Great Salt Lake was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Great Salt Lake:
Completed or in-process:
Priority 2
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
This article is FULL of grammatical and composition mistakes, and I don't have time to correct all of them. The article is especially bad concerning the terminology of geology and civil engineering.
A natural, solid, geological body in a lake - that extends above or close to the surface - is either an island, an islet, a rock, a reef, or a shoal. Islands and islets are permanent features that extend above the water level all the time. There is no such thing as an island or an islet that disappears. If it ever does so, then it is a rock, a reef, or a shoal.
There was a huge amound of confusion about what a water pump does, and I have corrected most of these. In the context of this article, a water pump that has its inlet in a lake, river, or canal "moves", "removes", or "pumps" water, and there is no point in its doing anything else. There were several other words that had been used that didn't make any sense.
It would be helpful for writers to learn something about civil engineering rather than letting their imaginations run wild.
98.81.11.27 (
talk)
19:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The article currently ends with "Source: The April 29, 2002 issue of High Country News". Is this a direct quote, or just where the information came from? If the former, we need to verify that it's a public domain resource. If not, I'll take that out. Vicki Rosenzweig
a pic would be great here...there is one on the German version of the article: Großer Salzsee....how does one borrow?? Jon 01:48, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The Weber River does not flow into the lake per se, it flows into the Ogden River, which then flows into the east side of the lake in Ogden Bay. At http://www.ogdencvb.org/Davis/lake.html they call it the weber/ogden tributary.
Could someone with more skill squeeze in the names of all the islands (carrington, dolphin, badger, and egg island are not mentioned, neither is strong's knobb)?
Recent studies of the GSL's water have revealed the highest levels of mercury found in any body of water tested in the United States. We need to add a section about the pollution on the lake. see this and this article for a little more info.
" Is the Great Salt Lake polluted?
The quantities of harmful contaminants in the lake, such as industrial organic wastes, copper, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, and lead are very low. This is contrary to what one might expect since rivers, waste-water treatment plants, and industrial facilities discharge into the lake."
This seems to indicate that the lake has been tested before for mercury, but only "very low" levels were found.
There are 7 links in the to-do list above we should use to expand the mercury info, if anyone is willing to look through them. -- Lethargy 01:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
From the Dead Sea's peer review:
The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.
This applies here as well. The current lead is pretty good IMO, but it introduces information not currently included in the article (e.g. Lake Bonneville, lake effect snow). Please make sure this info is added somewhere and make sure the lead section adequately summarizes the article. I have a pretty good idea of improvements I can make to the lead, which I will post later. -- Lethargy 01:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
It is important to have a clear idea of what needs to be covered in the lead, my current topics include (please add any you think should be there):
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the GSL near where the Mormons went in 1800-something? In the 1830, Joseph Smith organized the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I think that is notable enough to be included somewhere. Insane99 19:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
In the 1830 Joseph Smith organized the church of jesus christ of latter day saints. I thinks this article looks great. But is there a reason that the subheading "Ecosystem" has so few in-line references? I think if that one matter were addressed, corrected and/or clarified, I would approve this. One other thing: Why is there a subheading under superstitions? There only appears to be one, so the subheading is unecessary.-- Esprit15d 13:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
This article has been delisted from GA status for failing to meet the following criteria:
-- jwanders Talk 07:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
bob rulz 02:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The issues were taken care of and the article fits all of the GA criteria. -- GoOdCoNtEnT 06:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
As I have mentioned elsewhere, I plan to submit this for peer review soon. Before I do that, I'd be very grateful if everyone could copy-edit it (see Wikipedia:How to copy-edit) to improve grammar, punctuation, tone, etc. Also, please review it and list any opportunities for improvement.
The first thing I notice about the article in its current state is that the commerce section could use some expanding and more references. I expanded the evaporation pond stuff earlier, but I would like to see the rest of it expanded. Also, I'm not entirely sure why Spiral Jetty is in the commerce section, unless it is a tourist attraction... -- Lethargy 21:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
"The harvest of brine shrimp cysts during fall and early winter has developed into a significant local industry."
We should expand this one sentence paragraph. How significant is the industry (e.g. how much money does it bring in and where are the products seen), what effect has the harvest had on the lake (this may belong in the ecosystem section, I'm not sure), and what are the cysts used for? Some sources we can use: [13] [14] [15] [16]-- Lethargy 21:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
First off, this is a beautiful article, and all those who have contributed should be proud of their work. I think it deserves to be a selected article, among other things :D
Now, on to what I think might improve it - and I think most of my comments will be pretty low-key.
Current: ...deposit around 1.1 million tons of minerals in the lake each year,[1] and the balance of evaporated water is mineral-free, concentrating the lake further.
This piece of a sentence, while likely totally true and factual, is written in a slightly confusing manner. I am unsure at this time as to a replacement sentence.
Current: ... prehistoric lake called Lake Bonneville. Lake Bonneville was nearly as large as Lake Michigan and significantly deeper ...
Suggestion: ... prehistoric lake called Lake Boneville which, at it's peak surface area, was nearly as large as Lake Michegan and was significantly deeper ...
--note: The rest of this sentence seems a little bit awkwark, though I cannot come up with a suitable alternative barring the use of parentheses. Em3rald 03:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Some metric sizes are wrong. 950 square miles = 2,460 km² (not 1,529 km²) ; 3,300 square miles = 8,547 km² (not 5,311 km²)
84.233.128.65 07:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a great page. Three memories I have of the lake are its surreal beauty especially at sunset when the mountains seem to rise into the sky, the buffalos on Antelope Island, and the lake stink.
I believe the lake stink is caused by the brine flies, which are remarkable unto themselves as they actually live in the water and fly out when you wave your hand over them. The level of lake stink is part of radio weather reports.-- John van v 00:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I recently stumbled upon the North Shore Monster article. I fixed up what I could, but it does need more attention. See my comments on that article's talk page for more of my comments. Even if you're not interested in that article right now, it is short so I'd like you to read it and fix up what you can. Then you can ignore it, if you like. — Val42 ( talk) 22:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm of the belief that this section might be worth turning into a separate article on the grounds that this was a major and controversial engineering project (For example, see this New York Times article. Supposedly satellite pictures exist of the lake while the pumping was in operation, which might be worth locating. Also it should be make clear that the region the water was pumped into is the area into which the Great Salt Lake expands to once it rises above 4217 ft. Finally it would appear that the lake created lasted until 1991, perhaps photographs exist from the lakeshore. Graham1973 ( talk) 02:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
This article, along with several related articles, cite a website for the claim that Calochortus luteus may have occurred on islands in the GSL. This website cites only a text from the explorer Domenech, but other explorers from this time period mentioned seeing C. luteus as well. I think this is not supported by any evidence, and is explained by the fact that the name C. luteus was applied to plants that are today called C. aureus and which look much like C. luteus. I am looking for a better source on this, as we have only a few. In the meantime, I have revised the text, but it could be revised to be more vague about this, or more definite. I tried to follow a middle path. Michaplot ( talk) 02:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I remember years ago learning about the lake growing. I came here looking for info to see how far along it was. And nothing! Looked over at google and see that now it's actually shrinking. Seems like this needs a section. Leitmotiv ( talk) 18:54, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
the water volume is stated to be 18km2 is that to spill point, current year, average. I assume the water volume is very variable? 92.110.165.40 ( talk) 18:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Shouldn't we add a mention of the fact that the dangerous compound BMAA has been found in Great Salt Lake dust? Source: https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2023/11/16/study-shines-more-light-toxins/ 98.123.38.211 ( talk) 23:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2006 listing with uncited material. failing criterion 2b GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 15:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, I don't think the required notifications were ever made here. Hog Farm Talk 20:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Great Salt Lake was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Great Salt Lake:
Completed or in-process:
Priority 2
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
This article is FULL of grammatical and composition mistakes, and I don't have time to correct all of them. The article is especially bad concerning the terminology of geology and civil engineering.
A natural, solid, geological body in a lake - that extends above or close to the surface - is either an island, an islet, a rock, a reef, or a shoal. Islands and islets are permanent features that extend above the water level all the time. There is no such thing as an island or an islet that disappears. If it ever does so, then it is a rock, a reef, or a shoal.
There was a huge amound of confusion about what a water pump does, and I have corrected most of these. In the context of this article, a water pump that has its inlet in a lake, river, or canal "moves", "removes", or "pumps" water, and there is no point in its doing anything else. There were several other words that had been used that didn't make any sense.
It would be helpful for writers to learn something about civil engineering rather than letting their imaginations run wild.
98.81.11.27 (
talk)
19:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
The article currently ends with "Source: The April 29, 2002 issue of High Country News". Is this a direct quote, or just where the information came from? If the former, we need to verify that it's a public domain resource. If not, I'll take that out. Vicki Rosenzweig
a pic would be great here...there is one on the German version of the article: Großer Salzsee....how does one borrow?? Jon 01:48, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The Weber River does not flow into the lake per se, it flows into the Ogden River, which then flows into the east side of the lake in Ogden Bay. At http://www.ogdencvb.org/Davis/lake.html they call it the weber/ogden tributary.
Could someone with more skill squeeze in the names of all the islands (carrington, dolphin, badger, and egg island are not mentioned, neither is strong's knobb)?
Recent studies of the GSL's water have revealed the highest levels of mercury found in any body of water tested in the United States. We need to add a section about the pollution on the lake. see this and this article for a little more info.
" Is the Great Salt Lake polluted?
The quantities of harmful contaminants in the lake, such as industrial organic wastes, copper, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, and lead are very low. This is contrary to what one might expect since rivers, waste-water treatment plants, and industrial facilities discharge into the lake."
This seems to indicate that the lake has been tested before for mercury, but only "very low" levels were found.
There are 7 links in the to-do list above we should use to expand the mercury info, if anyone is willing to look through them. -- Lethargy 01:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
From the Dead Sea's peer review:
The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.
This applies here as well. The current lead is pretty good IMO, but it introduces information not currently included in the article (e.g. Lake Bonneville, lake effect snow). Please make sure this info is added somewhere and make sure the lead section adequately summarizes the article. I have a pretty good idea of improvements I can make to the lead, which I will post later. -- Lethargy 01:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
It is important to have a clear idea of what needs to be covered in the lead, my current topics include (please add any you think should be there):
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the GSL near where the Mormons went in 1800-something? In the 1830, Joseph Smith organized the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I think that is notable enough to be included somewhere. Insane99 19:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
In the 1830 Joseph Smith organized the church of jesus christ of latter day saints. I thinks this article looks great. But is there a reason that the subheading "Ecosystem" has so few in-line references? I think if that one matter were addressed, corrected and/or clarified, I would approve this. One other thing: Why is there a subheading under superstitions? There only appears to be one, so the subheading is unecessary.-- Esprit15d 13:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
This article has been delisted from GA status for failing to meet the following criteria:
-- jwanders Talk 07:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
bob rulz 02:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The issues were taken care of and the article fits all of the GA criteria. -- GoOdCoNtEnT 06:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
As I have mentioned elsewhere, I plan to submit this for peer review soon. Before I do that, I'd be very grateful if everyone could copy-edit it (see Wikipedia:How to copy-edit) to improve grammar, punctuation, tone, etc. Also, please review it and list any opportunities for improvement.
The first thing I notice about the article in its current state is that the commerce section could use some expanding and more references. I expanded the evaporation pond stuff earlier, but I would like to see the rest of it expanded. Also, I'm not entirely sure why Spiral Jetty is in the commerce section, unless it is a tourist attraction... -- Lethargy 21:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
"The harvest of brine shrimp cysts during fall and early winter has developed into a significant local industry."
We should expand this one sentence paragraph. How significant is the industry (e.g. how much money does it bring in and where are the products seen), what effect has the harvest had on the lake (this may belong in the ecosystem section, I'm not sure), and what are the cysts used for? Some sources we can use: [13] [14] [15] [16]-- Lethargy 21:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
First off, this is a beautiful article, and all those who have contributed should be proud of their work. I think it deserves to be a selected article, among other things :D
Now, on to what I think might improve it - and I think most of my comments will be pretty low-key.
Current: ...deposit around 1.1 million tons of minerals in the lake each year,[1] and the balance of evaporated water is mineral-free, concentrating the lake further.
This piece of a sentence, while likely totally true and factual, is written in a slightly confusing manner. I am unsure at this time as to a replacement sentence.
Current: ... prehistoric lake called Lake Bonneville. Lake Bonneville was nearly as large as Lake Michigan and significantly deeper ...
Suggestion: ... prehistoric lake called Lake Boneville which, at it's peak surface area, was nearly as large as Lake Michegan and was significantly deeper ...
--note: The rest of this sentence seems a little bit awkwark, though I cannot come up with a suitable alternative barring the use of parentheses. Em3rald 03:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Some metric sizes are wrong. 950 square miles = 2,460 km² (not 1,529 km²) ; 3,300 square miles = 8,547 km² (not 5,311 km²)
84.233.128.65 07:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
This is a great page. Three memories I have of the lake are its surreal beauty especially at sunset when the mountains seem to rise into the sky, the buffalos on Antelope Island, and the lake stink.
I believe the lake stink is caused by the brine flies, which are remarkable unto themselves as they actually live in the water and fly out when you wave your hand over them. The level of lake stink is part of radio weather reports.-- John van v 00:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I recently stumbled upon the North Shore Monster article. I fixed up what I could, but it does need more attention. See my comments on that article's talk page for more of my comments. Even if you're not interested in that article right now, it is short so I'd like you to read it and fix up what you can. Then you can ignore it, if you like. — Val42 ( talk) 22:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm of the belief that this section might be worth turning into a separate article on the grounds that this was a major and controversial engineering project (For example, see this New York Times article. Supposedly satellite pictures exist of the lake while the pumping was in operation, which might be worth locating. Also it should be make clear that the region the water was pumped into is the area into which the Great Salt Lake expands to once it rises above 4217 ft. Finally it would appear that the lake created lasted until 1991, perhaps photographs exist from the lakeshore. Graham1973 ( talk) 02:17, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
This article, along with several related articles, cite a website for the claim that Calochortus luteus may have occurred on islands in the GSL. This website cites only a text from the explorer Domenech, but other explorers from this time period mentioned seeing C. luteus as well. I think this is not supported by any evidence, and is explained by the fact that the name C. luteus was applied to plants that are today called C. aureus and which look much like C. luteus. I am looking for a better source on this, as we have only a few. In the meantime, I have revised the text, but it could be revised to be more vague about this, or more definite. I tried to follow a middle path. Michaplot ( talk) 02:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I remember years ago learning about the lake growing. I came here looking for info to see how far along it was. And nothing! Looked over at google and see that now it's actually shrinking. Seems like this needs a section. Leitmotiv ( talk) 18:54, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
the water volume is stated to be 18km2 is that to spill point, current year, average. I assume the water volume is very variable? 92.110.165.40 ( talk) 18:26, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Shouldn't we add a mention of the fact that the dangerous compound BMAA has been found in Great Salt Lake dust? Source: https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2023/11/16/study-shines-more-light-toxins/ 98.123.38.211 ( talk) 23:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2006 listing with uncited material. failing criterion 2b GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 15:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, I don't think the required notifications were ever made here. Hog Farm Talk 20:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)