Talk:Horton Plains National Park

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VBC-48W251J-4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8dc2b1b06e87a5e8d1638580ea57a545. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:56, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Alt text

I've added alt text and tweaked the article yet again. Do we know how many visitors the park gets annually? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid, we don't have the number of annual visitors. Revenue-wise it is the second most earner after Yala. I was able to get the visitor information on Udawalawe though.--Chanaka L (talk) 08:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I expanded the lead section to summarize the text.--Chanaka L (talk) 08:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Good, I've tidied it a bit to remove repetition (the name of the park is used far too often), and running sentences together to improve the flow. Please change back anything you don't like

Thanks Jim, It is all OK. Do you think now it is ready for nomination? --Chanaka L (talk) 09:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I think so, it will probably be a while before it gets reviewed, so we can carry on refining the prose any way. A reviewer is bound to pick up on things we have missed any way. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:23, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Showtime! I listed it in GAN. I think would be good idea of keep improving the text. A question, As an usual practice for a mammal species mentioned in the source, if it has a subspecies in Sri Lanka I go for subspecies. Eg. Elephant -> Sri Lankan Elephant, Sambar Deer -> Sri Lankan Sambar Deer. Is there any wrong with that?--Chanaka L (talk) 12:58, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Nothing at all - they are linked to appropriate articles, and are more accurate that just eg Asian Elephant Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:48, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Access

Under visitor attractions, is it worth adding something about access. It's easily reached by road from Nuaya Eliya, but I seem to remember that there's a train station near the park. What are the opening hours Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

•  Done access roads. Final ticket issue for entrance is done at 4.00pm. Er... couldn't find any thing on opening hours.--Chanaka L (talk) 07:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Found this regarding num. of visitors. I'm afraid, no mention of HP though. Table 19 & 20 [1]--Chanaka L (talk) 10:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Any use?

Shyamal sent me this link. Any use? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I took boreal herbaceous plants info from there. Seems they are very colourful.--Chanaka L (talk) 09:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Shyamal (talk) 09:35, 12 December 2009 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

Comments

This is a very interesting region that seems to be an extension of the Sholas of southern India. At first glance, the article seems to cover most of the key aspects required for articles covering biomes. Some comments as I go through the article.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is overall looking good, needs some tightening of prose and some slight restructuring. Should not be too much work before it is a Good Article if the sources are available.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Good luck with improving this article! Additional comments below.

Specific suggestions

• Perhaps the history of changes in its protection status should be moved out of the lead. Current status alone in lead, lead can avoid inline references with their usage best left in the main sections.

 Done Removed in line citation from lead.

• "park is contiguous with the Peak Wilderness Sanctuary in the west" - can be slightly confusing, which one is on which side?

 Done Clarified now.

• "supports the most extensive area of cloud forest" - support ? perhaps some other verb. Does this mean there are other areas with cloud forest.

 Done Replaced with "contains". Of course there are some cloud forests. Eg. Hakgala Strict Nature Reserve and Sri Lanka montane rain forests (the entire ecoregion)

• The altitude is mentioned in the second paragraph of the lead. Perhaps it would be good to move it up and explain that although called "Plains" that these are highlands.

 Done by Shyamal. Thanks

• Physical features - can a climate chart be included ?

I am afraid. Those charts are rare for even cities such as Kandy.

Not a problem, just that it would be a quick summary. Shyamal (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

• References - could you also use a book reference such as a Gazetteer http://www.archive.org/details/agazetteercentr00lawrgoog , http://www.archive.org/details/ceylongazetteer00chitgoog - there are more recent versions too. In general web sites from unknown publishers are rarely considered as reliable as printed journals or books, see WP:RS
  • Some of the journals are lacking volume, issue and page numbers (Reviewer may have fixed some of these since)

Thanks for refs. Is iwmi.org the concern? Oh no, That's very reliable. They even has given refs in the articles. I checked those books. Sorry no mention of HP. Lawrie's gazetteer and Casie Chitty's book are really history books. aren't they?

Not a problem. My concern was a non-English source that was not easily verifiable. Gazetteers usually include more than history, geography, geology, flora&fauna, population etc. Not sure about the mentioned though. Shyamal (talk) 09:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah It would be better to have all-English sources. But do not worry Senaratna's book published by a leading publishers in Sri Lanka (if not the biggest). Here is their web. The title of the book Sri Lankawe Jathika Vanodhyana means "National Parks of Sri Lanka" in Sinhala. Although this not descriptive as the Green's I found it very useful. I have another book called Sri Lankawe vananthara (Forests of Sri Lanka). ISBN 955-573-401-1. by same author.

• Some sources on the web suggest that the place was named by "Thomas Farr" - who (re)"discovered" it at least for the European settlers. Do you have a WP:RS for that ?

I have read that Thomas Farr is a planter. The story is two army officers found this plains when they were on hunting and named after the governor of that time.

• Some citation needed tags and inline clarification tags are added.

 Done

• Would suggest merging of the sections within Fauna, the "Fish and crustacea" stand out as being somewhat loose. Also overall this is too vertebrate centric

 Done Merged. Yeah it would be nice if I was able to mention some butterflies.

• Keep your eyes peeled for a new species of mouse deer http://www.flickr.com/photos/8586609@N04/2351394601/ - right now there is no WP:RS (it is said to jump into water to escape http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2009.05.007 !)

I found this and bit reluctant to mention it. I have a book authored by that Gehan de Silva Wijeratne. But I wasn't all convinced about his manner of writing. It better fit as a travel guide not as an academic literature.

• One pending item, there are three rivers mentioned in the lead but at the end of the physical features section, a cited mention of only one is provided.

 Done added a source. There were a couple of sections ending without source citations including the fauna section on endemic birds. I have moved some references which I believe cover these.

• Web links OK

http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Horton_Plains_National_Park

• Readability - just for fun

http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/readability1.4.py?page=Horton_Plains_National_Park

• 3 links going to redirects (not a real problem)

http://toolserver.org/~byrial/linkcount.php?sub=en&domain=wiki&page=Horton+Plains+National+Park&redir=yes&disambig=yes

Addional comments

• Why is there a comma in the first sentence?

 Done by shyamal

• National park should not be capitalized in the lead or the History section

 Done

• Why is there a comma in the last sentence of the lead?

That is serial comma. I don't know what is the relevant Mos Guideline regarding this. So grateful if you could point out and am willing to change it.

Only two places are listed. The serial comma is only used for three or more.

Fixed now

• "The peaks of Kirigalpotta 2,389 metres..." is not clear. The hights are just stuck in there without punctuation or other words.

 Done

• "Horton Plains was designated as a wildlife sanctuary on 5 December 1969,[1] and because of its biodiversity value, was elevated to a National park on 18 March 1988." is listed twice in the History.

 Done

• "A total 744 plant species" -> "A total 744 ofplant species"

 Done

Have changed it further, does not have to be that accurate. Feel free to improve on it. Shyamal (talk) 09:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant "A total of 744 plant species". You are welcome to be accurate.

• Why are there so many italicized scientific names? Those are meaningless to most readers. Use common names or cut back on the number of them.

Searched every species with binomial name for common names. Changed some. Some of them are simply don't have common names yet.

I see, but I'm sure you understand that one scientific name after another does help a casual reader, so perhaps only list the most important.

• Why is there a comma in "Species such as Gordonia, and Rhododendron arboreum have spread"?

See above

Serial comma is only for three or more items.

• Why is there a comma in "include shrubs such as the endemic, Rhodomyrtus tomentosa"

See above

Fixed now

Serial comma is only for three or more items.

Fixed now

• "about 1500 individuals of Sri Lankan Sambar Deer" -> "about 1500 Sri Lankan Sambar Deer"

 Done

• You can remove the main article link for the Attractions section.

 Done

Fantastic article overall! Reywas92^Talk 00:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks very much for the review. Extremely sorry for some what late response. I had lectures yesterday and working on your comments. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 05:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I have fixed almost every concerns. So grateful If you could have a look and inform me if there are anything needs to be tightened up. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
    • I have clarified. Thanks for the informative article! Reywas92^Talk 01:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
      • Thanks very much Reywas92 for kind and encouraging words. Hope to write a few like this. Regards--Chanaka L (talk) 08:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Horton Plains National Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://dw.iwmi.org/wetland_profile/Horton.asp

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Horton Plains National 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/20090205164237/http://primate-sg.org/PDF/PC23.lydekkerianus.distribution.V2.pdf to http://www.primate-sg.org/PDF/PC23.lydekkerianus.distribution.V2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 04:50, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Horton Plains National 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/20110617050423/http://www.pdn.ac.lk/purse/purse07/papers/026.pdf to http://www.pdn.ac.lk/purse/purse07/papers/026.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090328131313/http://www.primate-sg.org/nycticeboides07a.htm to http://www.primate-sg.org/nycticeboides07a.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160813131624/http://www.ceylontoday.lk/64-81943-news-detail-a-growing-threat.html to http://www.ceylontoday.lk/64-81943-news-detail-a-growing-threat.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090905152223/http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2009/08/30/fea15.asp to http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2009/08/30/fea15.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 22:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Horton Plains National 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/20110717202709/http://www.vijithayapa.com/pdesc.php?id=24046 to http://www.vijithayapa.com/pdesc.php?id=24046
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121019170127/http://www.dailynews.lk/2012/05/22/fea05.asp to http://www.dailynews.lk/2012/05/22/fea05.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100104162223/http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2002/04/21/fea11.html to http://www.sundayobserver.lk/2002/04/21/fea11.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707103440/http://nature.alawathugoda.com/horton.htm to http://nature.alawathugoda.com/horton.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 22:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Images

@Obi2canibe: Please explain replacement of significantly higher quality photographs. Only because I made them? --A.Savin (talk) 01:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

There is already an existing image of the grassland vegetation within the article, this image depicts the cloud forest vegetation, which is equally significant. Dan arndt (talk) 02:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dan arndt: If Obi2canoibe is unwilling to answer my question, surely you can do it for them. I'm waiting. --A.Savin (talk) 13:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I don’t presume to answer on anyone else’s behalf. I’ve already provided my explanation - your image is a duplication of another better image contained in the article. At least this image provides a contrast of the different vegetation types within the national park. Dan arndt (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

So does mine, and it is technically very much better. A "duplication", as for me, is e.g. if there are two photos of World's End in the article. --A.Savin (talk) 16:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Have solved the issue and replaced the main image with one that is more representative of the National Park therefore avoiding the issue of having two images effectively depicting the same landscape. Dan arndt (talk) 02:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dan arndt: I strongly disagree. Such low quality picture has nothing lost in the infobox. --A.Savin (talk) 13:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: Commons:Category:Horton Plains National Park has dozens of images of the park. So why do want to include an over processed image of a dusty path leading up a mountain? The current image, whilst better, is still not the best representation of the park. It would be better if we had a image of the park taken from high above giving a wider, panoramic view of the park. The original image did this. Other examples include this, this, this and this.--Obi2canibe (talk) 16:44, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The original image, apart from the low quality, id not a representation of the whole park, because it depicts only the view from World's End, which is only a partial aspect. The park is called "Horton Plains", with "plains" meaning that big parts of the area are flat, while located at a high elevation. --A.Savin (talk) 17:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

And the above of course still means that you are perfectly free to select a real better infobox picture, or go there yourself and take one (if you can). --A.Savin (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: The images you've chosen only show a partial aspect of the park - a dusty path up a mountain or a close of a river. They do not show wide view of the park. Views from World's End don't need to be excluded from this article just because there is separate article. If the view from World's End is the best image of the park then that's what we should include.

The title may include "plains" but the parks tropical montane cloud forest are the reason why it's part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site.--Obi2canibe (talk) 18:31, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

As you may have noticed, a World's End view picture is already in the article, so no need to be upset that it's no longer in the box too. Don't worry, be happy. --A.Savin (talk) 21:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: If that's the problem, the solution is to remove the image of World's End from main body and place one in the info box. The image in the main body shouldn't be anywhere in this article, or any other article. When we have a choice of dozens of images why should we include an over processed image with a bunch of gawking European tourists?--Obi2canibe (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, you don't need to repeat over and over again that you find all my pictures bad, I know it meanwhile, and I disagree. The "bunch of gawking European tourists" is because the caption is "The World's End is a tourist attraction", or sth like that. And you see the whole landmark on the picture and why it's actually called World's End. But feel free to go there and take a picture without tourists, as long as they are not back yet. --A.Savin (talk) 14:14, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@A.Savin: There are other images on Commons which can be used illustrate this point and aren't over processed or manipulated to give an unnatural look. Why choose this one?--Obi2canibe (talk) 15:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

You really don't need to tell me like a mantra over and over again "Your pictures are overprocessed". You are not someone I have respect for. It definitely needs a neutral opinion. This way we will not come forward. I'm really sorry. --A.Savin (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Fine, let's wait for a WP:3O. And respect WP:BRD, as you been told at ANI.--Obi2canibe (talk) 13:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

A.Savin Your statement above of "You are not someone I have respect for" violates WP:CIVIL and is not a helpful comment. 1292simon (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)