fire... - That needs a reference and would then make a nice hook for DYK.

Generally, there are by far too many redlinks that need to be fixed. -Barras talk 11:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

I can help with the redlinks of animal articles =) Best, Jona^{talk to me} 16:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

That would be very nice :) And thank you, Barras, for the good and comprehensive review! --weltforce (talk) 14:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Sixteen years

The history says "For the first sixteen years, there was no money for the park. So from 1886 to 1917, the US Army managed it." But that's thirty-one years, not sixteen! Also keep in mind that the park was founded in 1872. I don't see this sentence on enwiki, or a source for it. Lights and freedom (talk) 06:26, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, it could still be true that the Federal government gave no money directly. But the lack of references is grounds for removal. The relevant part of the En wiki account is:

"It was established by the 42nd U.S. Congress with the Yellowstone National Park Protection Act and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant on March 1, 1872. Yellowstone was the first national park in the U.S. and is also widely held to be the first national park in the world. The park is known for its wildlife and its many geothermal features, especially the Old Faithful geyser, one of its most popular.".

Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

2022 Good Article Nomination

New comments for the next GAN. This should become a GA or even VGA on the wiki. Perfect fro the target audience(s).

UNESCO World Heritage Site

The lede says it became a UNESCO WHS in 1978. The body section says it was proposed. It also says it was elected, which is weird. Complex quote is...complex. Each bullet point is complex and wordy. Use of "collection" is complex anthropomorphism and should not be used. If a word has to be in "scare quotes" it is not simple. The park does not collect anything.

Passive

Much of the article is in the passive voice. Simple, direct statements and actions should be used instead.

Vocabulary

Complex or idiomatic vocabulary to be simplified (best) or at least linked (second best):

• ecosystem
• swarm
• forbid, forbidden, forbade: used on many pages, and is a necessary word.
• herd, herds
• intact: a necessary word, akin to "untouched". Comment: This is from a sourced quotation under UNESCO World Heritage Site. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
• predator.
• migrate, migration
• elevation
• survey
• adopt
• bypass
• nevertheless: necessary as a concept = "all the same" or "despite this".
• evade - avoid or escape.
• stronghold (says what it is)
• husbandry = keeping cattle
• lame: context dependent.
• stats has a link.
• pumice stone = cold lava (easy once it has been seen.)

All found using Lextutor. There may be more. --Gotanda (talk) 23:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Or, there may be fewer! Terms which are already in the wiki with explanations are OK if the reader can get at the explanation. We could link a few others to simple wikt. Incidentally, many of these words are not complex or idiomatic, but a few are. Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

They are all infrequent. If they can be linked, then they need to be linked in the text of the article. But, it is even better to use common, simple words. Just because a word is used elsewhere does not make it simple. For example: forbid is is in the K4,000 most frequently used words, but allow (not allowed) is one the 1,000 most frequently used words in English, so it is much more likely to be read quickly and understood. Survey is one of the three thousand most common words, but that includes very different meanings. A direct, active verb such as to count is simpler. --Gotanda (talk) Gotanda (talk) 00:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

---

• Well, I didn't write this originally, and many of the problems come from the UNESCO documents. When quoting an official document, there is a limit to how far the language should be changed. Therefore, I hesitate to go further into simplification because it would take us too far from the sources. Que sera, sera! Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

• Most of the words complained of now do have pages or places where they are defined: see blue links. Of the few which are still red, "intact" comes from a sourced quotation, and "forbidden" has been a film title, so is presumably not so alien. It could be rendered as "not allowed", but I judged that was rather weak for a legal prohibition. We have at least seven pages with "forbidden" in their title. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

---

Did a quick Readability Score test for this article as it stands now. Here were the results:

• Flesch Reading Ease score: 64.2 (standard/average)
• Gunning Fog: 9.2 (fairly easy to read)
• Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 7.8 (eighth grade)
• The Coleman-Liau Index: 9 (ninth grade)
• The SMOG Index: 8.2 (eighth grade)
• Automated Readability Index: 7.1 (11-13 years old (sixth and seventh graders))
• Linsear Write Formula : 8 (eighth grade)

I used this website and simply copy/pasted the text, and I removed any of the artifacts of references (e.g. something like [9] or [27] dotting the page, so as to limit its impact).

Admittedly, none of this is *bad*, but frankly, I think this could be better. An article being at an eighth grade reading level I think is appropriate if the subject is particularly complex or diverse, but for something like a national park, I would aim for a sixth grade level.

I went ahead and tried changing some of the words to better fit the combined wordlist. Some examples included "The park is the center *main part* of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem" (unless you literally meant the actual center as in location [in which case, "middle" would be better since it's on the wordlist], then this would be more exact while still being simple); "This is the largest *biggest*, nearly intact *almost complete* ecosystem in the Earth's northern temperate zone" (biggest is more simple than largest, and "intact" isn't especially simple, while "complete" is).

The new scores are:

• Flesch Reading Ease score: 66.1 (standard/average)
• Gunning Fog: 8.9 (fairly easy to read)
• Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 7.5 (eighth grade)
• The Coleman-Liau Index: 9 (ninth grade)
• The SMOG Index: 8 (eighth grade)
• Automated Readability Index: 6.9 (11-13 years old (sixth and seventh graders))
• Linsear Write Formula : 7.9 (eighth grade)

It's not a *huge* improvement, but nearly all categories were improved slightly. I'm not sure how much more the article can be simplified without it being rewritten. Admittedly, I'm not sure how important it is for some words to be changed. I know that I knew what the words "habitat" and "ecosystem" meant when I was in elementary school, so it might not be that important. I think with a few more minor changes, it will definitely be ready. I'll weakly support it for now. ~Junedude433^talk 19:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

@Junedude433 Your changes look good. Here, I think "intact" means "pristine" or "not seriously altered by humans". I wonder if "almost complete ecosystem" is really the right wording here. (In any case, it's not completely true, as they are regularly killing or exporting the bison to keep the herd from getting too large and spreading outside the park.) Lights and freedom (talk) 19:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Well, the area is in the United States and, considering that, it is remarkably intact. The judges of this are the UNESCO committee which awards its international-quality status. I don't think the article should be much more altered. Take it or leave it. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

2023 discussions

@Macdonald-ross: I can support this as GA, if just a few more things are resolved.

• The fire plan info (in "Conservation") is out of date. Given that fire management strategies have been changing recently, it should be updated. Also, the ref is a dead link. There's a summary here: https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/management/fire-management.htm
• In "Geology" it says the volcano is active, but enwiki says it's dormant.

Dormant is correct. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

• In "Climate" it says that the hotspot affects the climate, but that's not explained (or sourced).

I suppose readers can take it for granted that a hot, bubbling potential volcano affects the climate!

Lights and freedom (talk) 08:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross Yes, heat and bubbling would certainly affect the climate, but in my understanding, it's not doing that because it's dormant. It's basically just a mountain with a crater at the top. Lights and freedom (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

• Yellowstone has major geothermal areas. Enwiki describes it as "the largest volcanic system in North America, and worldwide it is only rivaled by the Lake Toba Caldera on Sumatra. It has been termed a "supervolcano" because the caldera was formed by exceptionally large explosive eruptions..." The magma chamber that lies under Yellowstone is estimated to be a single connected chamber, about 37 miles (60 km) long, 18 miles (29 km) wide, and 3 to 7 miles (5 to 12 km) deep.
• En wiki has a list of Yellowstone geothermal features which mostly are geysers, springs and pools. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

  It really needs a source to show that this affects the climate. There are of course geysers, but it's not self evident that geothermal activity changes the climate of the region. Lights and freedom (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

• I've brought over some stuff from En wiki which seems relevant. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)