Talk:Codfish Falls

Removed unverifiable "Flora and fauna" section

I have removed the section from this article previously titled "Flora & fauna". The article had been flagged with a "Refimprove" template since July 2016 (it's currently December 2016) almost entirely on account of this unsourced section. Although the section was a well-written component of the article, the complete lack of supporting reference material makes it invalid for encyclopedic use. As per the rough guidelines set forth in Wikipedia:Verifiability/Removal of Uncited Material, I have copied the removed material here to the talk page where it can be discussed and/or returned to the article one day when/if sufficient references can be incorporated.

The wildlife of Codfish Falls is varied, including many reptiles and amphibians, as well as several bird species. The water is too swift too support beaver and muskrat dwellings, though they have been known to take up residence on the opposite side of the road, and at the base. Otters, voles, shrews, and raccoons are among the mammals known to live directly on the shores, while several others use the falls to sustain themselves. The many hollows in the sides of the stone provide adequate shelter for bats. There is a notable amount of fishers, giving to the name of the brook. There is a diverse population of fish in the waters, although, somewhat ironically, not cod, as there are no freshwater species native to North America.

Of the few plants that grow directly in the falls area, moss is the most abundant, as the myriad rocky outcroppings and fallen trees that are abundant in the ravine are ideal locations for growth. Algae and lichen grow on some rocks near the edge. The banks of the waterway are carpeted with ferns, hardy grasses, and skunk cabbage, but few trees. Fungi are also relatively common here.

As somebody who has visited this particular waterfall on a number of occasions and who is familiar with Connecticut wildlife, I'll attest that some information seems to be somewhat accurate, at least in so far as it describes wildlife which is generally common to the state and/or region. However, no material is offered for quite a few specific, and in some cases apparently interpretive, claims: "water is too swift to support beaver and muskrat" and claims of where they "take up residence" instead (who says?), the claim that various animals are "known" to live directly on the shores (known to who?), the claim that there is a "diverse" range of fish in the brook (entirely unsubstantiated and, in my experience, unlikely).

Again, this is a well-written addition to the article, but no amount of skillful writing overshadows the enormous importance of citations and verifiability in an encyclopedic context. —Jgcoleman (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I hope you don't mind, but I undid the edit. I made sure to keep the refimprove, but I didn't remove the section, as I am sure that someone can find sources to improve the section. Living within a mile of the falls, I can confirm these claims, although I agree that it would be better to have at least one professional source that is not WP:OR.Sea Captain Cormac 16:01, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Cormac Nocton: While I applaud your ambition in writing up this paragraph, it's really just not permissible as encyclopedic. If you want to find sufficient references for the many individual claims made and then reinstate the text, that's fine. But the general refimprove for the article had been up for months already. Nobody is offering any sources and, given the esoteric nature of the article, I doubt anybody will. And, to be frank, you really shouldn't be adding content and expecting somebody else to do the citation work for you. —Jgcoleman (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

The paragraph, if anyone would be kind enough to confirm it, is as follows:

"==Flora and fauna== The wildlife of Codfish Falls is varied, including many reptiles and amphibians, as well as several bird species. The water is too swift too support beaver and muskrat dwellings, though they have been known to take up residence on the opposite side of the road, and at the base. Otters, voles, shrews, and raccoons are among the mammals known to live directly on the shores, while several others use the falls to sustain themselves. The many hollows in the sides of the stone provide adequate shelter for bats. There is a notable amount of fishers, giving to the name of the brook. There is a diverse population of fish in the waters, although, somewhat ironically, not cod, as there are no freshwater species native to North America.

Of the few plants that grow directly in the falls area, moss is the most abundant, as the myriad rocky outcroppings and fallen trees that are abundant in the ravine are ideal locations for growth. Algae and lichen grow on some rocks near the edge. The banks of the waterway are carpeted with ferns, hardy grasses, and skunk cabbage, but few trees. Fungi are also relatively common here." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cormac Nocton (talk • contribs) 13:44, 7 April 2017 (UTC)