Template:Did you know nominations/Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park
- ... that one of the canoe routes through Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park is difficult but rewarding for its "unusual and spectacular scenery"? Source: Ref #3 (Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park Management Statement)
Created by P199 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 36 past nominations.
Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC). General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
--evrik (talk) 17:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
@P199 and Evrik: I don't feel that comfortable with including a promotional quote from the park's manager on the main page. What else is there? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- AirshipJungleman29, is that an absolute policy or a preference? Would reworking the sentence be enough?--evrik (talk) 17:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 and Evrik: would you accept this alternative (I still use the quote, albeit a different portion, and no longer use the POV terms):
- ALT1: that one of the canoe routes through Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park is difficult but rewarding for its "scenery of rapids, waterfalls, talus boulders and steep canyons"?
- -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- @P199: slightly better, but as it is a non-WP:INDEPENDENT source, I don't think saying "is difficult but rewarding" in Wiki-voice is appropriate. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 and Evrik: would you accept this alternative (I still use the quote, albeit a different portion, and no longer use the POV terms):
- What if we change the sentence to this, "The canoe route through the Ottertooth Creek canyon [has been described as] especially difficult and seldom travelled, but rewarding for its "unusual and spectacular scenery of rapids, waterfalls, talus boulders and steep canyons."? There are few independent sources. --evrik (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- If there are few independent sources, it might be worth considering whether the article meets the WP:GEOFEAT criteria. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- This park is notable. I also think the hook is fine as written with the current sourcing. I'm struggling to find a solution that makes you happy. --evrik (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with Evrik. There are tons of sources, just not scholarly/academic ones (obviously, I don't want to use blogs and travel accounts). But an official government-issued work (i.e. Reference #3) should be more than acceptable. Furthermore note that this is not a marketing brochure or some other promotional material. So, if they say that the route "presents the canoeist with severe travel obstacles and minimal campsites" and "one is rewarded with unusual and spectacular scenery...", then that is rather factual and authoritative. It should not cause such trepidation... -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- What if we change the sentence to this, "The canoe route through the Ottertooth Creek canyon [has been described as] especially difficult and seldom travelled, but rewarding for its "unusual and spectacular scenery of rapids, waterfalls, talus boulders and steep canyons."? There are few independent sources. --evrik (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- AirshipJungleman29, is that an absolute policy or a preference? Would reworking the sentence be enough?--evrik (talk) 17:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)