Talk:Grizzly Creek Fire
Latest comment: 7 days ago by Axad12 in topic Other Lookout Mountain
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Other Lookout Mountain
edit | The user below has a request that an edit be made to Grizzly Creek Fire. That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is low. There are currently 55 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. |
- Specific text to be added or removed: Wikilink to Lookout Mountain (Colorado) (but not the mention of a Lookout Mountain)
- Reason for the change: There are multiple features in Colorado named Lookout Mountain, which seems to be causing a confusion regarding the wikilink provided in the article.
- The location described by the article would be in Garfield County near 39°32′28″N 107°15′29″W / 39.541°N 107.258°W. It is near Interstate 70 Exit 121, serving the Grizzly Creek rest area, which is named after the same tributary of the Colorado River as the fire. This Lookout Mountain would appear to be otherwise insufficiently notable to merit its own article.
- The location linked by the article, Lookout Mountain (Colorado), is in Jefferson County near 39°43′55″N 105°14′20″W / 39.732°N 105.239°W and I-70 Exit 256. This location is well outside of the closed section of I-70, between Glenwood Springs, Colorado (I-70 Exit 116) and Dotsero, Colorado (I-70 Exit 133).
- Since I'm employed by Colorado Department of Transportation, I'm including the edit COI template.
- References supporting change: Are coordinates already provided (by others) in the two articles sufficient? There's a roughly two degree difference in longitude.
Msramming (talk) 03:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable. I wonder if it would be useful to somehow include some text in the article to clarify this point, perhaps as a footnote?
- If we don't do something along those lines then the same (rather understandable) mistake is going to be made time and again by well meaning editors. Axad12 (talk) 06:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)