Talk:Bob Marshall (wilderness activist)/Archive 1

Article improvement

I see that the article uses the word "boastsmanship". Is there an alternative? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

That word bothers me, as well, but I'm not sure of an alternative. It's straight from the source, and I know absolutely nothing about outdoor terminology, to tell you the truth. I was wondering whether I should just remove that bit all together? María (habla conmigo) 19:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The art of boasting?

• Okay, so I'm an idiot and even though I stared right at the sentence, I didn't see the huge, glaring typo: boaTmanship. Um, yeah. I'm going to go hang my head in the corner now.

What about cause of death? "a police autopsy indicated "myelogenous leukemia" and "coronary arteriosclerosis" as two possible causes of his death"See this summary. Comparing that summary to the article might give you some idea of what another reviewer thinks are the most important things about Bob. All the best (back to work for me!) -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

His death is next up on my list, which sounds morbid, but it's true; I wanted to work in chronological order, so I've been concentrating on the more uplifting stuff first. It's funny you link to that page, by the way, as it's a summary of Glover's book, Marshall's major biography and my main source. I'm going to hit it over the next few days and hammer out the last couple years of his life. María (habla conmigo) 20:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Check this out: [1]; and this: [2]. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks! That last link in particular is great, I hadn't come across it yet. María (habla conmigo) 23:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope my copy edits are helpful. Please revert anything that you don't find useful. I left a few hidden comments in the Alaska section just now. -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the look over and suggestions! I think I've taken care of your suggestions. María (habla conmigo) 14:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Scartol

Excellent work, Maria. This article is thorough, intriguing, and well-documented. Your passion for the subject really comes through in your prose. I expect you'll have no trouble in the GA process. (If you shoot for FA, you may need to find some more books, since most of it comes from the one bio.)

Some minor issues:

• The lead says he was a "...conservationist and wilderness activist...". Is there a significant difference between these two? If not, I'd rather see one removed.

• Not too big of a difference, no; removed "conservationist".

• The son of wealthy constitutional lawyer and early wilderness advocate Louis Marshall, Marshall was exposed to nature as a young child. Two things: (1) "early wilderness advocate" is a strange phrase. Is "early" really necessary? (2) The bumping "Marshall"s are confusing. I find it's best to use full names until we're done discussing people with the same last name.

• Removed "early" and made names easier to follow.

• I worry that some of the details in the lead (the number of peaks in the Adirondacks, the specific city which Arctic Village is based on) may be distracting and too specific for the purposes of the lead.

• Made it a little less specific, but the number of peaks is important, I feel; it's in the name and all. :)

• I'd like to see a mention of where and when he died in the lead. As it is, we skip from his BIA and FS posts to the Wilderness Act.

• Fixed.

• "addiction to exploring and charting" feels melodramatic. How about "passion for"?

• Changed.

• Florence Marshall died in 1916 of cancer. After graduating from the Ethical Culture School in 1919 and spending a year at Columbia University, Marshall transferred... The bit about his mother's death feels tacked on, out of nowhere. Is there some way to integrate it into the narrative more smoothly? Maybe say how it affected him, what changes it brought for the family, something?

• I haven't found any mention of how Marshall or his family may have reacted to her death, so I've just removed it for now.

• ...an organization devoted to the building, maintenance and teaching of hiking in the park. I'm confused. How does one build hiking? Maybe hiking trails?

• Building an maintenance of trails, but the teaching of hiking; fixed.

• Although he still had a great love for the Adirondacks, Marshall longed for wilder country. This sort of "here's what he was thinking" prose is a bit sketchy. At the least we should have a reference following it; at the best, give us his words. Otherwise, it's better to just stick to the facts.

• Okay, removed.

• Marshall became interested in the plight of the American worker... This phrase is a bit POV. Maybe "unsafe conditions for many working Americans" or some such?

• Good suggestion, changed.

• Marshall's primary interest was the aesthetic call of the wilderness. Again, this feels like interpretation. Is there a quote from him which would illustrate this?

• I'll work on a quote.

• ...He befriended a number of the area's inhabitants, a majority of whom were single white males... This last bit about single white males feels oddly placed. Maybe just discuss his methodology here, and then discuss his findings in later sentences.

• I moved it down a bit.

• Since I assume there's no article for him, could we get a word about who Robert Sterling Yard was before heading up the WS?

• Actually, I may create a stub about the guy later on today...

• 33 miles seems long for a "walk". How about "hike" in those instances? I think that paragraph could also use a generalized lead-in sentence.

• Changed to "hike" and added an intro sentence about his productiveness during his last couple years.

• It also made these areas more permanent. This is a bit vague. Could you explain with another phrase? ("made their protected status more secure" or "extended the life of their protected status", etc)

• You have the general idea; I've worked in your former suggestion.

Hope this helps! Thanks for your hard work on this important article. – Scartol • Tok 13:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Scartol! I really appreciate your hard work and attention to detail. :) María (habla conmigo) 15:42, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I made a couple more small edits that I hope are helpful. Feel free to revert if you don't agree with them. The article looks very good. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of April 7, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass

2. Factually accurate?: Pass

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images?: Pass

Very well-written, researched, and sourced. An interesting and informative read. A peer review in the near future would be in order, and this article will be on the path to FAC consideration. Congratulations! If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.—
Jim Dunning | talk 04:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Whee! Thanks so much. :) María (habla conmigo) 12:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Film

This film was added to the "Reference" section, but since it's not currently used for a source, I thought I'd move it here. I haven't heard of it, but there's always the possibility that someone will have the opportunity to view it and see if anything pertains to Marshall and is therefore of use for the article:

• 2007 - Gates of the Arctic: Alaska's Brooks Range

María (habla conmigo) 12:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to remove date-autoformatting

Dear fellow contributors

MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.

There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:

Disadvantages of date-autoformatting

• (1) In-house only

• (a) It works only for the WP "elite".
• (b) To our readers out there, it displays all-too-common inconsistencies in raw formatting in bright-blue underlined text, yet conceals them from WPians who are logged in and have chosen preferences.
• (c) It causes visitors to query why dates are bright-blue and underlined.

• (2) Avoids what are merely trivial differences

• (a) It is trivial whether the order is day–month or month–day. It is more trivial than color/colour and realise/realize, yet our consistency-within-article policy on spelling (WP:ENGVAR) has worked very well. English-speakers readily recognise both date formats; all dates after our signatures are international, and no one objects.

• (3) Colour-clutter: the bright-blue underlining of all dates

• (a) It dilutes the impact of high-value links.
• (b) It makes the text slightly harder to read.
• (c) It doesn't improve the appearance of the page.

• (4) Typos and misunderstood coding

• (a) There's a disappointing error-rate in keying in the auto-function; not bracketing the year, and enclosing the whole date in one set of brackets, are examples.
• (b) Once autoformatting is removed, mixtures of US and international formats are revealed in display mode, where they are much easier for WPians to pick up than in edit mode; so is the use of the wrong format in country-related articles.
• (c) Many WPians don't understand date-autoformatting—in particular, how if differs from ordinary linking; often it's applied simply because it's part of the furniture.

• (5) Edit-mode clutter

• (a) It's more work to enter an autoformatted date, and it doesn't make the edit-mode text any easier to read for subsequent editors.

• (6) Limited application

• (a) It's incompatible with date ranges ("January 3–9, 1998", or "3–9 January 1998", and "February–April 2006") and slashed dates ("the night of May 21/22", or "... 21/22 May").
• (b) By policy, we avoid date autoformatting in such places as quotations; the removal of autoformatting avoids this inconsistency.

Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis/ The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 09:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Photo of burial site

A photo was added, in August 2008, of the burial site, removed by another editor and re-inserted. Because of the light conditions, it is difficult to see what is in the photo, and so the image does not add much to the reader's understanding. On the other hand, the photo emphasizes that the burial site is in a wooded part of the cemetery. I think Bob would be pleased that, 70 years after his death, his burial spot is still shaded by trees in a rather picturesque spot. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:03, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

You know, I hadn't considered the photo's inclusion with the site's setting in mind. I agree the location is rather fitting. :) María (habla conmigo) 20:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Wording

"Bob Marshall was first exposed to nature as a young child."

Aren't we all? I don't want to amend this now as it is a featured article, but I'd suggest that this could be better worded eg Bob Marshall developed an appreciation of nature as a young child.

Totorotroll (talk) 08:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, thanks for the suggestion! I don't know if it could be fixed in its current state on the mainpage, but I've changed it in the article's lead regardless. :) María (habla conmigo) 15:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

"Bob Marshall exposed himself to nature as a child." or, for accuracy, "Nature exposed herself to Bob Marshall when he was a child". --Moni3 (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, yeah...! Oh. Well, I mean. Shush, you. :p María (habla conmigo) 18:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)