Jump to content

Talk:Door County, Wisconsin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Airports/Transportation

[edit]

I added a few links for the county airports, Door County Cherryland Airport and Ephraim-Fish Creek Airport. I recently created the Cherryland Airport article, and if anybody has more info on the airfield, please update the article. Also, if there is more information on any airports in Door County, I think that would be a valuble addition to the article..just my two cents. Luke119 01:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

[edit]

I added the template for expansion because I think more information on why folks vacation in Door County would be interesting; if not on this page, then on the individual cities' pages. I've never been up there so I don't really know that much. HollyAm 17:41, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Native Americans in Door County

[edit]

If this article is going to talk about the Amerindians in Door County, I don't think it should jump from the 13th century to the "1800s". I don't like treating them like Brigadoon. The Door Peninsula and its islands feature in the westward migrations of North American Indians during the early historical period, with groups from the east displacing and replacing groups from the west. That Amerindians once lived on the Door Peninsula but now generally don't is a sort of truism and applies to the U.S. generally. It does not convey any information.

How many Native Americans lived in Door County in 1830 and how many were "removed" by the Indian Removal Act. What specific treaties conveyed what become Door County to the federal or territorial governments? When were they enacted? If unknown, try early 19th century or late 19th century.

Also, generally, the 1800s should be avoided. In 1801, Great Britain still controlled that part of the world. By 1899, the earlier part of the century was as unimaginable to those alive as 1899 is to us today. -Acjelen 21:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism

[edit]

Please keep an eye out for people changing tourism to terrorism on some articles, including this one. Is that suppose to be cool or something? -Keandobus 21:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to revert the stuff in the Tourism section about F***ing Illinois sh** heads.. since it very clearly does not add anything to this article and seems really out of place for an encyclopedia. BenFFoster 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see a lot of marketing copy by specific stores so I'm deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.47.15.38 (talk) 21:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The origin of "Deaths Door"

[edit]

It's a common misconception that Death's Door was named after shipwrecks. However the name significantly predates any shipwrecks in the passage and has it's root in the 1600's as the passage was at the center of a conflict between rival Native American tribes attempting to control the fisheries off the coasts of Washington Island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cite Your Sources (talk • contribs) 17:44, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Door County, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Door County, Wisconsin. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

George Townshend

[edit]

Not sure if "Cape Townsend" has anything to do with George Townshend, George Townshend. There is no h in Townsend, so maybe the similarity is just a coincidence. I am cross-posting this on the George Townshend talk page.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 16:03, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

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) 12:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Parks images

[edit]

User:Royalbroil has images of Newport and Potawatomi State parks (putting this here instead of in the article.)--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 01:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And many more places in the Door County and Wisconsin in general. Royalbroil 03:59, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are they all already on commons? I'm going to assume they aren't, so I get to make a wish list. I expect most of these requests will be unfulfilled, so don't feel like you need to go photograph them just because I asked. But on the off chance you have them:
  • A picture of Robert La Salle County Park would fit in well to illustrate the mention of this place in the history section, but there aren't any pictures of it on commons or flickr.
  • County or town parks not already featured could go in the Gallery or in the pages for the local communities. There are very few smaller parks featured on flickr under a suitable license.
  • Pictures of food, people fishing or of caves (especially the entrance to Horseshoe Bay Cave) could go in the existing montages.
  • There also aren't yet any good pictures of the escarpment on commons, just the stone quarry. I think a good picture would be one from a park where the landscape is undeveloped.
Yes, I saw those other pictures from Canada especially but I could find no similar big-cliff type pictures for Door County. I moved the NiagaraEscarpmentOutcroppings and the turbine up to the escarpment section, where they fit with the existing photo as a montage. The outcroppings picture is larger in the montage because it is hard to pick out the details when it is smaller.
I haven't found the Niagara Escarpment to be cliff-type in Door County. I might have some that are more gradual.
Yesterday I looked it up (and put it in the article) that it is more of one big escarpment north of Sturgeon Bay and separates into multiple smaller ridges south of Sturgeon Bay. Part of it is that the cliff face, when bare, is probably covered in trees. The places where it is more bare and exposed are probably near development or roads.
  • Picture(s) of J-1 workers (like servers in ethnic European dress) could illustrate the Economics of tourism section. In general there aren't many photos of people on commons--many photos with people doing things of interest could be potentially added to county related articles.
  • The reason why there aren't many people images is because they are very difficult, as the worker would need to be asked and give permission.
Oh well.
  • A photo of biking or a bike race could go under non-motorized transportation. (There are already county related horseback and kayak pictures on flickr under a suitable license that I could upload.)
  • Under "Geographic distribution of tourist spending"--if you took pictures of restaurant buildings, maybe a fancy one from the northern part could be placed alongside a diner or bar from the southern part.
File:Wilson's - panoramio.jpg Fancy northern
Yes, that would work.
  • A photo of the coastal byway sign with the flower on it might fit either in the county article or another one.
Thank you for pointing that one out. I added it.
  • A photo of the hospital in Sturgeon Bay could go in the public health section.
  • A photo of an active gravel pit for the Soils, crops, gravel pits, and minerals... or maybe an oats or wheat crop near maturity?
My first thought was the Olde Stone Quarry which is photographed in the article
Another quarry-in-a-park is at Potowatomi State Park; yet neither is obviously a quarry to the picture-viewer because of time
  • Recreational aircraft or motorcycle photos. A photo of the Wisconsin Motorcycle Memorial could work instead.
Door County Cherryland Airport
I really liked the photo in the infobox some months back when I first noticed it; but don't want to make the airport article seem degraded by taking it for the main county article.
  • The current photo in the Shoreline development photo could be replaced if you have a better one.
  • The Maple-Oregon Street bridge could use a picture on the Sturgeon Bay article if you have it. The other two bridges have pictures already.
I just uploaded File:OregonStBridgeSturgeonBayAug2009.jpg
  • A maple tap, or a store which sells maple products.
  • Brussels Hill and / or other high points
  • The garden or demonstration plantings at the Peninsular Research Station
  • If you photographed any unusual looking lichens, I can look at it and see if is one of the two kinds mentioned in the article. The lichen pictured is one of the more ordinary lichens that is found in more places and since they are mentioned, pictures would be appropriate.
  • A barn quilt
  • A chipmunk

--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I notice you add far more images that most Wikipedians want. Most Wikipedias want about 5 on an article of this size. I have inserted up to a dozen in some cases just to have others remove them saying that someone can click on the Commons link if they want to see more images. Royalbroil 04:20, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, some of these requests if you have them might be better in the individual topic articles due to space. Or they might replace an existing image, freeing up the one on this article to be used on another article without duplication. Likewise, a montage might replace existing single photos. If you count montages as a single image, roughly this article has around the same number of images as the San Francisco and Manhattan articles, (which are counties--strange). So it isn't excessive yet, but I understand I should be careful.
It helps that this is a noncontroversial article, but you still never no what people will fight about. About a month ago someone reverted a few photos I added to another county article, one in a less developed area that was under-illustrated. People are very arbitrary with their image preferences on Wikipedia so I often don't know what to expect until I try it despite the various rules that have been published. There is even an article about it: De gustibus non est disputandum.
If someone argues that people should just use commons link again, you can respond that page views stats indicate that items on commons aren't viewed much at all, while articles are seen and used. I've recently considered deleting the ferry, boat contest, lighthouse, 2000 census chart, wigwam, and Cave Point County Park photos. If any of them are yours and you want them kept, tell me.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(deindent) @Epiphyllumlover: I looked through photographs from dozens of trips to Door County since 2006 and didn't find anything that fit your other requests. I hope to go later this year to pick cherries and possibly a separate time to do a vacation rental for a few nights. I would take along the list in case I could fulfill any. Royalbroil 15:21, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Royalbroil:I didn't expect more than a few from my large list, and I was able to add two of them, so I feel like I got what I requested from my long-winded request. Plus I see above there are more suggestions I haven't attended to yet. Yet if you want to do more, have more ideas. Again, due to the volume there is no way you would want to do every one of them. Many of these would not be appropriate on the Door County article but could be helpful on the individual location articles:
  • A. I'm not sure which way you are driving but you could photograph public wayside facilities and they could go into the highway articles. On 57, there are restrooms at Wequiock Falls, Bay Shore County Park, Red River County Park, and Meridian Park; On 42 they are at the Kewaunee Selner Park, Algoma Visitor Center south of Crescent Beach, Forestville Dam, and Maplewood. For 42-57 there are porta-potties at the Peninsular Agricultural Research Station by the Open Door garden. There are also public restrooms at 1820 S. Neenah and the visitor center in Sturgeon Bay.
  • B. the Strawberry Creek fish hatchery just south of Sturgeon Bay
  • C. All playgrounds, schools, and ballfields, and the signs for the two youth camps. They could go on the individual community articles.
  • D. There are about 10k acres of DNR owned land, about 4k acres of Door County Trust Land, a little over 1k acres of county parks(for details, see page 49 and following of this pdf), and I am not counting the Ridges Sanctuary or parks owned by communities or school districts like the trail systems at Sawyer Elementary in Sturgeon Bay or the Southern Door School Forest. Of these, only the state parks and a minority of the county parks have illustrations. So the gaps are the DNR-owned areas that are not part of the five large state parks (I wonder if the tiny state park on Detroit Island has signs?), the Land Trust properties, most county parks, and nearly all local parks. It is safe to say that over 90% of public lands in Door County have zero pictures on Commons.
  • E. Inland lakes. Some lakes have no photos and yet are fairly accessible to the public; a list:
  • Arbter Lake (Mud Lake; Schmok Lake)
  • Bradley Lake within Sunset Park
  • Forestville Flowage
  • Krause Lake
  • Little Marsh (Wickman Marsh)
  • Mackaysee Lake
  • Rogers Lake
  • Schwartz Lake
  • Kellner's Fen
  • Unnamed Lake #3 in Lyle-Harter-Matter County Park
  • Voecks Marsh
The photos could go both on the main county page with the other lake photos or in the individual community or location articles.
  • F. Rivers and Creeks. They are marked with signs on the roadway. There area already photos for Mink River, Logan Creek, and the Ahnapee. Possibly there are more I am missing among the flickr Mayer photographs, but they do not all appear to be labeled so I wouldn't know what to caption them anyway.
  • G. For development on the escarpment, there is a telecomunications tower in Egg Harbor and also houses on the escarpment in that area.
  • H. If you have a selfie-stick, you could stick it into the grate at Horseshoe Bay Cave (the openings are intentionally big enough for bats to get through). That way you could get an inside-the-cave picture.
  • I. Any commercial fruit trees, bushes, or vines besides cherries or apples.
Resources for finding places to photograph:
--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article length

[edit]

Hello all. This article is far too long per our guideline on article size. (I'm seeing nearly 15k words with the prose size script!) What can be cut out, shortened, or moved to sub articles? I might suggest looking at the attractions (sub-article?), public health sections (shorten, especially on COVID), and historical county border adjustments (to history section or remove) to start, though more than that will need to be done. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:27, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I made sub-articles on coronavirus and pollution. I intend to remove the plants and fungi from attractions and make a new sub-article about them. I believe a new sub-article on this topic will meet GNG. --Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:53, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The plants and fungi are separated into another article, the history of county borders is moved to Door Peninsula, and the table of lakes is moved to another article. Now there is somewhat less than 85kb of articlespace text not including spaces, or somewhat less than 100kb including spaces but not paragraph symbols.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 02:21, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Epiphyllumlover! I'm still looking at nearly 12k words though (as measured by the script). So, a few additional questions...
  • Could the history be moved to a separate History of Door County, Wisconsin article and summarized here?
  • I know you've worked on this, but do we really need all of the information about living plants and animals? That seems extraneous. What would a general reader need?
  • How detailed do the entries in the "Population and its health" section need to be? For a single example, I figure that the "Religious statistics" section should be a sentence in a larger section about demographics.
  • Same question about the "Child maltreatment" section.
  • How could the "Geography" section be shortened?
Etc. :-/ Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:20, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Article_size#A_rule_of_thumb goes by kb instead of word count. Is there another guide that gives recommendations by word count so I know what to aim for? I would like to think that a larger article can be justified due to scope; that the pool of general readers includes area residents, tourists/potential tourists, and migrant workers/potential migrant workers. As of right now it seems the easiest section to trim would be Geography, some of that could go to Door Peninsula which would make sense since counties are political and peninsulas are geographical.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The section on rare snails mentioned Brown and Kewaunee Counties, so it seemed worthwhile to move it to the Door Peninsula article.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point, but even by that metric the article is as of this writing at 70kb, well above the 60kb "Probably should be divided" threshold. It also doesn't include the bulleted lists and the tables. And in terms of scope, we're talking about a county; not World War II, the history of the Roman Empire, or similar. :-)
So on that line of thought, I would find it hard to believe that most general readers are looking for details as specific as some of these given in the article. Potential places to shorten things include the geography section, especially if it fits more directly in the scope of the article, and the over 2,000 characters/362 words on child mistreatment in the county, which is extremely detailed for what should be a tiny part of this article's scope. Same with "Demographics"; for example, the religious statistics really only need the percentage point in a single sentence IMHO. Vehicle accidents too. Do we really need to list of statistics as specific as the last couple years of bicycle accidents or a few months of work zones?
Also on a tangential point, why does the also rather detailed "Marriages" section only include data on women? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:35, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How about I try to reduce the size of the article by a further 1/7th then based on your 70kb/60kb explanation?
The source I used discussed detailed marriage statistics for women but not men. When writing that section I thought that was odd too. I may be able to find male statistics on the census website.
As for your earlier comments I can address them... for the crime section, I would like to expand it to cover more types of crimes. That said, by statistics and trends the APS-and-CPS-investigated crimes surpass the police-investigated violent crimes both in volume and by their marked upwards trend. Most other crimes figures are flat, making them less interesting. Homicides are tricky to discuss and maybe better just left out because a USA-Today affiliate reported one possible murder for 2019, but the police did not call it a murder. Instead it was, and is still being "investigated" and at the same time the police chief in charge ended his career, which passes the responsibility on to someone else. I was able to discuss child maltreatment in detail because the dashboard I used as a source reported it in detail. I can see reducing the child maltreatment section when expanding the crime section in order to keep the Crime section as a whole to a smaller size. As for bicycling accidents, this is significant because a decent chunk of the economy relies on imported labor that cannot drive. One J-1 worker was killed on a bicycle elsewhere in Wisconsin commuting to or from a tourist job. As such biker safety and infrastructure is a basic justice issue. There are also sizable annual biking events using public roads, making safety also an economic issue.
I support splitting off a "History of Door County, Wisconsin" article with one caveat. I am concerned that a split article will not pass GNG. The other three articles that I split off were ones that pass GNG. If you would like to research your opinion on its notability, fill me in on it. I am concerned that an "Attractions of Door County" article for the tourists would be a POV fork, with county residents reading the main article instead. Because the split Flora article is of interest to both residents and tourists, it is not a POV fork.
The section on religion at present is comparable to a variety of urban area US county articles. I am reluctant to report the activities of specific churches to avoid advertising, although the stavekirche are mentioned. Not reported in the article is that several of the smallest denominations with statistics reported are highly politically active and have been vary successful generating media attention and getting their members elected to political positions for many years. This is not a new thing. Historically, the remnants of the religious colony at Ephraim turned into a political center of influence disproportionate with its size. That isn't surprising given that Ephraim as a community predated most other communities in the area. Also, other churches perform functions typically given to governments or secular nonprofits, but as I stated earlier, I am reluctant to discuss the details in the article, so it seemed like just putting in the statistics would be enough. To some readers who care to interpret such things, the religious statistics also serve as a proxy for the current size of the Belgian, Moravian, other Scandinavian, German, and Anglo-Saxon communities which settled in the 19th and early 20th century and are mentioned elsewhere in the article. The figure for Catholics is a proxy for the number of Belgians, Germans, and smaller groups like Irish and Swiss. The figure for Moravians indicates Norwegians. The figure for ELCA Lutherans mostly indicates Scandinavians in general. The figures for LCMS and WELS Lutherans indicates Germans. The figures for UCC, UU, Baptists, EC-USA, and UMC represent those of Anglo-Saxon or Yankee heritage. These ethnic associations go without saying so directly in the article; the sort of people who are interested in such things are already aware of the context.
In terms of scope, I can see by now that I conflated "county" with "peninsula". It is tricky to resolve this because a number of sources refer to "Door County" instead of the "Door Peninsula". I fell into the trap of conflating them, but my solace is that I didn't start it. I will work on the article some more today and see what I can do. I disagree with using the standard "general reader" rubric of Wikipedia for this article because looking at the page views there is a very strong seasonal pattern to this article. This means that a large portion of the annual readers are related to tourism and temporary workers. The seasonal pattern is considerably larger than the typical school year and school week patterns often seen on geographical and government articles. For most equivalent articles, "general reader" can approximate to secondary student. The challenge instead is how to write for tourists, seasonal workers, and residents without making the article too large, nor making it unsuitable for students.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find male marriage statistics on the US Census QuickFacts. It seems that it should be possible to get these figures and the county rankings, but one would have to request a census product for all US counties. I have never done this and am not sure how long it would take. The figures reported in this article seem counter-intuitive. Out of 3k US counties, Door County both ranks 69th highest for never-married women 45–54, but is also 389th highest for married women in the age bracket just younger than this. As I understand it, in other resort areas with large seasonal populations the ACS is capable of picking up both the seasonal and local populations, since the surveys are done randomly throughout the year. That may be what happened here; the summer residents could be more likely to be older and never-married, while younger year-round residents are more likely to be currently married. Because this is unusual, it is worth keeping in the article.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 22:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I trimmed the article by about 1/7th. Disregard my previous comments about splitting off the history section. Instead, I moved the pre-county history portion to Door Peninsula, which is a better fit anyway because Door County didn't exist back then, but Door Peninsula did.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 00:02, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Articles?

[edit]

I believe additional articles can be added such as one covering transportation and the bridges of Sturgeon Bay (see User:TillmanJosh/Bridges of Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin) and potentially additional articles covering the history of Sturgeon Bay (something which has a lot of content to be added on). But would it be too much? I don't think so at the moment but you guys can decide. TillmanJosh (talk) 15:05, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TillmanJosh, Yes, I just split off Climate of Door County, Wisconsin. Many some other local areas articles have separate split-offs for things like history, demographics, and culture. I came across an Economy of Cornwall article, so an Economy of Door County, Wisconsin article could be justified too. Earlier I separated a coronavirus article off of this one, but it was AfDed and redirected to the Wisconsin coronavirus article. So not all possible additional articles will work out.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cana Island edit

[edit]

I just made an edit to the Cana Island page. I'd never heard of it until a beautiful photograph of it appeared on my mother's laptop as the screensaver. I was interested in it, so I decided to look at its Wikipedia page and saw that it was stated as being over 8 square miles, which seemed gargantuanly wrong - not even ballpark to its actual size. I used Google Maps to estimate it, and from what I saw, Cana Island was just under 750 feet wide from West-East, which was its largest dimension for area, which would mean that it is less than .02 square miles. If there are any knowledgeable locals who can provide more accurate information, please be my guest and make a correction. Please leave a message on my talk page if you need any technical help with that. QuakerIlK (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using the area calculator at the door county web map it comes out to around 8 or 9 acres, not square miles. The size of the island is smaller right now than it is on the webmap because lake levels are higher. The article must have mixed up acres and square miles.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article length and amount of sources

[edit]

Going through this article, it seems a bit excessive for how big this article is and how many sources are listed. I don't recall another article about a county or even a state for that matter go into such excess detail about every topic and statistic out there. Do we really need to include details about tick-borne illnesses, child maltreatment, or how many motorcycles and aircrafts are registered in the county? These are just seemingly random topics to include that aren't really standard in a lot of other county articles. A lot of the information looks like it would be found on City-Data not Wikipedia because they aren't notable topics. JayJayWhat did I do? 18:39, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite long. It is as long or longer than the entries for the 3 most populous counties in all of the USA: Los Angeles County, California, Cook County, Illinois, and Harris County, Texas - all of which are 150x as populous or moreso than Door County, WI, and which all have only a small fraction as many resources. But if the resources are mostly reliable and at least somewhat relevant, who honestly has the authority to go on a deletionist-style purging of most of the article and say what is relevant and worthy of inclusion and what isn't? Just rhetorical points. I bet it's a beautiful area, though. QuakerIlK (talk) 21:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the level of detail is excessive. Much of it should be summarized or purged. Imzadi 1979 → 23:49, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, WP:TOOBIG would counsel that this article is already too long. It's at 71 kB of readable prose, so we're at the "probably should be divided" stage. However, realistically there are topics here that shouldn't be spun out, so it's a matter of summarizing or purging detail. Imzadi 1979 → 04:12, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the climate section could be split off into its own article. Imzadi1979, do you have a preferred target size?--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The guidelines say 50–60 kB. I've pulled a lot of excessive content. Splitting out the climate section helps, and now we're down to 62 kB. It's probably a matter of summarizing and deleting excess detail.
Another measure is just how many footnotes are present. Most decent articles won't hit more than 200, maybe 250. This article has had over 500 at points. That's usually a sign that we should be looking at which sources are in use and consolidating to better secondary/tertiary sources. Imzadi 1979 → 18:06, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are no limit to footnotes or references in the size policies, and there are other articles which have many references. Manhattan, San Francisco, and Brooklyn are all their own counties, and are at 15644, 13381, and 11,004 main body words respectively. Door County, after some removal is now at 11,736 main body words. As of yesterday it was at 13,384 words. The pageviews for the article approximates that of individual county articles having the same population that Door County has annual visitors. As for the source quality, I want to avoid poor quality sources; if there are any in particular that must not be used, we can discuss them individually here.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I split out the economics of tourism section to Economy of Door County, Wisconsin. The article is now down to 9873 main body words, or 51 kB of readable prose. In theory this would allow for adding as much as 9 kB of new readable prose, or restoring certain items that have been recently trimmed.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:26, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest that we should trim further to get under 50 kB of readable prose. We should not be adding back per the guidelines. Imzadi 1979 → 21:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into splitting off the transportation section to make Transportation in Door County, Wisconsin. There are articles like Transportation in the San Francisco Bay Area, Transportation in South Florida (a peninsula!), and Transportation in Boston.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 22:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't. Honestly, there's a lot of stuff here that just needs to be summarized and pared down. I'm not sold on all of these sub articles, and I'm not sure all of them would survive AfD on notability grounds. The problem is the extreme depth of detail, which isn't needed for a lot of these topics. This isn't a large metro area, so splitting the transportation topic off isn't comparable. Imzadi 1979 → 22:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make the article and see if it "sticks". If it gets deleted, the content can be re-added.--Epiphyllumlover (talk)
@Epiphyllumlover: don't create it. We're really a point now where the existing sections just need trimming and summarization to get the overall prose length down. Imzadi 1979 → 22:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For now the article needs to be small enough that I personally feel I can safely add more interesting things as I come across them without running into complaints. For now I'll wait and see if there is any other input about splitting out the transportation section, and instead work on a History of Door County, Wisconsin split off.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 22:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't work on any more sub articles. I wouldn't worry about adding more content; there's plenty here. What's here needs to be curated. Seriously, there's whole sections here that could just use a good pruning. For example, do we need a listing of every wetland in the county? How about the listings of animal species? Could those be summarized a bit more? I think the whole "Ephraim no longer dry" section could go; put that content on Ephraim's article and move on. I also think the demographic information could get some summarizing, and the COVID section isn't probably needed. Imzadi 1979 → 22:51, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting proposal: History of Door County, Wisconsin

[edit]
It is better to have the separate history article, because previously I had split off half of it to make the article smaller. Having a separate history article allows the history to be combined again.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, do we need the lists of specific wetlands, animal species and the like? Maybe those are the sections that need attention first on the way toward getting the size of the article inline with guidelines? There's two more sections that are probably not needed. Ephraim no longer dry could be a single sentence or two in the history section, and the COVID content could dropped or summarized. (Imagine a time when you wouldn't need to edit the article every day or two just to update numbers!) Imzadi 1979 → 23:15, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see you reverted me; I will wait and see if the others interested in this article think a separate history article is better or not. I am going wait on responding to any of your other questions or concerns, and take things bit by bit here.
A proposed & much shorter alternative to the current section in Door County Wisconsin:

= = History = =

Main page: User:Epiphyllumlover/History of Door County, Wisconsin

The Door County peninsula was once inhabited by Paleo-Indians.[1] Artifacts from an ancient village site at Nicolet Bay Beach have been dated to the early Woodland period. This site was occupied by various cultures until about 1300 AD during the Mississippian period.[2]

Door County's name came from Porte des Morts, anglicized as "Death's Door", or the passage between the tip of the Door County Peninsula and Washington Island.[3] The name "Death's Door", or "Porte des Morts" arose from Native American tales, heard by early French explorers, which related to a failed raid to capture Washington Island from a rival tribe.[4]

The 18th and 19th centuries saw the immigration and settlement of pioneers, mariners, fishermen and farmers, with the first white settler being [ncrease Claflin.[5] Economic sustenance came from lumbering and tourism.

During the 19th century, various groups of Native Americans occupied the area that would become Door County and its islands. Beginning in mid-century, these Indians, mostly Potawatomi, were removed from the peninsula by the federal government under the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Later in the 19th century, a fairly large-scale immigration of Belgian Walloons populated a small region in southern portion of the county.[2]

A Civilian Conservation Corps camp was established at Peninsula State Park during the Great Depression. In the summer of 1945, Fish Creek was the site of a German POW camp, under an affiliation with a base camp at Fort Sheridan, Illinois.[6][7][8] The prisoners engaged in construction projects, cut wood, and picked cherries in Peninsula State Park and the surrounding area.[9] Eagle Bluff Lighthouse was constructed in Peninsula State Park in 1868 on orders from President Andrew Johnson, at a cost of $12,000. It was restored by the Door County Historical Society in 1964, and opened to the public.[10]

  1. ^ Long, C.A. (2008). The Wild Mammals of Wisconsin. Pensoft Series Faunistica. Coronet Books Incorporated. p. 25. ISBN 978-954-642-313-9. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
  2. ^ a b Soucek, G. (2011). Door County Tales: Shipwrecks, Cherries and Goats on the Roof. American Chronicles. Arcadia Publishing Incorporated. ISBN 978-1-61423-383-1. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
  3. ^ Gannett, Henry (1905). The Origin of Certain Place Names in the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved May 7, 2018 – via Google Books.
  4. ^ Kohl, Cris & Joan Forsberg, Shipwrecks at Death's Door, Page 10.
  5. ^ Hjalmar Holand. History of Door County Wisconsin, The County Beautiful. Chicago: S. J. Clarke, 1917, p. 77.
  6. ^ Mariah Goode. "The Harvest of 1945: German POW Camps Filled Door County’s Labor Shortage". Door County Pulse, July 1, 2005.
  7. ^ cheyenne Lentz. "Story Of Wisconsin's German POWs Is A Piece Of Hidden History, Author Says". Wisconsin Public Radio, June 23, 2015.
  8. ^ Damien Jaques. "Cherry picking with German POWs in Door County". On Milwaukee, July 9, 2012.
  9. ^ Tishler, W.H. (2006). Door County's Emerald Treasure: A History of Peninsula State Park. Wisconsin Land and Life. University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-22073-0. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
  10. ^ Wardius, K.; Wardius, B. (2013). Wisconsin Lighthouses: A Photographic and Historical Guide, Revised Edition. Wisconsin Historical Society Press. p. 100-25. ISBN 978-0-87020-610-8. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
This could be used with the photos of Eagle Bluff Lighthouse &/or Peninsula State Park--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:19, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Summarizing Ephraim into the history puts the article at 50 kB. There's still room to summarize as I've noted. Imzadi 1979 → 23:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One of the articles you've done some good work on, SS Edmund Fitzgerald, has 55 kB readable prose. It is inconsistent for you to make such a deal about this article being over 50kB of readable prose when that article is larger than this one. If you have issues with some of the content and think it is unencyclopedic, or particular sources that are problematic, they can be discussed piece by piece.
Even if 50kB should be held as a strict rule, that doesn't mean you have consensus (yet) for the particular method you propose to shrink the article. For now I will wait and see if there is support for a separate history article or not. A split proposal for this is listed at Wikipedia:Proposed_article_splits#AWAITING_CONSENSUS, so this could take some time.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 00:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Epiphyllumlover: I've done very little work on that article, so please don't attribute that to me at all, thank you. The articles where I've done the most work all top out in the 30–40 kB range. Imzadi 1979 → 01:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I went back and checked; the talk page was your 2nd highest article talk page by number of edits; when it was in draft you made 5 edits on it and when it was published in articlespace you made 177 edits. It ranks as your 32nd most edited article out of a list of 1,000 articles which you edited 9 times or more.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't confuse edit count with research time, writing, etc. Edit count includes things like reverting vandalism and the like. Imzadi 1979 → 20:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An analysis tool says you wrote 7.3% of the current version, the second highest of any particular editor on that article. On the Door County article as it currently stands, I wrote 74.5%. of it. I am self-conscious of that, since I want the article to reflect consensus and the available sources rather than my ego. So I have avoided editing the lead so much, since that is what much of the readership looks at anyway on a long article; only 5 words and the census population number in the lead were written by me. I have avoided removing things others write, even if I personally disagree, because it might make others feel bad and discourage their participation. Some might have standing to fault me for writing 3/4 of an article, but you don't, since for your top five edited articles, you were responsible for 86.0%, 90.2%, 81.0%, 92.0%, and 84.2% of the articles' content respectively. Out of my top five edited articles on enwiki, this one has the second highest contribution by me; the highest one is a translation and is (for the English) listed as 93.7% being my authorship.
Replacing the history section with the short version above will help reduce my contribution percentage to the article, since the short version is mostly from others' authorship, and the long history section currently in the article (below the Settlement and development subheading) is disproportionately written by me and serves to weight the article as more strongly written by a single author.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Currently, prose text is at 51 kB, with 9798 main body words. If the history section were to be replaced with the short version above, the article would be at 41 kB, with 9521 main body words--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like the split proposal didn't gain consensus, so I've removed the {{split}} tag from the article. -- Mikeblas (talk) 01:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mikeblas, I never asked for help on individual talk pages; this may be part of why no one commented. At the end of August 31, 2021, it was at 47 kB and 7742 words of readable prose size and 9107 main body words. The article is currently at 55 kB and 9086 words of readable prose size and 10483 main body words. Maybe if it gets up to or passes 60 kB someday I will just go ahead and split it without asking and see if anyone objects after the fact.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 15:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Door_County,_Wisconsin&oldid=1206870226"