-Courtney 20:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Jinelle and I am here to edit your page, here is the constructive feedback, enjoy!
Overall, this is a great starting point. There are minor fixes I would recommend doing as listed above. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. The biggest thing is to reference everything and anything so it is reliable! Thanks -- JinelleC09 ( talk) 21:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Firstly, I love the amount of pictures put into this page - I think it's the perfect amount. I also like the use of 'for more information' and linking the 'Mount Seymour' page instead of just putting the 'Mount Seymour' page by itself
Charlizeriza ( talk) 22:35, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey I'm Kayla and first of all, I'd like to say that the page is coming along really well you guys! It is visually appealing and definitely adds more insight to Mount Seymour than what was available on the pre-existing Wiki page.
Introduction: I think the "for more information" link was a good choice. Just a formatting suggestion, the introduction for the provincial park should be the very first thing on the page, above the content table. The info box with the picture and map was well chosen, however it too should be above the content table as well. Another formatting suggestion is that the introduction does not need its own section divider with a title, as the title of that section will technically be the title of the wiki page. As for the actual writing of the introduction, what you have so far is good, but needs sources. The introduction could also possibly be expanded on, briefly mentioning the generalized topics that you will later elaborate on throughout the page, such as what is located within the park, what types of activities, etc.
History and Geography: History: This section was interesting and well written, good job!
Geography: This section was well written as well, however a visual suggestion I have is to possibly add a table of the mountains within the park, with their elevations, and other respective geographic features to make this section more effective.
Animals and Wildlife: The Wildlife of Mount Seymour: The first sentence sounds a little like its from some type of promotional campaign for Mount Seymour, maybe consider making it more neutral sounding. Other than that, the section was good! I also really like how you included a list of the wildlife, maybe consider some type of photo-set or collage to showcase more of the animals, other than just the Stellar Jay.
Vegetation: Natural vegetation: Well written section! Be consistent with the units of measurement you use throughout the page though, I found that sometimes you used imperial units and sometimes metric. Also, if possible add more clickable links for the listed sub-alpine flowers, as well as more sources for the rest of that paragraph.
Invasive plants: Capitalize the plants mentioned in your list. Also, possibly add links to "bull thistles" and "soil fines" as I was unsure what this sentence meant because I was not familiar with the things mentioned. As well, the "periwinkle" link needs to be fixed as it does not go to the proper page. I also noticed that on my laptop your list and paragraph are fine, but on my iPad it wraps around the image awkwardly, possibly consider resizing the image so that the paragraph doesn't wrap around it.
Facilities: There is a typo I believe at "area as offers. . .", but other than that I thought it was a good summary of the topic. However, you are missing sources for this section, please include them!
Recreation: The main paragraph for this section is well written, however the "hiking" subsection looks awkwardly formatted because it is so short. The use of the table for the hiking trails is really good though! Also, this section as well as "accidents and rescues" both do not have a bolded sub section title for the first paragraphs within the section as all the other sub topics do. Be consistent with your format!
Accidents and rescues: The first paragraph is good, however the "preparation for the Weather" paragraph sounds like something Mount Seymour would write and thus lacks a neutral voice. It also lacks any sources. Also, given the way this paragraph was written, as well as it's subtitle, it doesn't quite seem to fit "accidents and rescues", in my opinion. Possibly just say they are park guidelines or something along those terms?
Snow depth: Need more sources for this paragraph, and possibly include in brackets what BCRFC stands for, or include a link. Aside from that, this section is good!
Broadcasting: Good job on this section you guys, except you still need to include sources! Since the other Mount Seymour page already goes into depth about this section, maybe just add another "for more information" link.
Appearances in Film and Television: Good job on this section as well, aside from its lack of sources. Since these last few sections are rather short, maybe find a way to combine them all, and then just have sub titles that are bolded for these paragraphs.
Overall you guys did a good job, and it's clear that you guys put a good amount of effort into the page, well done :) -- Kaylerz ( talk) 20:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I think this a good page and you have put quite a lot of work into it! However a few improvements would make it a great page. Here are my suggestions for improvement:
I think you guys have put a lot of work into the article and with just a little more work this will article will be around and used by lots of people for years to come!!
RuthVancouver ( talk) 18:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
The peer-reviews are all excellent - you should take all their advice in doing your revisions.
There's one big problem. As I think we discussed, there's a serious need for reorganization of the information on the 'Mount Seymour' and 'Mount Seymour Provincial Park' pages. One possibility is to combine them, but I think that's more work than you should take on at this stage. A better (stopgap) alternative is to make your page more clearly about the park (park-specific resources provided by BC Parks, history, how it's used for recreation in both winter and summer, etc) and the other specifically about the mountain. So maybe the ski area information on the Mount Seymour page could be moved to your page. In either case you also need to clarify the relationship between the Park and the commercial entity 'Mount Seymour Resorts' (at mountseymour.com), which controls access to ski facilities in winter and also does some things in summer. What does 'the Recreation Area' mean' and what's a 'Park Use Permit'? This should probably be a separate section.
If you'd like we can have a meeting to discuss how best to handle this.
Minor points: 'blu clematus' should be 'blue clematis'.
-Courtney 20:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello! My name is Jinelle and I am here to edit your page, here is the constructive feedback, enjoy!
Overall, this is a great starting point. There are minor fixes I would recommend doing as listed above. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. The biggest thing is to reference everything and anything so it is reliable! Thanks -- JinelleC09 ( talk) 21:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Firstly, I love the amount of pictures put into this page - I think it's the perfect amount. I also like the use of 'for more information' and linking the 'Mount Seymour' page instead of just putting the 'Mount Seymour' page by itself
Charlizeriza ( talk) 22:35, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey I'm Kayla and first of all, I'd like to say that the page is coming along really well you guys! It is visually appealing and definitely adds more insight to Mount Seymour than what was available on the pre-existing Wiki page.
Introduction: I think the "for more information" link was a good choice. Just a formatting suggestion, the introduction for the provincial park should be the very first thing on the page, above the content table. The info box with the picture and map was well chosen, however it too should be above the content table as well. Another formatting suggestion is that the introduction does not need its own section divider with a title, as the title of that section will technically be the title of the wiki page. As for the actual writing of the introduction, what you have so far is good, but needs sources. The introduction could also possibly be expanded on, briefly mentioning the generalized topics that you will later elaborate on throughout the page, such as what is located within the park, what types of activities, etc.
History and Geography: History: This section was interesting and well written, good job!
Geography: This section was well written as well, however a visual suggestion I have is to possibly add a table of the mountains within the park, with their elevations, and other respective geographic features to make this section more effective.
Animals and Wildlife: The Wildlife of Mount Seymour: The first sentence sounds a little like its from some type of promotional campaign for Mount Seymour, maybe consider making it more neutral sounding. Other than that, the section was good! I also really like how you included a list of the wildlife, maybe consider some type of photo-set or collage to showcase more of the animals, other than just the Stellar Jay.
Vegetation: Natural vegetation: Well written section! Be consistent with the units of measurement you use throughout the page though, I found that sometimes you used imperial units and sometimes metric. Also, if possible add more clickable links for the listed sub-alpine flowers, as well as more sources for the rest of that paragraph.
Invasive plants: Capitalize the plants mentioned in your list. Also, possibly add links to "bull thistles" and "soil fines" as I was unsure what this sentence meant because I was not familiar with the things mentioned. As well, the "periwinkle" link needs to be fixed as it does not go to the proper page. I also noticed that on my laptop your list and paragraph are fine, but on my iPad it wraps around the image awkwardly, possibly consider resizing the image so that the paragraph doesn't wrap around it.
Facilities: There is a typo I believe at "area as offers. . .", but other than that I thought it was a good summary of the topic. However, you are missing sources for this section, please include them!
Recreation: The main paragraph for this section is well written, however the "hiking" subsection looks awkwardly formatted because it is so short. The use of the table for the hiking trails is really good though! Also, this section as well as "accidents and rescues" both do not have a bolded sub section title for the first paragraphs within the section as all the other sub topics do. Be consistent with your format!
Accidents and rescues: The first paragraph is good, however the "preparation for the Weather" paragraph sounds like something Mount Seymour would write and thus lacks a neutral voice. It also lacks any sources. Also, given the way this paragraph was written, as well as it's subtitle, it doesn't quite seem to fit "accidents and rescues", in my opinion. Possibly just say they are park guidelines or something along those terms?
Snow depth: Need more sources for this paragraph, and possibly include in brackets what BCRFC stands for, or include a link. Aside from that, this section is good!
Broadcasting: Good job on this section you guys, except you still need to include sources! Since the other Mount Seymour page already goes into depth about this section, maybe just add another "for more information" link.
Appearances in Film and Television: Good job on this section as well, aside from its lack of sources. Since these last few sections are rather short, maybe find a way to combine them all, and then just have sub titles that are bolded for these paragraphs.
Overall you guys did a good job, and it's clear that you guys put a good amount of effort into the page, well done :) -- Kaylerz ( talk) 20:15, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I think this a good page and you have put quite a lot of work into it! However a few improvements would make it a great page. Here are my suggestions for improvement:
I think you guys have put a lot of work into the article and with just a little more work this will article will be around and used by lots of people for years to come!!
RuthVancouver ( talk) 18:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
The peer-reviews are all excellent - you should take all their advice in doing your revisions.
There's one big problem. As I think we discussed, there's a serious need for reorganization of the information on the 'Mount Seymour' and 'Mount Seymour Provincial Park' pages. One possibility is to combine them, but I think that's more work than you should take on at this stage. A better (stopgap) alternative is to make your page more clearly about the park (park-specific resources provided by BC Parks, history, how it's used for recreation in both winter and summer, etc) and the other specifically about the mountain. So maybe the ski area information on the Mount Seymour page could be moved to your page. In either case you also need to clarify the relationship between the Park and the commercial entity 'Mount Seymour Resorts' (at mountseymour.com), which controls access to ski facilities in winter and also does some things in summer. What does 'the Recreation Area' mean' and what's a 'Park Use Permit'? This should probably be a separate section.
If you'd like we can have a meeting to discuss how best to handle this.
Minor points: 'blu clematus' should be 'blue clematis'.