Talk:Kaibab Plateau

message: I've added the story of the kaibab deer overpopulation, very interesting stuff. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aoc001 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 25 February 2014 Aoc001 (talk) 02:41, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 comment

message: The article, as currently written, is both very detailed and written with great clarity. The article develops in chronological order, and is well focused on the topic of the article. The article seems to be written in a balanced and neutral manner, I am not sure if there were opposing views to the Grand Canyon National Game Preserve, but that could potentially be included. Regarding the articles structure, I think you could break down the “Kalibab Deer” section into subsections, maybe including a historical impact section at the very end. I also believe the lead section could include a better preview of the population testing described later in the article. Overall, the article is clear, focused and detailed, but it could be better structured.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.82.164.34 (talk) 01:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Review 

message: The lead-in section for this article is brilliantly written. It is clearly written, well thought out, organized, and informative. The lead-in also includes proper citations, which serve to bolster its credibility. I think this section is quite good as is and does not need any further editing. As of now, there is only one heading in the article, so it is difficult to assess whether or not the article offers balanced coverage. However, I understand that the story about the deer may be the only story of ecological value that the Kaibab Plateau has to offer, and that for the purposes of our History of Ecology class, this may be the only section that the author intends to work on. If that is the case, then it might be helpful to assign a new title to the section- possibly "Ecological Significance"- so that the reader knows the relevance of the story before reading about the deer. 
The author structured the section very nicely, recounting events chronologically and offering insight when possible. The section flows nicely and can be read with ease. However, there were moments throughout the article where I had uncomfortable with the way that the author attempted to explain the ecological importance of the deer population on the Kaibab Plateau. For example, throughout the section, the author references a number of estimates of the deer population without offering citations or explaining where these estimates come from. Rather, the author simply mentions that the estimates were untested, unproven guesses made by ambiguous sources. I think it might be more effective if the author were to include a couple of sources, primary or not, that include make note of these estimates, just to give the reader an idea of where these numbers are coming from; seeing as though these estimates are the foundations of the ecological significance of the Kaibab deer population, I think this would be a useful addition. Additionally, in the final few sentences of the section, there seems to be some generalizations being made that might call to question the perspective of the article. While these claims ("The Kaibab deer controversy has revolutionized the way science is taught in textbooks, and the way students question ecology and biology...") are not inherently biased, their unsubstantiated nature might lead the readership to question the credibility of the article as a whole. All told, I think the article is well written, clearly articulated, organized and accessible, but could benefit from some more credible citations, balanced coverage (if it is the case that the author is editing more than just the portion about the deer), and a more neutral perspective. 
Aleary1 (talk) 05:39, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: The lead section provides some information on basic facts about the Kaibab Plateua but offers nothing in terms of its history or importance to the field of ecology and its development over time.  Also, the lead section is supposed to be a precursor to the information that is to come, however, the rest of the article focuses primarily on the Kaibab Deer which is not really mentioned in your lead section.  The overall structure of the article is somewhat weak because it only has one heading about the Kaibab Deer and while I don't know much about the history of the Plateau itself, I would assume that there is more to it than just the deer.  Being that you do provide information about the importance of this area because of the experiment that involves population engineering, the heading being called "Kaibab Deer" is uninformative and slightly misleading.  I like how you talk about the role played by Theodore Roosevelt because he is known for his contributions to the national recognition of the importance of ecology.  There are several instances where you mention that there is no concrete knowledge to support some of your claims which makes some of your arguments sound a little irrelevant when they may actually be critically important.  It would be better to simply use the information that is actually known as your support so that it sounds more confident.  You should go into more detail on the topics of populations and carrying capacity and focus more on explaining why the deer are a good case study.  Also, the fact that there are only three sources here makes the article seem lacking in credibility and information.  I feel like this is a good start to what could be a great article.  You just need to work on the structure and incorporate more research.
CJCstudent (talk) 06:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ENST 244 Peer Review 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kaibab Plateau. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051219204855/http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/kaibab_plateau.htm to http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/kaibab_plateau.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:40, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Not sure why an image of Kaibab Lake would be on this page.  Kaibab Lake is not on (or near) the Kaibab Plateau.
The Plateau is an area, not a point.  The reference shows a point, I believe a map showing the boundary (edges) would be more appropriate.  A KML or shapefile would also be a useful addition.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.1.171.186 (talk) 22:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaibab Lake Image