Talk:Denali National Park and Preserve

Some of the material that's in question that is heavily sourced to the park's own website geared towards visitors do fall under WP:NOTGUIDE and minute details of tourist attractions per WP:NOTPRICE regarding some of the restored contents with edit summary "this is valid information about the park and its amenities". Specifically "amenities" that cites primary sources. I believe it's fine to say there's a road in the park... but to say something like off limits to vehicles, except to those camping in xx campground is getting into visitor guide mode. Graywalls (talk) 23:42, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:No, these are not minute details and it's very appropriate and necessary to give more information than the basic fact that a road exists. A National Park is built for tourism and we must describe what that consists of. If I were planning a trip, this would be woefully incomplete compared to a tour guide, but it's an important overview of what facilities and access exist. Sourcing information to the National Park Service is entirely acceptable. WP:Featured articles that describe tourist attractions and access like campgrounds, visitor centers, trails, and more, all inclusive of NPS sources, include Glacier National Park (U.S.)#Recreation, Grand Teton National Park#Recreation and Grand Teton National Park#Tourism, North Cascades National Park#Attractions, Zion National Park#Activities, Saguaro National Park#Recreation, Bryce Canyon National Park#Activities, Everglades National Park#Activities, Petrified Forest National Park#Activities, Death Valley National Park#Activities. You are applying this far too strictly not only to this article but also others, and nominating this article for status without the integral blocks of text you deleted would get it laughed out of there. Reywas92^Talk 14:30, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{re|Reywas92}}, "if I were planning a trip..." well, you don't turn to an encyclopedia to plan a trip and we have Wikivoyage for that. NPS is a primary source and even if reliable, writing about NPS (which even has a social media marketing department) managed parks significantly sourced to their own website is pretty similar to writing about a company based on a company website. This is especially when it is parroting contents significantly off of NPS site itself on things like amenities, bus, campsite info and such is a matter of excessive coverage that is undue and Wikipedia isn't intended to serve as a resource for traveling. Let's discuss the generality of this at Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Travel_time,_proximity_to_another_spot_and_such. Courtesy ping to {{ping|Masem}} Graywalls (talk) 20:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Not going to waste time discussing deleting perfectly valid information similar to those in the featured articles. This article has general information about how visitors experience the park, whereas Wikivoyage has specifics for trip planning like costs of passes, how you enter the road lottery, differences between and costs of buses, links to all the lodges, how many sites are at each campground and their facilities, etc. Do not delete whole sections just because it relates to visitation. It is absolutely encyclopedic to describe how visitors experience a national park, including how it takes to get into the park's core and that visitor centers are there. Reywas92^Talk 21:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::::{{re|Reywas92}}, I disagree {{tq|Only the first 15 mi (24 km) of the road, up to Savage River Bridge and a loop trail, are available to private vehicles, except for visitors camping at Teklanika Campground. Beyond this point, visitors must access the interior of the park through tour/shuttle buses.|tq}} being necessary. You're in no position to store contents because WP:ILIKEIT when you refuse to participate in establishing consensus as your own response "Not going to waste time discussing deleting perfectly valid information". You don't singularly decide what's due. See WP:ONUS and WP:VNOTSUFF. Graywalls (talk) 22:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::This is *completely* relevant and due. You don't say there's a road but fail to say you aren't allowed to drive on most of it. You don't fail to say visitors must take a bus to get inside the park. The point of Wikipedia is to be useful and informative, not devoid of the very most important things to know about park visitation. Tourism and how it works is encyclopedic. Reywas92^Talk 02:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::{{tq|This is *completely* relevant and due. |tq}}, disagree, especially citing nps.gov itself which is no different than citing a resort website about a resort. This is why I opened a discussion. Graywalls (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::{{re|Reywas92}}, so you continue to disregard WP:ONUS and continue to reintroduce the challenged content, but refbombing with numerous travel guide type sources. Please stop and engage in discussion to reach consensus. Graywalls (talk) 03:31, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::So first you complain it's not due (that's not how WP:DUE even works), and then when I provide several reliable sources indicating its relevance you complain it's refbombing (it might be WP:OVERCITE, but it's not a WP:REFBOMB). Guess what? Besides the fact that these are perfectly reliable sources and not all travel guides, we're not forbidden from using travel guides as sources. We should not present information as a how-to and be a travel guide ourselves, but that's not what we're doing! This does not tell you what the buses cost or what the different tours are or their schedules or contact information for the concessioner or how to prepare. It's a very simple encyclopedic statement that private vehicles are not permitted on the road and that visitors take buses. Why in the world do you think Wikipedia is better with this and other information about how the National Park operates deleted? I don't like to put Britannica in articles, but [https://www.britannica.com/place/Denali-National-Park-and-Preserve they believe] this is encyclopedic to state as well! [https://access-newspaperarchive-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/us/alaska/fairbanks/fairbanks-daily-news-miner/2011/08-07/page-1 Here's] [https://access-newspaperarchive-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/us/alaska/fairbanks/fairbanks-daily-news-miner/2013/09-08/page-1 a couple] more newspaper sources about the road. Reywas92^Talk 03:42, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::And we're not forbidden from using Facebook, Instagram, YouTube etc under narrow guidelines. That's why they're not deprecated. WP:VNOT. I'm arguing the contents you're fighting to include is undue. At this point, consensus will determine. Graywalls (talk) 04:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::There are no narrow guidelines about travel guides. Anywhere. Reywas92^Talk 14:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

{{disdis|Manuductive|spi=Lardlegwarmers}}

Third opinion has been requested. Graywalls (talk) 22:43, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Notice to editors: we are attempting to get a broader consensus around this at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Travel time, proximity to another spot and such. — hike395 (talk) 11:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:The reason there's a discussion there here, as well as there is that this one here is about the issue in this article, but the one over there is about the broader interpretation, generally speaking. Graywalls (talk) 16:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe a good compromise guide would be a reader who wants to learn about the park but does not intend to visit it. Would it be the type of info that they want to read to learn about the park? This would tend to leave out info that is overly focused on being a visitor guide. North8000 (talk) 14:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:It's a central feature of the park that the vast majority of the road is accessible only by park busses. That is fairly unique among US national parks. I've been in a legitimate traffic jam way up in the mountains in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. that's impossible at Denali. It's a defining feature of the park. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 18:48, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::{{tq|except for visitors camping at Teklanika Campground.|tq}} is unnecessary in my opinion. Too tour guide esque and exceedingly specific and can be interpreted as promoting the purchase of camping privilege at Teklanika. It's unnecessary as is it's unnecessary to say police, fire and medical have keys to the gate and may access. Such information can be accurate, yet undue. Graywalls (talk) 19:01, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:::I don't know whether I count as a third opinion, but if it were up to me, I would compromise between the two positions and use a shortened Access section, removing the more touristy stuff, see Talk:Denali National Park and Preserve/Access. — hike395 (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

style="border-top: solid thin lightgrey; padding: 4px;" | Image:Searchtool-80%.png Response to third opinion request:

style="padding-left: 1.6em;" | I'd say pull it out for no weight. The only secondary source I can find talking about the road being closed to thru vehicles looks more like a blog[https://www.thealaskalife.com/blogs/news/teklanika-river-your-backstage-pass-to-denali-national-park-and-preserve], unless you want to try to argue that it's RS. The primary source won't cut it, especially if there's resistance from other editors. If somebody is driving out to Denali and using Wikipedia as a navigation aid, they've got more problems than just having to park and take the bus. Manuductive (talk) 13:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:So you didn't read any of the sources in the article? Reywas92^Talk 13:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Disclaimer that mine are just quick "drive by" comments, but a high level view of the overall management scheme (excluding vehicles and providing shuttles) might be enclyclopedic info. North8000 (talk) 14:32, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I think that Hike395's idea is sort of the same one that I offered and is a good one and does not conflict with others have said in this section. I.E. take out any "tourist info" info and the shortened section could still include the road closure info as info on park management. North8000 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:I don't believe anything here is merely "tourist info". No one could possibly use this to plan their trip, as it's only a general overview. It is absolutely encyclopedic to describe visitor centers, airports, campgrounds, and more. Nearly all aspects of national park visitation are part of park management, which includes decisions on balancing conservation with recreation. Even hotel lodging has a fascinating history if you read the [https://npshistory.com/publications/dena/adhi1.pdf park history] that includes how it was developed, where, and why. There could be some further cleanup and rephrasing, but little should actually be deleted. Access and recreation at Denali is very different from other national parks in Alaska and elsewhere, and deleting sections like this would obscure this content that is perfectly academic and informative about human interactions with the landscape, not a how-to guide. Reywas92^Talk 17:35, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

::I did a more careful read of that section. I think that you are right for nearly all of the info. I'd reword that on sentence to take out the "sells tickets". If it's the origination point for the busses, I'd say that instead. North8000 (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2025 (UTC)