Talk:Minnesota Zoo

message: This article needs improvement because of deficiencies in style: it sounds somewhat like a tour guide.  Some of the content should probably be shifted to WikiTravel.Michaelbusch 16:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the travelogue-like portions of the article, but I see that some has been added back.  This is fine, but watch the style.  Phrasing like "Visitors can do XXX" doesn't sound encyclopedic. Michaelbusch 20:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: improve tag

message: This article is about the zoo. The dolphin section dominates the article, and births and deaths at zoos are not generally notable (they happen all the time, and we certainly can't keep up with listing all of them). The section also just rambles. The dolphin sections are also completely unreferenced and therefore unverifiable. Perhaps a separate article about the dolphins would be appropriate, if it is properly cited, with a summary in the zoo article? Don Lammers (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I spent some time yesterday morning trying to re-reference the dolphin section following the news of the closure. It would seem that a couple of anonymous Wikipedia users later decided to fill in their own versions of the dolphin story, not realizing how to preserve what was there before, or how to use references.  The references had been deleted before, in March. The previous deletions appeared to whitewash the article by removing a controversial fact about the death of Harley. There is no dispute that animals come and go all the time. I concur that for the most part, it really makes little difference to zoo-goers, and does not make the news. The dolphins are, until they leave, star attractions, and have names that people remember. There have been multiple articles over the years, from multiple news sources, covering the comings and goings of the dolphins. Of the zoo's attractions, they are among the most notable. This Minnesota Zoo article is not that big, compared to say, The Metrodome. If it is felt that Minnesota Zoo Discover Bay Dolphins could stand on its own, then someone could create that article. Note that other famous animals, such as Kentucky Derby Winners, do have complete family tree listings. In any case, I have reverted back down to the referenced part. I created a new talk section here for the part not referenced. Thanks much. Group29 (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! Quick work! This looks much better. I'm not arguing for or against how much material there really is on the dolphins that is verifiable. However, Even now this is approaching about a long as a section should be in an article this size that is, after all, about the zoo, not about the dolphins. If this section is going to get bigger, I would argue that there should be a separate article, as there already is now for the huge list of animals. Don Lammers (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: This is not a studbook

message: This might be true, but has no references, and seems a bit prosy. If someone could fill in the refs for thie information, and re-add where appropriate among the referenced material, it would be great. Thanks, Group29 (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Dolphin text missing references

message: I have assessed this as C-class now, and done some work to better cite the article. I have marked where I think improvements need to be made in the WikiProject Zoo banner.
* Citations=OK, though there are still some holes (notably the Past exhibits section).
* Coverage and accuracy=no because the article is currently heavily unbalanced towards the dolphins, which are leaving, and says almost nothing about the (arguably) signature exhibit "Russia's Grizzly Coast", which (I think) won an AZA award, though I can't verify that yet. I am not suggesting removing dolphin material, but adding in other places.
* Structure=OK.
* Grammar and style=no mostly because I think the dolphin section could use a good copy edit specifically to try to reduce its size without eliminating any information. I've done some of this, but don't have any more time right now.
* Supporting materials=no because we need a logo and a photo of the entrance for the infobox, and a photo or two of the award-winning new exhibit would not hurt. Don Lammers (talk) 13:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment (May 2012)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Minnesota Zoo. 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/20121205011259/http://www.mnzoo.org/animals/animals_northernTrail.asp to http://www.mnzoo.org/animals/animals_northernTrail.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120807180323/http://www.mnzoo.org/animals/animals_tropicsTrail.asp to http://www.mnzoo.org/animals/animals_tropicsTrail.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110218181757/http://www.startribune.com/local/south/116247989.html to http://www.startribune.com/local/south/116247989.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100615190738/http://aza.org/uploadedFiles/Membership/Honors_and_Awards/exhibit09-minnesota.pdf to http://www.aza.org/uploadedFiles/Membership/Honors_and_Awards/exhibit09-minnesota.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120520175354/http://www.mnzoo.org/animals/animals_athtehZoo.asp to http://mnzoo.org/animals/animals_athtehZoo.asp
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) 14:08, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)