The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Why isn't the article about the park as a whole, rather than just the lake? The sources appear to indicate the park as the subject. Gatoclass (talk) 11:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
@Gatoclass: I intended for the article to cover both subjects, and coverage of the lake necessarily involves the park (and vice versa). The lake is more likely than the park to be considered notable per WP:GEONATURAL, but I can move the page to Clark Lake Park if you wish. DirtyHarry991 (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
There are only two sentences in the article that have the lake specifically as the subject, and only one of the five references. So yes, I think the article needs to be moved to the de facto topic of the article. Gatoclass (talk) 15:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC)