Talk:Dart Island State Park

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dart Island State Park/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vacation Q (talk · contribs) 23:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll take this. Just give me a few days. Thanks, Vacation Q (talk) 23:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Lead

• Is it a sandbar or an island?

It is both in a sense. The name is also "Dart Island" not "Dart Sandbar". ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

History

• wikilink Connecticut River.
• "typical river trees like willow, poplar and red maple."is a direct quote. needs citation
• surround "Department of Environmental Protection" with () instead of []

Done. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Activities

• should change header to "Recreation"

Why? Fishing is not purely recreational.

• "the The Connecticut River Guide" double the.

Fixed

• "within a distance that's canoe-able by two people who aren't particularly good at canoeing." -again needs direct reference.

I was told before that this was debatable by some, but I added because I missed it myself.

Sorry, you either need a reference or you need to delete it.  ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 13:57, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It is referenced... ChrisGualtieri (talk) 10:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

References

• The ref list should be like {{reflist|2}}. Although not necessary to pass GA.

Why? I prefer this layout for short lists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It's not required, but take a look at H:REFCOLS ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 14:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

• ref 3 doesn't have an accessdate

It is a book the information is not subject to change by access date. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Images

• Doesn't need images, but for a state park like this, it's surprising that there is not free-use photos on Flickr.

Nothing at all, much less than free. This park is amongst the more obscure ones. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Other

• Broad in Coverage concerns me here. Although the above could be fixed easily, the article is missing an Ecology section.

There may be more once you fix them. (Problems of the fixes). Although the above is enough for a quick fail, I am going to hold this for a week and see how it goes.

Please direct me to an ecological study of the park because I have not seen any data to suggest a dedicated study has ever taken place in any source. The DEEP doesn't even provide the history of cursory information on the park. I had Leary's book, dedicated entirely to the park system, to get what little information I could get on the "wooded sandbar". I pulled some very obscure records that I got through a search with the Connecticut State Library and other sources to compile this article. The tiny little park has been made a mockery of by the town itself, and I referenced that. Broad is limited by available information and I cannot add that which does not exist or give you pure WP:OR as a substitute. This article currently comprises every scrap of useful (non-duplicative) information I have found on the park and that's after consulting the very book recommended for such a purpose by the DEEP itself. I wouldn't be using 80 and 90 year old texts for how and when it became a state park if the DEEP (or even Leary) was aware of it. A good argument I can put forth is that the State of Connecticut often misreported Dart Island's size as "two acres" despite it being "one acre" until 2012.... ish?[1] A large document about the funding of parks mentions Dart Island once....to say its 19 acres and repeat the information already in the article. Sadly... in the last 20 years of the Connecticut General Assembly records - Dart Island was mentioned three times and unexpanded - including its circumstances for its increased size.[2] I want more info on it, but there is simply none to be found. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

In consulting with another person.... I have a feeling that the acreage might actually be a typo that has gone unnoticed for 3 years because no size increase record exists. I'm going to have to actually give the department a phone call because such things DO happen, but they are extremely rare. And that is rather concerning... Also... no ecology study seems to have been done, given its small size, the best I could do is grab a local one and "lump it in", but it would not be specific in any shape or form. Not even the famous Bluff Point State Park has had a detailed plant survey, but is extremely important for some 200 endangered birds, fishes, etc. that use the land. The survey you ask simply doesn't exist, but I'll ask tomorrow, just to be safe. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 10:13, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

More Stuff

• ref 10 needs ISBN. forgot to spot that. Sorry. ΤheQ Editor  ^Talk? 14:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but it has no ISBN. That became a standard in 1970, but this predates it. Would you like a World Cat? I'm not sure how to add it, but it is 4759002.[3] Best that can be done for this. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 10:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dart Island State Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140530021005/http://www.middletownplanning.com/harborimprovementplan/hmp1.html to http://www.middletownplanning.com/harborimprovementplan/hmp1.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2716&q=445284&depNav_GID=1650#DartIsland
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140530021005/http://www.middletownplanning.com/harborimprovementplan/hmp1.html to http://www.middletownplanning.com/harborimprovementplan/hmp1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)