Talk:Yellowstone National Park: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 16:02, 27 November 2006 editCamperStrike (talk \| contribs)791 edits →Geology images ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 15:21, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk \| contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,091 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2]
(489 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header}}
	{{Messagebox protected areas}}
			{{Article history
	{{featured}}
			\|action1=FAC
	{{mainpage date\|March 29\|2004}}
			\|action1date=00:45, 12 Mar 2004
	{{V0.5\|class=FA\|category=Geography}}
			\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Yellowstone National Park
	Selected on ] (may be in HTML comment)
			\|action1result=promoted
			\|action1oldid=2735972

			\|action2=FAR
	__TOC__
			\|action2date=07:49, 2 May 2007
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Yellowstone National Park/archive1
			\|action2result=kept
			\|action2oldid=126092625

			\|action3=FTC
	--------
			\|action3date=02:51, 8 May 2007
	taken from Feature article nominations:
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured topic candidates/National Park Service/archive1
	== number of visitors==
			\|action3result=not promoted
	The number of visitors given in the infobox is from and applies to the ''fiscal year'', which most probably does not coincide with calendar year. gives the number of visitors for the ''calendar year'' 2002 as 2'983'051. Also, the km-ha discrepancy I noted at ] should be fixed (just decide on one of the numbers, apparently, not even the NPS itself knows how big the park is: gives again slightly different numbers). ] 09:59, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
			\|action3oldid=129025580

			\|action4 = FAR
	== Several quibbles ==
			\|action4date = 2023-06-10
			\|action4link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Yellowstone National Park/archive2
			\|action4result = demoted
			\|action4oldid = 1159027019

			\|currentstatus=FFA
	I very much enjoyed reading this article (and loved the photos) after following up the featured article nomination. I have several quibbles which can mostly be cleared up quite easily.
			\|maindate=March 29, 2004
			\|otd1date=2004-03-01\|otd1oldid=2645106
			\|otd2date=2005-03-01\|otd2oldid=10872616
			\|otd3date=2006-03-01\|otd3oldid=41759201
			\|otd4date=2007-03-01\|otd4oldid=111712870
			\|otd5date=2008-03-01\|otd5oldid=195065524
			\|otd6date=2009-03-01\|otd6oldid=274071041
			\|otd7date=2010-03-01\|otd7oldid=347176295
			\|otd8date=2015-03-01\|otd8oldid=649315826
			\|otd9date=2017-03-01\|otd9oldid=768098297
			\|otd10date=2018-03-01\|otd10oldid=828283064
			\|otd11date=2021-03-01\|otd11oldid=1009395273
			\|otd12date=2022-03-01\|otd12oldid=1074395986
			\|otd13date=2023-03-01\|otd13oldid=1142272567
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|collapsed=n\|class=B\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Protected areas\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Montana\|importance=high}}
			{{WikiProject Volcanoes\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Geology\|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject World Heritage Sites\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject United States\|importance=High\|WY=Yes\|WY-importance=Top\|Yellowstone=yes\|Yellowstone-importance=Top\|ID=yes\|ID-importance=top\|portal1-name=United States\|portal1-link=Selected article/4\|portal2-name=\|portal2-link=Selected article/1}}
			{{WikiProject National Archives\|importance=Mid}}
			}}

			{{User:MiszaBot/config
	*The lead paragraph doesn't say what country this is in, OK most people have heard of the names of American States, but it might be a good idea to mention the USA as a courtesy to the non Americans amongst us.
			\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav\|noredlinks=y}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 100K
			\|counter = 2
			\|minthreadsleft = 7
			\|algo = old(180d)
			\|archive = Talk:Yellowstone National Park/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{Spoken Misplaced Pages request\|Catfurball\|Important}}

			== Educational edits ==
	*The lead also contains the area down to the nearest square meter, a bit precise? I'd put such precise stats in the infobox, and give the area to the nearest square mile/square km.
			{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/University_of_Kansas/Environmental_Ethics_and_the_National_Parks_(Spring_2022) \| assignments = ], ] \| reviewers = ], ], ] \| start_date = 2022-01-19 \| end_date = 2022-05-20 }}

			== Fort Yellowstone ==
	*Throughout the article, there's a mixture of imperial and metric measurements. Pick one as standard (imperial as it's in the US?) and give the conversion after every time. Example of current text: "It was created by a cataclysmic eruption that occurred 630,000 years ago that released 1000 <u>cubic kilometres</u> of ash, rock and pyroclastic materials ... forming a crater nearly a <u>kilometre</u> deep and 45 by 25 <u>miles</u> in size"

			I currently live in Mammoth Hot Springs and I just wanted to point out that this article's photo of "Fort Yellowstone" actually depicts the General Store and the Terrace Grill, not the historical Fort. I'd love to see it replaced. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	*"The park was named for the yellow rocks seen in the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone - a deep gash in the Yellowstone Plateau that was formed by floods during previous ice ages and by river erosion from the Yellowstone River." - can you have a flood in an ice age? Are we talking about glacial erosion or was this area always too hot for that?

			:Thank you for the information! That is interesting! ] (]) 23:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
	*"It was known to the aboriginal natives as "Mitzi-a-dazi," the "River of Yellow Rocks," because of the high sulfur content of the rocks exposed in the river's canyons. The yellow rocks seen in the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone are caused by hydrothermally-altered iron-containing rocks." - shouldn't this kind of info (and more?) also be included in the Geology section?
			: Image swapped out with older image of Fort. ] (]) 12:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

			== Featured article review needed ==
	*There's no map of the park; I was wondering why there was no geographic/geological map of the park when I was reading the continental divide section - showing the two drainage sytems and the continental divide. Then I realised there is not a political map of the park itself either. I have no knowlegde of this area, or the geography of the US at all, so a map combining these two factors would be invaluable (showing the mountains/rivers etc, and pinpointing notable things like old faithful and any other significant named areas).

			This is a 2004 promotion that was reviewed back in 2007 and needs work.
	Well, that all sounded a bit negative. I really enjoyed this article - honest! ] \| ] 17:58, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
			The main issues are:
			*Citations. There are multiple paragraphs that are completely uncited. There are also countless unsourced sentences.
			*Manual of style: Many images violate ], and there are also some weasel terms/words.
			*Relevance: A lot of information needs to be updated. A big part of all references is pre-2010. Information about visitors also needs to be updated.

			This article is about one of the most important National Parks, and keeping its vital status (viewed >1m times/year) would be a significant achievement.
	:Not negative at all. Thanks for the feedback! I'll try to address these issues this weekend. --] 02:04, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
			] (]) 11:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

			:While a maintenance update may be warranted, you do realize that individual sentences need not be sourced, and that the historical scholarship hasn't advanced much since 2010? '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 13:14, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
	:*The outline map and the box which gives the location as USA seems adequate.
			::{{ping\|Acroterion}} Upon a closer look, you're right. But to have a featured article with completely uncited paragraphs seems rather peculiar. ] (]) 22:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
	:*I tweeked the units.
			:::Yes, that needs to be fixed, probably the result of 14 years of minor edits. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 22:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
	:*The NPS doesn't seem to have an appropriate map.
			::::We are old timers here so to someone that started editing a couple years ago 2007 must seem like the stone ages.--] (]) 23:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
	:*For info on (post)glacial flooding, see http://www.nps.gov/yell/nature/geology/geocanyn.htm .
	For more on the general subject see http://en.wikipedia.org/Lake_Bonneville and http://en.wikipedia.org/Missoula_Floods .
	We need an article on Washington's Channeled Scablands. ] 03:00, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

			{{ping\|Wretchskull\|MONGO}} Wretchskull, I realize you are new to ], so wanted to let you know that MONGO is the main author of so many older FAs, that it would not be possible for him to update all of them at once; we are trying to keep in mind that editors of many older FAs need time to work. I believe (??) he is working on Glacier next. {{pb}} MONGO, this one is in much worse shape than Glacier, and considerable updates will eventually be needed. Not only is a lot of it uncited, but information needs to be checked to be sure it is current and as of dates are given. It looks like this one got hit by student editing. I think I got all of the ]. ] (]) 22:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
	I wonder if one of the various wiki map people could help out and find us a map? There was a list of the various map people on the village pump the other day, IIRC. I snuck "US" into the lead paragraph, I don't think it's too obtrusive. I just read the link which described the flash flooding, and classic v-shaped valley. Interesting (thanks)... as are all the gaps in our understanding of the area. :) ] \| ] 04:13, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC), off to second the article.
			:It's really popular with student editors, so I'm not surprised that it has more issues. I'll see what I can do. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 23:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
			:: I can’t be much help because my computer is in repair and I am hunting and pecking from an iPad, but everything that is cited to the National Parks should be brought up to their latest version, and any data that might have changed needs checking (things like numbers of animals, number of visitors, etc). Thx! ] (]) 23:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
			:: PS, {{u\|Acroterion}} students are specifically requested to NOT edit featured articles ... if it happens again, you can contact the Wiki Ed staff person in the student template, and they will call them off. ] (]) 23:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
			:::I mean more along the lines of informal student editors, who've read about or done an assignment concerning Yellowstone, and then arrive here. There's not much individual harm, but the cumulative effect is evident. '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 23:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
			::::Wanted to mention that this article was brought to FA by someone other than myself, namely ] in 2004, before I even started editing here. 18 years is a long time so yes, this article probably needs a major update but no way I can do that in the near term.--] (]) 15:57, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

			== Map in infobox ==
	==Location map==
	How was the location map for this article created? I'd like to create simllar maps for other parks. - ] 22:21, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

			For a park of this size, having a single point mark its location within Wyoming isn't really adequate. Would anyone be opposed to adding an outline map of Yellowstone in place of the current map, similar to ]? <b style="line-height:1.2;display:inline-block;transform:skew(-14deg);border-radius:9Q;overflow:hidden;box-shadow:inset 0 0 0 1Q#04b">]]</b> 02:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
	== Ansel Adams? ==

			== John Colter, fire and brimstone ==
	If I recall correctly, ] did much of his photography of Yellowstone Park. Perhaps information about that could be added to the history section. That might also fill in the big gap in dates between the 19-teens and 1970's. --] 03:36, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

			The following paragraph is in the History section:
	:He did work in many national parks, but is most associated with ], not Yellowstone. --]

	== 62%? ==

	Anyone got a citation for this number?

	---current text---
	Preserved within Yellowstone are many geothermal features and some 10,000 hot springs and geysers, 62% of the planet's known total.

	---maybe this?---
	Preserved within Yellowstone are many geothermal features and thousands of hot springs. Approximately half of the planet's geysers are located within the park (Bryan, T.S. 1995, Glennon, J.A. 2005)


	References:
	*Bryan, T. S. (1995). The geysers of Yellowstone, 2nd edition. Niwot, Colorado: University Press of Colorado.

	*Glennon, J.A. (2005). World Geyser Fields, website, http://www.geyserworld.com/world.htm

	== DNA evidence ==

	I am concerned about the following sentence: "DNA evidence suggests the devastating results of these changes could have resulted in the worldwide population of humans falling to as little as 10,000 individuals." does anyone have a source for this? I don't argue the point, but think it should be referenced. If the last eruption of maximum magnitude occurred 600,000 years ago, then there is little chance that humans were invlved in any way...that is the era of ], not modern humans. Perhaps it should say something more like: Based on the evidence of previous eruption magnitudes, should an equal eruption occur today as did 600,000 years ago, the human population could be reduced to 10,000 individuals, due to the ] that would ensue.--] 00:19, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
	* The edit which inserted it refers to the BBC. But ''Homo erectus'' may have survived another 100,000 years, which seems unlikely if reduced to 10,000. I deleted the phrase. Also, the proposal to change from past to future tense does not seem reasonable because of the different number and abilities of modern humans. (] 04:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC))
	::Okay, I started other editing but am not sure this article is yet to be a featured article or has already been one...I don't want to step on anyone's toes...--] 04:57, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
	:::The above quote actually refers to a non-Yellowstone event, so deleted it didn't really effect anything about Yellowstone Ralph 22Feb06

	== 1988 Yellowstone Fires ==

	Not to continue nit picking, but I fought the forest fires for over 5 weeks in 1988 and I am concerned about the following sentence: "Controversially, however, no serious effort was made to completely extinguish the fires, and they burned until the arrival of autumn rains." The problem is mainly the wording. The facts are that due to a transformation of wild land fire suppression attitudes which went from putting out all fires dating back to the 1930's to letting them burn unchecked in the mid 1970's as, by the time the extremely hot and dry early summer of 1988 came around you had a huge amount of dead understory in the forest. A combination of lightning strike and man made fires were burning in the park and west of the park as early as April as oftentimes happens and was allowed to happen due to the hands off policy of that time. This doesn't mean that the fires weren't closely monitored. When mid to late July rolled around, a series of dry weather fronts with high winds caused the fires to explode and one fire consumed over 100,000 acres in a day. Even though by this time, some suppresion efforts were underway, it was too late. The Park Service then called in all available resources but by then the fires were out of control. Thousands of firefighters were at work in the park, building hundreds of miles of fire line and assisted by dozens of aircraft performing retardant drops. Pretty longwinded response to my questioning the use of the words "no serious effort". Could the sentence be rephrased?--] 00:43, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
	Additionally, the section should be expanded as it is the most significant event in the park since it's creation.--] 00:47, July 23, 2005 (UTC)


	I wouldn't mind seeing more opinions from firefighters on the "no serious effort to extinguish" comment. Does it even make sense to talk of "completely extinguishing" large wildfires? From what I've seen, once a fire takes hold there's nothing that can be done except to contain it and wait for it to run out of fuel. If I'm not mistaken, this comment not only misrepresents what happened in YNP in 1988, it misrepresents wilderness firefighting itself. ] 02:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

	== Infobox ==
	On my browser (Mozilla Firefox), the infobox has no space between it and the text. This makes the text more difficult to read. I've seen this on other national park pages. I've researched this but I haven't found out how to fix it yet. Would someone else look in to this? ] 06:02, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

	== article length ==
	This article is getting rather long. The volcano information should probably be split off into a ] article.--] 04:39, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
	* The length seems reasonable to me, and the information on past eruptions explains Park features. (] 13:43, 1 August 2005 (UTC))
	* I have no objection to the length of the article as it stands. ] 17:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

	:Er - I am the person who is usually the one complaining about articles being too long and yet I am planning on significantly expanding this article. In most cases, we do not even start to consider an article being too long until it at least triggers a page size warning. This article has not done that yet (30KB+ is the size that triggers such a warning). But given the importance of this topic and the fact that so much can be written about it, I would say that an article 50% larger than the current one would still not be too long. See ]. --] 17:50, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

	== ja ==

	Is there anyone who can speak and would be willing to contribute to ?

	Half of it is in the ].
	] 00:11, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

	== First and oldest ==
	It says "Yellowstone is the first and oldest national park in the world" -- isn't that redundant? If it's the first, it's by default the oldest. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 02:11, 1 September 2005 (UTC{{{3\|}}})</small><!-- -->

	:That assumes that every national park ever created is still a national park. If such a park was created before Yellowstone and was decommissioned a decade later, then that national park would not be the oldest even though it was the first. --] 17:44, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

	== Lower Yellowstone Fall Closeup ==
	I added a closeup of the lower falls but it was a little hard to fit in. I thought it was different enough from the existing lower fall picture to be worthy of inclusion. --] 18:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

	== Why no Supervolcano reference? ==

	I came here to learn more about the ] underneath Yellowstone. Why is there no mention of it? I would like to add reference to it, but I know so little about the topic that it would just come across as very amateurish if I did add anything. -- ] 21:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
	:You shouldn't feel that way, and you're right, it does need to be in the article...check here for info and more and another to get you started. --] 21:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

	:What do you mean by no reference? The word supervolcano was used at least twice in the article? ] 21:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

	Geez. How did I miss that? Thanks. I suppose that I assumed that if the supervolcano were mentioned in this article then it would be given its own section entirely. When I looked at the article index and didn't see any such section, I guess I assumed there was no mention of it in the article. Whatever the case, thanks for the response. -- ] 09:24, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

	== Map Problems ==

	Why don't we get a map that actually shows the borders of the park, rather than treating a designated, delineated National Park as an ambiguous region, in which case a simple circle would make sense.

	:I don't understand your problem, unless you're just talking about the map at the top of the article that has the dot. The map of Yellowstone and the map of the surrounding area show the boundaries of the park. ] 00:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

	:I think the problem is that most of the localized maps are at the bottom of the page. There's a lot of scrolling involved to find them. ] 00:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

	The map ion the infobox is just a locator for those completely unaware of where the park is situation on a map of the entire U.S. If the maps we have otherwise are bad or dated, that can be fixed of course.--] 02:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

	== 1988 Fires ==

	] is right. The section on the '88 fires is too small and too biased. Also, possibly out of date re: the current fire policy. I'll check it out and make an edit. ] 01:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

	Google the '''NIFC''' and the '''National Fire Plan''' and I'll try and assist this in a few days.--] 02:22, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

	== Yellow Stone(s) ==
	This article states "It was known to the original natives as "Mitzi-a-dazi," the "River of Yellow Rocks," because of the hydrothermally altered iron-containing yellow rocks in the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone (many people incorrectly believe that the yellow color is from sulfur)"

	However, someplace else (on Wiki) it states the name Yellowstone comes from the yellow sandstone found near the mouth of the Yellowstone river. I think the reference was either Yellowstone River or Fort Yellowstone articles. The sandstone story also matchs my memory from school. It also matchs history, as the river was called Yellowstone long before the "Park" area was popularly known.

	I'd check this out myself, but it's past bedtime Ralph 28Feb06(local)
	:We may need to find out what tribe or language this comes from, or if it is even an Indain name at all...or if our translation is correct.--] 06:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

	:: I found a ref here ... & . Per some other research I did, it may be tough to pin the language down to a specific tribe. The area wasn't dominated by a particular tribe. Bad thing is that the US gov sites don't reference this at all... ] 13:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
	:::Those certainly are a start...I'll look those over tonight...thank you.--] 13:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
	:::Interesting, two different sources giving two different backgrounds, how surprising (not) Ralph

	::::This is the account given in the Moon Handbooks Guide To Yellowstone and Grand Teton:

	::::"The word 'Yellowstone' appears to have come from the Minnetaree Indians, who called the river 'Mi tse a-da-zi,' a word French-Canadian trappers translated into 'Rive des Roches Jaunes'--literally, 'Yellow Rock River'.

	::::"The Indians apparently called it this because of the yellowish bluffs along the river near Billings, Montana (not because of the colorful Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone)." --] 18:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
	:::::It also appears here in this website...but they may have used your reference as their source. Billings is actually a fair distance from the present day park though. As far as French Trappers as part of the story, ] is widely credited with being the first white man to venture into the present day park. Does anyone have a date for when French Trappers are thought to have been in the region? It may predate Colter's 1806-1808 period when he was there.--] 11:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::::All the references I googled kind of look they point around and back to each other. Looks vaguely like an internet urban legend. I went to the National Park System gov website and sent them an email inquiry. So far no answer but I will keep you posted on what they say. ] 14:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


	::::::Hiram Chittenden, an army engineer and one of the park's first historians, reports the French using "Roche Jaune," perhaps as early as the mid-1700's. "Yellowstone" is a translation from the French name, which is itself a translation of an Indian name. Chittenden gives the Minnetaree name "Mi tsi a-da-zi" as the ultimate origin, but preferred to believe that the name derived from the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone area (simply because he wasn't impressed by the "yellowness" of the rock along the lower Missouri). Aubrey Haines, a former YNP Historian who frequently questioned received wisdom, disagreed. He pointed to the fact that the Minnetaree did not inhabit the upper Missouri, doubted they travelled that far, noted that the Shoshone name for the river tranlates as "Elk River," and dismissed Chittenden's argument in favor of the "lower river" explanation.

	::::::Chittenden's "The Yellowstone National Park" first appeared in 1895 and has been reprinted since; for Haines, I'm using his "Yellowstone Place Names" (1996).] 02:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)


	:::::::Very good find! I googled Hiram's name along with the river of yellow rocks and found the following additional reference which uses the phrase even earlier than Hiriam. . This is looking less like an internt urban legend. Here's an even better reference which itself refers back to a government publication. I think we got this done & dusted. ] 11:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
	::::::::I've tried to incorporate the findings of this talk page into the main article. I don't yet know how to cite references on Misplaced Pages, so could someone please do that? Feel free to rewrite my text, of course. --] 08:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::::I took the liberty of editing the discussion of the name "Yellowstone." I thought the entry could have led to confusion between the naming of the park and the naming of the river. By the time Yellowstone National Park was created, <i>Yellowstone</i> was a well-established name for the river which dominates the park, so there's no controversy about that - for the park, <i>Yellowstone</i> is a second-generation name. The uncertainties refer only to the original name of the <i>river</i>. ] 21:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

	== Cleanup ==

	In the process of recaptioning the images in this article, I removed a few redundant images.

	* There were three different pictures of Yellowstone Fall and the Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone. I removed P6260126.JPG-Lower Yellowstone Fall Closeup as it did not seem to fit with the geology section text which mainly deals with volcanism and seismicity.
	* There were three pictures of bison in the section about those animals. I decided to remove Buffalo Bizon.jpg-A lone Buffalo as it was least representative of the bison in the park. The other two showed the bison near a geothermal feature and the other showed how the bison interact with and are affected by people in the park.

	--] 18:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

	::* I have a picture I took of the North Gate of the park that is much clearer than the current picture. The current picture is extremely washed out, and you can't even read the sign on top. I uploaded my picture at http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Yellowstonenorth.jpg I didn't want to just remove someone else's picture without getting a general OK first. -- ] 18:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)


	::: Picture looks nice.... Since you've released rights to the image under GNU, go ahead and replace. ] 02:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

	]

	I removed '''image:Stump - Mallard Lake trail - Yellowstone 2004 12.jpg''' and made all picture sizes a uniform 200px to prevent crowding and/or clutter. Any thing larger than 200px on the right and 100-150px on the left causes photgraphs to infringe upon the text and each other.
	{{unsigned\|CamperStrike\|09:54, 10 November 2006}}

	Reverted changes by ] as the image size was no problem (I use low res and had no overlap), the gallery images were blanked, and the added section ''Past and Present Problems in Yellowstone'' seemed either redundant or irrelevant and incomplete. ] 14:15, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Fires (part deux) ==
	Jsut some observation as this section seems a little small. Maybe another article on currrent fire ecology theory is in order but here's my observation;
	1). Prior to 1988 the park policy was to fight all fires that were accessible as the park was to be preserved for the future. This created a dangerous situation that led to the fire of 1988.
	2). But as catastrophic as that fire was, it was not the sterilyzing burn that pre-1988 "let it burn" ecologists feared. In fact only a very small percentage (less tha 1%) of the soil is sterilized.

	and so, as I understand it, mans decision as to whether to fight the fires or not fight them is largely irrelevant in regards to the long term health of the forest. Even the most overgrown, fuel laden forest does not lead to sterilyzing fires. Is the current burn policy still controversial?

	My own $0.02 is that "lots of little fires" prevents the "big one" but the "big one" is really only "bad" from a perception point of view and the forrest is ultimately able to care for itself in spite of man's effort to "preserve" it. In a sense, every year that yellowstone has fires too small to make the news is a successful fire management year. The current fire policy was put in place before the 1988 after effects were measured so has this been studied and is there any controversy over the current policy?--] 06:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
	:There will be a major expansion and maybe a subarticle on fires in Yellowstone. I'm trying to keep this article at a featured level and hope to follow a similar organizational style as can be seen on ], but since there are no glacier in Yellowstone, we won;t have a section on that. No doubt, this article needs a lot of dressing up, so whatever you think should go in here, add it. We have almost nothing about the recreation, park management and aside from what I have started in the history section, no references are cited in the text of the article.--] 08:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Photographic Size ==
	Due to the large variety of photographs and great desire for people to feature them on wikipedia, I am requesting that all photographs be kept at a maximum of 200px for uniformaty and to prevent clutter or clipping of the text.{{unsigned\|68.207.207.137}}


	Added a gallery to the bottom of the page. It should help in the cleanup of this article.

	*I agree with ] photographic edits. By removing the px size and leaving it as ((thumb)) only, it keeps the photograpsh at their default wiki article size and prevents them from overtaking the article. If a reader needs to see a larger version of a photograph, then he or she is free to click on it for an enlargemnt.]

	== Photograph in question ==

	'''As demonstrated below, User Mogo believes that there is no room for a 2004 photograph demonstrating how the forest had partialy recovered from the 1988 fire.''' Shall this panaramic photograph stay or go.

	I believe it shows how the ecosystem can recover from what was believed at the time to be a huge enviromental disaster. This panarmic shot shows that in time things return to they way they were. It also shows dead scorched trees (as edvidence of the fire)along with new groth and how it affected tourism at Yellowstone (blocked roads).

	''I also agree that it should belong in the article. It is edvidence of an ecological disaster and recovery all in one article. Mongo has argued that such panaramic photographs don't belong in featured articles but .''

	<blockquote>		<blockquote>
			In 1806, ], a member of the ], left to join a group of ]. After splitting up with the other trappers in 1807, Colter passed through a portion of what later became the park, during the winter of 1807–1808. He observed at least one ] area in the northeastern section of the park, near ].<ref name="Haines">{{cite web \|last=Haines \|first=Aubrey L. \|title=The Lewis and Clark Era (1805–1814) \|website=Yellowstone National Park: Its Exploration and Establishment \|publisher=U.S. Department of the Interior \|url=http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/haines1/iee1a.htm \|year=2000 \|access-date=November 14, 2006 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061015000223/http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/haines1/iee1a.htm \|archive-date=October 15, 2006}}</ref> After surviving wounds he suffered in a battle with members of the Crow and ] tribes in 1809, Colter described a place of "]" that most people dismissed as delirium; the supposedly mystical place was nicknamed "]". Over the next 40 years, numerous reports from mountain men and trappers told of boiling mud, steaming rivers, and ] trees, yet most of these reports were believed at the time to be myth.<ref name="Haines2">{{cite web \|last=Haines \|first=Aubrey L. \|title=The Fur Trade Era (1818–42) \|website=Yellowstone National Park: Its Exploration and Establishment \|publisher=U.S. Department of the Interior \|year=2000 \|url=http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/haines1/iee1b.htm \|access-date=November 15, 2006 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061015000323/http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/haines1/iee1b.htm \|archive-date=October 15, 2006}}</ref>
	A series of ]-derived ]s started to burn large portions of the park in July of the especially dry summer of 1988. Thousands of ]s responded to the blaze in order to prevent human-built structures from succumbing to the flames. Controversially, however, no serious effort was made to completely extinguish the fires, and they burned until the arrival of autumn rains. Ecologists argue that fire is part of the Yellowstone ], and that not allowing the fires to run their course (as has been the practice in the past) will result in an overgrown forest that would be extremely vulnerable to deoxygenation, disease, and decay. In fact, relatively few ] in the park were killed by the fires; and since the blaze, many saplings have sprung up on their own, old vistas are viewable once again, and many previously unknown archaeological and geological sites of interest were found and cataloged by scientists. The National Park Service now has a policy of lighting smaller, controlled "]" to prevent another dangerous buildup of flammable materials.
	{{wide image\|Fallen Logs along Fountain Flat Drive.jpg\|7000px\|This June 14, 2004 ] from of 15 individual ] demonstrates how forest burned by ] is able to recover after a few decades. Young saplings contrast with the remains of old burned trees. Fire is a healthy part of the Yellowstone ] (Click Image To Enlarge)}}{{unsigned\|68.207.207.137}}
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

			I don't see support in either of these two sources for the claims that people didn't believe Colter, nor that Colter was wounded or fought in a battle, nor that people believed the other reports to be myth. The phrase "fire and brimstone" is also absent from both sources. This is concerning, as it is a featured article.
	:In Featured articles, we make all attempts to limit the number of images and the one you wanted included above shows almost as much of a road than it does of fire "ecology". The text in the blockquote is fine, but has no references and is therefore a violation of ]. This is a featured article and we also do not use "see also" in featured articles most of the time. You also have your resolution set up too high as most featured articles generally have images around 250-270px. I'm trying to get this article to a higher level, but honestly, if you're going to continue to try and force the issue, I'll just step back and let you continue to do whatever you want.--] 12:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	*I agree with Vsmith that 250px is too big and clutters the page. Notice that parts of the article have a "bottle neck effect" adn appear crammed. Remove 50px from each left and right photograph and that will save 100px of valuble text space per line.{{unsigned\|68.207.207.137}}
	::That's because there are too many images in the article and not enough words. As the article is expanded, the images will be more spread out. Have a look at ] or ] to see how recently promoted featured articles have their images spaced and the size that is generally used....also notice that neither article is overcrowded with images as this one is.--] 07:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
	:The panorama photo was just too wide to show what it was supposed to at that scale - removed it. As for the 200px stuff, that is the standart for thumbed images - so why not leave out the 200px so user prefs can work? ] 14:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
	:I think in the articles that are generally featured, setting them to approximately somewhere around 250px to 270px helps them from appearing too huge for those with a high resolution setting.--] 14:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Er - I have my monitor set at 800x600 (the lowest setting) and have no real problem with image size at either the 250 or 200 sizes. I simply recommended the default for thumb size of 200px (in other words leave out the px setting) as that way user prefs can work, but can go either way with image size. ] 11:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Article protection requested ==
	I was trying to get this article to remain at a level of featured, but have tired of watching the article become of a lower quality than a higher one. If one looks at several articles that have been more recently promoted to featured level, ], ] and ], they will see that in each case, the images are generally about 250-300px, all the sections have cited references and there is far more text than images. I had started to add cited references, cleanup the text and make improvements, but see can't do this if my changes (which match the FA"s I already linked) are going to be reverted all the time.--] 10:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Page protection has been granted. Please use the talk page to resolve disputes. I suggest that everyone take a look at ] and take into consideration that when you specify image size, it overrides user preferences (set in ], under "Files"). --] <small>(])</small> 12:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	::I don't see any discussion here...I have lowered the protection to semi-protection, as I would like to see improvements to this article to continue. I will keep watch on the article. --] <small>(])</small> 03:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	== Image Resolutions ==

	I'm not too impressed with the quality of the pictures on this site. I uploaded a picture a few weeks back of the Yellowstone North Gate entrance that I took. That's the resolution I'd like to see, personally. Almost every other picture on the site has high digital noise and low resolution which almost makes them look like they were taken from a camera phone. I do have a lot more pictures I can upload, but would prefer not to have a high ego labeled by replacing every single picture with one I've taken. At least not without a general consensus first. But compare the north gate picture with the rest of the pictures on here, and I'd appreciate to hear peoples feedback on their image resolutions. ] 21:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Hello - your pic of the north gate is unquestionably of better resolution (and a real improvement over the one that was there before). To my eye, most of the other pics are actually OK, both in terms of the way they look as small images on the page, and as enlargements when you click on them. Could they be better? Certainly. Do they need to be? I'd say not, but I certainly would not argue with your replacing them -- see what other folks say. The only pics on the page now that I would like to see better are issues of composition rather than resolution - Ft Yellowstone, Firehole river, and Old Faithful, especially. Thanks for your work - cheers, ] 22:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	==Image sizes==
	I have removed all the specified "px" sizes, so that ] can work. Now, the article is overcrowded with images. Choices need to be made as to which images to keep here, which to perhaps move to the subarticles, and to ]. --] <small>(])</small> 17:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	==Galleries==

	As for galleries, they are typically not used in ], though perhaps one with at most four images could be acceptable with a link to more images in Commons. --] <small>(])</small> 17:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	Prehaps we could use a gallerie and do it with fewer pictures than the previous implementation had? ]

	:For now, I don't see consensus for a gallery here. We have a link to the Yellowstone page on commons . That page, which serves as a gallery, can use improvement and better organization. --] <small>(])</small> 17:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

			{{reflist-talk}} —] (] ~ ]) 02:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
	==Geology images==
	We currently have 7 images in the geology section. I think we have room for 4-5 images in this setion.
	<gallery>
	Image:Yellowstone_bubbling_pool.jpg\|Boiling pool at Biscuit Basin
	Image:Columnar basalt closeup near Tower Fall in Yellowstone.jpg\|Columnar basalt near Tower Fall. Large floods of basalt and other lava types preceded mega-eruptions of superheated ash and pumice.
	Image:Firehole River near Excelsior Geyser in Yellowstone.jpg\|The Firehole River near Excelsior Geyser. Due to the volume of heated water pouring into the river from the geothermal features, the temperature of the river can get as high as 86 °F (30 °C).
	Image:Grand prismatic spring.jpg\|A thermal image of the ].
	Image:Steamboat Geyser at Norris Geyser Basin in Yellowstone-750px.JPG\|Steamboat Geyser: The world's tallest active geyser, Eruptions can reach as high as 300 feet (90 m).
	Image:Old_Faithful_Geyser_Yellowstone_National_Park.jpg\|The most famous geyser in the world, ]
	Image:Morning_Glory_Pool.JPG\|Morning Glory Pool
	</gallery>

			== yellowstone being the " first " national park in the world ==
	I think "Grand prismatic spring" is a must, as it is a featured picture. Which of the others do you think should be included? --] <small>(])</small> 19:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

			Sirs
	:I would choose the columnar basalt and Old Faithful (though I wish the OF pic could be a more dramatic one). Cheers --] 19:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

			Not only is the claim wrong but misleads the readers by the assertion of being the world's first national park. This title belongs to Mongolia who in the 1700's made an area in their country a national park pre dating the yellowstone's status by some 100 years Please amend the error and correct the article accordingly ] (]) 09:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
	]
			:Source? '''<span style="font-family: Arial;">] <small>]</small></span>''' 12:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
	I personaly like this shot of the morning glory pool, but I think it will need some colour tweeking: the contrast seems to be a bit too high.]

			* What is the NAME of this park? All the parks listed in ] were established in the late 20th century. A name would help resolve this. ] (]) 17:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
	==Yellowstone Fire of 1988==
	I also wikified the Forest fires section to provide a link to ]. I think there should be a subarticle about the fire and how the ecosystem has recovered. I don't have the time right now or knowledge to start that article. --] <small>(])</small> 19:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

			See: ] (which includes source reference citations) for some details about the claim of it being the world's first national park. ] (]) 17:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

			:Just wanna say that t
	==Images again==
			:his article needs to be updated.Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. ] (]) 15:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
	I realize he/she means well, but continued efforts to go around to articles and reduce the image sizes to accomdate high resolution setting for browsers is being disruptive. I gave linked Banff, Glacier and Redwoods as featured articles that this one should rise up to. In those articles, the images are fixed at a set size (about 250px) which is a better appearance than the tiny, almost postage size result we get when we have images reduced to smaller sizes. Furthermore, the use of the ultrawide image above may be okay for a featured article, but that image in particular is simply not a decent one...much of the image is of a road, not of a burned forest. There are better images available for this. Finally, articles are not image respositories...they are supposed to have written and cited text and images are only used to illustrate...in other words, accent the text. I have tried repeatedly to explain this to CamperStrike, but I do not seem to be getting the message across.--] 10:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
			:Question: Do you know which is the climate of Yellowstone National Park? ] (]) 15:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

			== Useless map ==

			The map of the park has geographic features and some unidentified cadastral lines. With no boundary or natural object named you cannot tell where the park boundaries are or where it sits in relation to the States it is in. In other words unless you already know all about it - it is useless. ] (]) 07:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
	==Proposal to bring back the table of information==
	<table border="1" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" align="right" width="280px">
	<tr><td style="background:#9BCB65;" align="center" colspan=2>
	<font size="+1">'''Yellowstone'''</font></td></tr>
	<tr><td align="center" colspan=2>
	]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''Designation''</td>
	<td>]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>'']''</td>
	<td>], ] and ]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''Nearest ]''</td>
	<td>], ]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>'']''</td>
	<td>{{coor dm\|44\|40\|N\|110\|28\|W\|}}</td></tr>
	<tr><td>'']''</td>
	<td>2,219,799 acres<BR>8,983.24 km²</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''Date of establishment''</td>
	<td>], ]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''Visitation''</td>
	<td>2,969,868 (2002)</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''Governing body''</td>
	<td>]</td></tr>
	<tr><td>''] category'' </td>
	<td>II (National Park)</td></tr>
	</table>
	In order for yellostone to achieve feature status, I am proposing to bring back the table of information to this article.
	http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment
	--]

Latest revision as of 15:21, 10 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Yellowstone National Park article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months

Yellowstone National Park is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 29, 2004.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 12, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
May 2, 2007	Featured article review	Kept
May 8, 2007	Featured topic candidate	Not promoted
June 10, 2023	Featured article review	Demoted
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 1, 2004, March 1, 2005, March 1, 2006, March 1, 2007, March 1, 2008, March 1, 2009, March 1, 2010, March 1, 2015, March 1, 2017, March 1, 2018, March 1, 2021, March 1, 2022, and March 1, 2023.
Current status: Former featured article

This

level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Protected areas Top‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Montana High‑importance

	Montana portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Montana on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontanaWikipedia:WikiProject MontanaTemplate:WikiProject MontanaMontana
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Volcanoes Top‑importance

	Volcanoes portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology High‑importance

	Geology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

World Heritage Sites Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of World Heritage Sites on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.World Heritage SitesWikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage SitesTemplate:WikiProject World Heritage SitesWorld Heritage Sites
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Idaho / Wyoming / Yellowstone High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Idaho portal This article is supported by WikiProject Idaho (assessed as Top-importance).
	Wyoming portal This article is supported by WikiProject Wyoming (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Wyoming - Yellowstone task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article has been selected for use on the United States portal.

National Archives (inactive)

This article is within the scope of National Archives project, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.National ArchivesWikipedia:WikiProject National ArchivesTemplate:WikiProject National ArchivesNational Archives

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

Educational edits

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 January 2022 and 20 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lgenn03, FaithMildfelt (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Rileysteg, Alli St. John, Emmjohnson.

Fort Yellowstone

I currently live in Mammoth Hot Springs and I just wanted to point out that this article's photo of "Fort Yellowstone" actually depicts the General Store and the Terrace Grill, not the historical Fort. I'd love to see it replaced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.151.75.66 (talk) 21:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the information! That is interesting! Eruditess (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Image swapped out with older image of Fort. Mike Cline (talk) 12:27, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Featured article review needed

This is a 2004 promotion that was reviewed back in 2007 and needs work. The main issues are:

Citations. There are multiple paragraphs that are completely uncited. There are also countless unsourced sentences.
Manual of style: Many images violate WP:SANDWICH, and there are also some weasel terms/words.
Relevance: A lot of information needs to be updated. A big part of all references is pre-2010. Information about visitors also needs to be updated.

This article is about one of the most important National Parks, and keeping its vital status (viewed >1m times/year) would be a significant achievement. Wretchskull (talk) 11:18, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

While a maintenance update may be warranted, you do realize that individual sentences need not be sourced, and that the historical scholarship hasn't advanced much since 2010? Acroterion (talk) 13:14, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Acroterion: Upon a closer look, you're right. But to have a featured article with completely uncited paragraphs seems rather peculiar. Wretchskull (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that needs to be fixed, probably the result of 14 years of minor edits. Acroterion (talk) 22:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

We are old timers here so to someone that started editing a couple years ago 2007 must seem like the stone ages.--MONGO (talk) 23:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Wretchskull and MONGO: Wretchskull, I realize you are new to WP:FAR, so wanted to let you know that MONGO is the main author of so many older FAs, that it would not be possible for him to update all of them at once; we are trying to keep in mind that editors of many older FAs need time to work. I believe (??) he is working on Glacier next.

MONGO, this one is in much worse shape than Glacier, and considerable updates will eventually be needed. Not only is a lot of it uncited, but information needs to be checked to be sure it is current and as of dates are given. It looks like this one got hit by student editing. I think I got all of the MOS:SANDWICH. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

It's really popular with student editors, so I'm not surprised that it has more issues. I'll see what I can do. Acroterion (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I can’t be much help because my computer is in repair and I am hunting and pecking from an iPad, but everything that is cited to the National Parks should be brought up to their latest version, and any data that might have changed needs checking (things like numbers of animals, number of visitors, etc). Thx! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

PS, Acroterion students are specifically requested to NOT edit featured articles ... if it happens again, you can contact the Wiki Ed staff person in the student template, and they will call them off. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I mean more along the lines of informal student editors, who've read about or done an assignment concerning Yellowstone, and then arrive here. There's not much individual harm, but the cumulative effect is evident. Acroterion (talk) 23:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Wanted to mention that this article was brought to FA by someone other than myself, namely Mav in 2004, before I even started editing here. 18 years is a long time so yes, this article probably needs a major update but no way I can do that in the near term.--MONGO (talk) 15:57, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Map in infobox

For a park of this size, having a single point mark its location within Wyoming isn't really adequate. Would anyone be opposed to adding an outline map of Yellowstone in place of the current map, similar to Park County, Wyoming? Mysteryman blue 02:08, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

John Colter, fire and brimstone

The following paragraph is in the History section:

In 1806, John Colter, a member of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, left to join a group of fur trappers. After splitting up with the other trappers in 1807, Colter passed through a portion of what later became the park, during the winter of 1807–1808. He observed at least one geothermal area in the northeastern section of the park, near Tower Fall. After surviving wounds he suffered in a battle with members of the Crow and Blackfoot tribes in 1809, Colter described a place of "fire and brimstone" that most people dismissed as delirium; the supposedly mystical place was nicknamed "Colter's Hell". Over the next 40 years, numerous reports from mountain men and trappers told of boiling mud, steaming rivers, and petrified trees, yet most of these reports were believed at the time to be myth.

I don't see support in either of these two sources for the claims that people didn't believe Colter, nor that Colter was wounded or fought in a battle, nor that people believed the other reports to be myth. The phrase "fire and brimstone" is also absent from both sources. This is concerning, as it is a featured article.

References

Haines, Aubrey L. (2000). "The Lewis and Clark Era (1805–1814)". Yellowstone National Park: Its Exploration and Establishment. U.S. Department of the Interior. Archived from the original on October 15, 2006. Retrieved November 14, 2006.
Haines, Aubrey L. (2000). "The Fur Trade Era (1818–42)". Yellowstone National Park: Its Exploration and Establishment. U.S. Department of the Interior. Archived from the original on October 15, 2006. Retrieved November 15, 2006.

—Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 02:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

yellowstone being the " first " national park in the world

Sirs

Not only is the claim wrong but misleads the readers by the assertion of being the world's first national park. This title belongs to Mongolia who in the 1700's made an area in their country a national park pre dating the yellowstone's status by some 100 years Please amend the error and correct the article accordingly 188.29.193.19 (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Source? Acroterion (talk) 12:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

What is the NAME of this park? All the parks listed in List of national parks of Mongolia were established in the late 20th century. A name would help resolve this. Mike Cline (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

See: Bogd Khan Uul Biosphere Reserve (which includes source reference citations) for some details about the claim of it being the world's first national park. GeoWriter (talk) 17:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Just wanna say that t

his article needs to be updated.Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. 152.166.156.103 (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Question: Do you know which is the climate of Yellowstone National Park? 152.166.156.103 (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Useless map

The map of the park has geographic features and some unidentified cadastral lines. With no boundary or natural object named you cannot tell where the park boundaries are or where it sits in relation to the States it is in. In other words unless you already know all about it - it is useless. 116.251.32.210 (talk) 07:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Categories: