Talk:Mount Shasta City Park

Need to Add:

Untitled

1. How much water emerges from headwaters and how much water it provides to sacramento river 2. More detail on groundwater studies of big springs aquifer 3. Estimated volume of big springs aquifer? 4. Crystal Geyser water bottling from both sides. 5. Hiking trail details 6. Restoration and flora and fauna at this location — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misshaleyrobinson (talk • contribs) 16:45, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Misshaleyrobinson.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Outline feedback

Hi Haley,

This looks great and it looks like you've already done a lot of research. Keep going!

Julianfulton (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Haley:

1.You did a nice job introducing the topic. I would suggest adding to the lead information about every section you have, so it gives a nice summary of the whole article! ( it mostly touched on recreation and left out history, headwater, water quality/chemistry, and the controversy currently going down. I think that might be okay though….just going off of the tutorial for this assignment it mentioned to touch on everything. 2.Nice job on all the subtitles, they are great. Personally I might switch them around, History and Water Course after the Lead section? Then moving in to recreation and what it is like today. That is just how I might do it. Also, and I’m sure you will get to this, the fonts are different, easy fix! I like what you have brought into this article! 3.You did a nice job balancing the sections, I am looking forward to the finished result! 4.This is a cool subject, who doesn’t want to learn about this park? I do think some of the words you use like “complete with” and “arguably one of the most unique” may show a little biased or personal feels towards this park. It’s not a controversial subject really, but when you add in the controversial section at the end dealing with drinking water diversions it might portray to the reader you disagree with the diversions. Just a thought. 5.You have a lot of nice references and pull a lot of information in for the readers. The yelp reviews are a good thing, I think, because it will give readers all perspectives and experiences people have had at the park! Nice job, really, you provided a lot of references and bulked this article up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tori Sepulveda (talk • contribs) 04:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

04-24-2016

Thank you Tori! I appreciate your feedback! I agree with what you had mentioned, I should change a few of the words or phrases to sound less biased. I will also take your formatting suggestions into consideration as I continue to work on this page! Thank you so much for your time and effort!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misshaleyrobinson (talk • contribs) 05:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)