Talk:Thousand Islands

Bodies of water discussion moved to Project:bodies of water by (WT-en) Evan

OK, somebody give me a good disambiguator for this, 'cause it's gotta move once I finish writing up Thousand Islands (Java). (WT-en) Jpatokal 09:44, 16 May 2005 (EDT)

I've moved this promotional material plus apparently unuploaded jpg files here. Anyone who wants to edit this should please do so:

Alexandria Bay

Boldt Castle - amazing guilded age castle on its own five acre island

Uncle Sam Boat Tour - various scenic tours on large tour boats

Cornwall Brothers Store - nice local history museum on waterfront

Clayton

Antique Boat Museum - largest collection of freshwater recreational boats

1000 Islands Musuem - great local history museum in downtown storefront

American Handweaving Museum - hidden treasure of craft and handweaving

Clayton 1000 Islands Tours - boat tours on the St. Lawrence

• These appear to be valid destinations, but would require that someone look up the info and include basic facts (location, contact info, neutral description) instead of just "great" and "hidden treasure". We currently do *not* have an article on Clayton (New York) (although Alexandria Bay exists on WV). Clayton (population 2000) is about ten miles west of metropolitan Alexandria Bay (pop 1000) so this becomes a question of whether to list points of interest for these under-5000 villages here (keeping Kingston, Gananoque, Watertown and Brockville as city/town-level articles), list Clayton/A-Bay together or create pages for every tiny village in the region. K7L (talk) 20:09, 20 October 2012 (CEST)
• There was a piece in the Sorrycuse paper a little over a year ago which may have a few landmarks which should be listed either here or at an adjacent point like Alexandria Bay. K7L (talk) 21:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Cape Vincent

DEC Fisheries Station - freshwater aquarium and fish research station

Tibbett's Point Lighthouse - lovely spot where St. Lawrence flows from Lake Ontario

Listings

Just a reminder, listings should not go in this article; they should go in destination articles. LtPowers (talk) 04:43, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

I've kept Kingston, Watertown, Brockville and the like off this page as these are small cities with their own established articles. The same is not true of places too small to have an article (Clayton, Lansdowne, Cape Vincent or anything actually located on one of the islands or on parkland). Gananoque (pop 5000) and Alexandria Bay (pop 1000) are included as jumping-off points for boat tours of the islands, although more local listings (like "eat" or "sleep") are left in the local article for these two. I'd suspect the Thousand Islands does pass the "can you sleep there" test on its own as Wolfe, Hill and Wellesley Islands all have some sort of tourist accommodations. K7L (talk) 07:34, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

That's a strange sort of hybrid approach that doesn't fit with our usual Geographical hierarchy. Maybe several islands can be combined into a single article. Or is your contention that this is that article? (Sadly, North Country isn't well divided yet, so maybe that's some of the confusion.) LtPowers (talk) 19:40, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

As opposed to 1700 articles, one for each island? That'd be a bit much, as many are just large enough for a single cottage. There's also the problem of what to do with the various rural villages (mostly population 1000 or less) on either side's mainland. North Country extends to Massena, so is likely too broad to accommodate individual listings, and Eastern Ontario ends up in the shadow of Ottawa. Keeping Hill Island ON and Wellesley Island NY together (they're the two large islands in the centre or center - take your pick - of the Thousand Islands Bridge) makes sense geographically, even though this is an entity arbitrarily split by a border (much like Glenrio NM/TX or Beebe Plain QC/VT). I think the islands should be one article, not a thousand articles. The rural areas will have to be assigned to either a region-level page or to the nearest town which has a page. Clayton (New York) might be viable as a stand-alone topic, but otherwise these are under-1000 person villages spread across a 40-mile/60km region and an international boundary. Cape Vincent is likely too small for a page, but fits better here than in Watertown as it is a seasonal ferry crossing point onto Wolfe Island.

The applicable sections of the geographical hierarchy would be:

• Other divisions "large rural areas... in which the individual towns do not really merit their own articles (which would lead to an excess of articles, and content being spread across too many separate pages) can benefit from having their own articles"
• Overlap "Occasionally a well-defined region will straddle a political boundary between two countries, states, or provinces. It is usually preferable to deal with these instances as a single region, rather than dividing them up into unnatural, small pieces"
• Keeping it together "Geographical unit articles need to meet the criteria for articles too. There should be enough scope in the article to have at least 4 or 5 good quality destinations or attractions, especially for regions."

I'd say the Thousand Islands is "a large rural region" which straddles a political boundary but which should be kept together to provide enough scope for an article. K7L (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

Regions function as "container" articles, so the whole region should be divided in articles at the lowest end of the hierarchy. I don't think LtPowers suggested having 1700 articles for each island, but suggested to group different islands together in a single article, as appropriate. --Globe-trotter (talk) 21:00, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

If something is rural or on a small island, there might not be any lower article in the hierarchy. The only places for which we have city-level articles are on the mainland on either side (like Kingston or Alexandria Bay), the Thousand Islands has no village-level articles for Wolfe Island, Hill Island, Wellesley Island, Amherst Island, Howe Island or the individual island parks. Grouping different islands together gives Thousand Islands... the same salad we already have. Even then, some of the sections ("drink" in particular) have no viable entries without including mainland points or establishments primarily serving food. K7L (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2012 (CEST)

"Drink" is not a required article section. If there's no nightlife, then so be it. We can and should create subdivisions of Thousand Islands as necessary. LtPowers (talk) 05:07, 21 October 2012 (CEST)

I suppose this raises a question... is Thousand Islands a bottom-level article (much like Kingston or Watertown) or yet another pointless level of regional subcategorisation? I'd prefer to place it as local-level as we already have eastern Ontario, northern New York, Frontenac County and Leeds-Grenville (so everything except Jefferson) and most of these at the county level are rubbish. Province - region of province - county is already three sub-national regions. I'm inclined to treat the Thousand Islands like any other small (1000-2000 population) but travel-noteworthy region split by a border. It's one community as it's too small to be two. As soon as something can be put in another local-level page (unless its infrastructure needed to "get in" or "go next", like boat rentals, ferries or bridges) it's in Kingston or Watertown (or wherever) so it no longer needs to be here. K7L (talk) 23:33, 22 October 2012 (CEST)

There are a number of ways it could be handled, but the article was begun as a subregion of North Country, as indicated by the presence of the Regionguide template and the presence of the "Cities" section -- only Regions contain Cities. I think the area covered by the Thousand Islands is too large to consider it a single destination. LtPowers (talk) 01:07, 23 October 2012 (CEST)

This is a difficult case. Could K7L draw a rough boundary of the areas actually considered part of the Thousand Islands on an OpenStreetMap screenshot and upload it here? Does it include things on the mainland(s), or just the islands themselves? --Peter ^Talk 23:25, 28 October 2012 (CET)

Roughly? From an OpenStreetMap, export (44.1 to 44.6 N, 76.8 to 75.6 W) and remove the mainland on both sides. (Kingston, Watertown and Brockville are not islands.) The region is every island in the St. Lawrence River (both nations) from Lake Ontario in the west to Brockville-Morristown in the east, including the ones in the middle of the 1000 Islands Bridge. K7L (talk) 00:01, 29 October 2012 (CET)

If the article is just about the islands themselves, then I think it might be able to work as a "bottom-level destination guide." It looks like the "Towns and Villages" on the mainland belong in this article, though. But they may be small enough where the article wouldn't get overwhelmed with content. I don't know. I'm inclined to encourage you to give it a try, if it makes sense to you, especially since it seems simplest. If the article were to get too long, we could divide it later. I'm not terribly concerned about it spanning administrative boundaries, although any border issues should obviously be covered in the article. --Peter ^Talk 01:48, 29 October 2012 (CET)

I've been picturing it as a subregion of North Country; it seems too large (geographically) for a single article to me. But I don't have a good sense for how much content might be in here. LtPowers (talk) 02:35, 29 October 2012 (CET)

The entire US shore (Cape Vincent < 1000, Clayton 2000, Alexandria Bay 1000) isn't going to fill more than one local-level article and the Thousand Islands themselves have no towns of over-1000 population on them. Kingston/Brockville are cities and stand alone, but of the towns Gananoque (5200) is the largest and the only other than Clayton to be over-1000 population. The end result is a sparse population scattered over a wide rural area. Many of these islands are large enough to hold a cottage and precious little else. K7L (talk) 05:51, 29 October 2012 (CET)

I think this is a mistake. Anyone going to Alexandria Bay is going to say they're going to the Thousand Islands; that village, then, should be "IsPartOf" the Thousand Islands region, not merely an access point to it. LtPowers (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2012 (CET)

That would create a problem of where to put listings. Points of interest actually on the islands belong in Thousand Islands, points on the US mainland belong in Alexandria Bay (although this needs to be replaced or broadened to extend through Clayton to Cape Vincent). Listing Alexandria Bay venues here (unless they're transportation, like the Uncle Sam boat tour to Heart Island) would be pointless duplication. Treating Gananoque, Thousand Islands and Alexandria Bay as three separate localities on the Canadian mainland, the islands themselves and the US mainland respectively (and only ending each where the next locality begins) leaves each listing with a proper home in one article and only one article. Towns which don't already have articles are a grey or gray area (is Cape Vincent closer to Alex Bay or to Wolfe Island?) but A-Bay listings belong in that town, not on the islands. K7L (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2012 (CET)

I'm not sure you've said anything I disagree with. The problem is converting Thousand Islands into a bottom-level entity, when conceptually it should contain other bottom-level entities like Alexandria Bay. LtPowers (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2012 (CET)

We already have a "container" for places like Alexandria Bay... at North Country. Creating multiple levels of sub-provincial regionalisation just creates a string of empty shells, like Frontenac County and Leeds-Grenville in eastern Ontario which serve little useful purpose as all listings are pushed out of them onto the bottom-level local pages. There is a need to define bottom-level articles in rural areas broadly, so that Cape Vincent to Alexandria Bay is one local area, ending where Ogdensburg picks up to continue eastward toward Massena. No place should be without some article to which its listings may be posted. I just don't see creating multiple layers of regional article to be the answer unless those regions, like bottom-level articles, are able to contain listings for everything not already listed in a city page. I realise Alexandria Bay is just one span of a bridge away from Wellesley Island, but usually it's best not to create huge areas of overlap.

In any case, there is one clear reason not to tag {{IsPartOf|Thousand Islands}} onto pages. If the 1000 islands region is part of eastern Ontario and Alexandria Bay is part of the 1000 Islands region, then Alexandria Bay is part of Ontario. (Not to worry, Fort Drum will march in and "liberate" them from the jackboots of Canadian oppression... but "Alexandria Bay is part of northern New York" and "Gananoque is part of eastern Ontario" would be best if an international incident is to be averted). K7L (talk) 16:40, 30 October 2012 (CET)

What I was envisioning was to include Alexandria Bay in this article directly (not as a sub-article). The fact alone that it's on the mainland shouldn't be reason to give it a separate article—if it makes sense as a part of Thousand Islands, almalgamate it here. If you're worried about the breadcrumb trail, don't be, since that's likely to change soon. Nice work, by the way! --Peter ^Talk 16:44, 30 October 2012 (CET)

North Country is far too large to be a bottom-level region. Even Adirondacks is going to have subregions. Other regions of New York State (like Niagara Frontier and Finger Lakes) have been subdivided. So if we're going to subdivide North Country, it seems like Thousand Islands should be a subregion, not a destination. LtPowers (talk) 18:38, 30 October 2012 (CET)

You lost me here. --Peter ^Talk 22:32, 30 October 2012 (CET)

Once fully developed, I'm fairly certain that North Country will need subregions, just as Finger Lakes does. It's just too wide a swath of land. The Adirondacks are even more sparsely populated than the North Country, and we've talked about subdividing that, so I don't see why we wouldn't consider subdividing North Country. Given that, it seems like Thousand Islands would be a natural subdivision, with articles like Alexandria Bay IsPartOf it. LtPowers (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2012 (CET)

Thousand Islands wouldn't have to have sub-destinations to be part of that structure, though, and Alexandria Bay could just be merged into it as a single article. --Peter ^Talk 03:19, 31 October 2012 (CET)

It would be weird to have both leaf nodes and non-leaf nodes at the same level of the hierarchy, wouldn't it? It'd be nice if we had a better idea how much content we're talking about, but Thousand Island still feels more like a region to me than a single destination. LtPowers (talk) 14:25, 31 October 2012 (CET)

It's not something we've been doing (I can count on one finger the number of instances that I know of), but I can't think of a reason not to, just so long as it makes sense in terms of dividing content. It makes all the more sense if we're not sure what the end quantity of content will be, as in this case. --Peter ^Talk 20:19, 31 October 2012 (CET)

North Country appears to be a single Congressional district, at most. Watertown and Plattsburgh are the only cities of any size, and neither appears to be the largest city in the state. K7L (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2012 (CET)

What odd metrics to measure by. LtPowers (talk) 21:36, 30 October 2012 (CET)

How so? Take a look at the total population of the area which you want to create as a region with multiple destinations within it. The entire south shore of the St. Lawrence from Cape Vincent to Morristown might have a little over five thousand people, so is comparable to one small town. Take something larger like "St. Lawrence Valley (New York)" (Clayton, Ogdensburg, Massena...) and then maybe you'd have enough for more than one article. Even then, unless North Country is unmanageably large now (and not merely the target of speculation that it might grow larger in the future) we do not need additional levels of categorisation at the current time. K7L (talk) 01:23, 31 October 2012 (CET)

Well, only one city is the largest one in the state, and that has its own region; not having the largest city in the state is not very informative for all the other regions. Also, population (which determines Congressional districts) doesn't map well to "number of attractions or destinations". LtPowers (talk) 14:25, 31 October 2012 (CET)

I look at North Country and see a mostly-blank page (there's a one paragraph introduction, a list of towns and then two lines of actual body content with many sections entirely empty). Why does this need to be broken into multiple levels of regionalisation, again? K7L (talk) 14:47, 31 October 2012 (CET)

I believe I said "Once fully developed". I could be wrong, but every other region of New York has been or will be subdivided. LtPowers (talk) 16:24, 31 October 2012 (CET)

By the looks of Talk:New York (state)#Destination article statuses, NYS is a mess of empty or outline region articles. There really is no need to create more classification levels at this time. K7L (talk) 00:03, 3 November 2012 (CET)

I don't understand what that has to do with my statement. LtPowers (talk) 03:36, 3 November 2012 (CET)

The eastern Ontario region has been restructured to scrap the county-level articles and create Seaway Region as the Kingston-Cornwall subregion in which Thousand Islands partially resides. Presumably, if there were a need to split NNY further below North Country (and there won't be while we're still missing many towns like Ogdensburg and Massena), Jefferson/St. Lawrence counties could be grouped as St. Lawrence Valley or something similar? K7L (talk) 21:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Miss Thousand Islands II image

Is that a commercial image? If not, why is it a good one to include, anyway? (WV-en) Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:52, 5 November 2012 (CET)

It's a Wikipedia (commons:) image of a tour listed in the "Do" section as available from the Antique Boat Museum in Clayton. It is relevant to that section of this page. The museum is notable; WPBS-TV actually did a documentary on this place. As a Wikipedian, however, I do see it odd that a "User:AntiqueBoatMuseum" uploaded a pile of these to make multiple edits to Antique Boat Museum on that wiki on Jan 5, 2012 with no one actually questioning this as a conflict of interest. (WP's article is tagged "lacks reliable sources" but that's a different issue.) If the museum put this on Wikipedia themselves, it is under a free license and not a copyright violation, but if this looks to be self-promotional on their part (which might be an issue to raise at WP if it concerns you) feel free to substitute something else as a photo. K7L (talk) 11:55, 5 November 2012 (CET)

I have no photo to substitute, but there is no problem with simply deleting a photo. Also, I believe we have different standards for what constitutes a promotional image than Wikipedia does. In a Wikipedia article that's specifically about the Antique Boat Museum, an image of a boat is clearly relevant, even if it has a secondary effect of promoting the museum. However, this article is about Thousand Islands, not about a tour that's provided by a museum. I guess I'm undecided on whether this photo should be removed from this article; I think its caption insufficiently explains what the image is of, though. Can you think of a way to remedy that without making the caption a paragraph long? (WV-en) Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:18, 5 November 2012 (CET)

The only way to fix the caption (short of just removing the image, and feel free to do so if you like) would be to list "Antique Boat Museum" or "Miss Thousand Islands II, Antique Boat Museum" in the caption - which would make this even more blatantly promotional. The "do" listing already explains the boat and the museum, so the image is optional at best. Pull it. Wikipedia's standards are WP:COI, WP:RS and WP:IRS which advise against conflict-of-interest editing and require information come from reliable, independent secondary sources. There's also a username policy under which this could be problematic over there. "An article about yourself", personal or organisational, is the sort of thing they're usually prone to jump all over... not sure how this slipped past them. Those same standards don't apply here (for instance WV allows primary sources and doesn't use footnotes and citations, WP discourages overreliance on primary sources and prefers citing secondary works) but self-promotion is normally a no-no on both wikis. K7L (talk) 12:33, 5 November 2012 (CET)

'Talk' section

For a sample sentence in eye-dialect: "Oh my Gad, I kyan't believe you wint fesheen at nuyt and cot so mawch!" Honestly, though, it's not nearly as difficult to understand as all this explanation makes it out to be, and unless English isn't your first language it shouldn't give you any trouble. There is little vocabulary deviation from General American; in terms of word preference, locals call sugary carbonated drinks "soda" and when they say "the City", they usually mean Watertown (or Syracuse, if they're feeling daring).

^^^^^^^^^WTF are you talking about? I grew up in Watertown and worked in Clayton for 3 years, and have never heard anyone talk like that around here. If someone did pronounce words like that around here, they'd be laughed out of town. -- 01:40, 19 May 2014 24.58.229.247 (talk)

(...moving this comment from article to talk page... K7L (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2014 (UTC) )

The whole thing is a little overwrought. Granted I'm from Upstate NY myself, and we're notoriously deaf to our own accent, but I simply can't imagine it's anything that needs to be particularly noted for a traveler. Powers ^(talk) 01:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea why an article at this low a level has an extensive "talk" section. Admittedly this was started as a region instead of a city-level rural area, but North Country#Talk and Seaway Region#Talk are silent and blank. (Eastern Ontario#Talk is a different beast, as it includes a chunk of Ontario-Québec border which actually is significantly bilingual.) It's possible to hear a slight difference from Kingston to Watertown but what's here now is overkill. K7L (talk) 03:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Talk

The Thousand Islands are home to two distinct dialects of English, depending which side of the St. Lawrence River you're on.

On the American side, residents speak American English with an accent colored by the Northern Cities Vowel Shift (as in Rochester, Syracuse, or Chicago), along with a little bit of Canadian Raising absorbed from north of the border. Essentially, this means that:

• the short "a" as in "can" (/æ/) sounds like "eea" ([ɪə]) before nasal consonants /m/ or /n/;
• the long "ah" sound in "father" or "God" (/ɑ/) is shifted towards the short "a", ending up as [a] (sounding close to "Gad");
• the "aw" sound in "law" or "bought" (/ɔ/) is moved towards an open "ah" sound ([ɑ]);
• the "uh" as in "cut" or "mother" (ʌ) has moved further back, closer to where the "aw" sound was ([ɔ]);
• the short "e" in "bet" (/ɛ/) is close to, but not quite, a schwa (rather close to the New Zealand short "i", [ɘ]);
• the short "i" sound in "milk" or "hit" is closer to the former short "e" ([ɛ]), except in the "-ing" verb ending, which sounds like "een" ([in]).
• and the long "i" sound in "right" or "like" (/aɪ/) is pronounced something like "uh-ee" ([ʌj]). This last one also means that locals can still tell the difference between pairs like "writer" and "rider", even if they sound identical to you.

For a sample sentence in eye-dialect: "Oh my Gad, I kyan't believe you wint fesheen at nuyt and cot so mawch!" Honestly, though, it's not nearly as difficult to understand as all this explanation makes it out to be, and unless English isn't your first language it shouldn't give you any trouble. There is little vocabulary deviation from General American; in terms of word preference, locals call sugary carbonated drinks "soda" and when they say "the City", they usually mean Watertown (or Syracuse, if they're feeling daring).

Speech on the Canadian side is much closer to a generalized Canadian accent (with a few regional peculiarities), perhaps best exemplified by Hockey Night in Canada commentator and Kingston native Don Cherry. On Wolfe Island, "the mainland" always refers to Kingston, not Cape Vincent.

In spite of the bilingual French/English signs on the Canadian side of the river (and the French heritage on the American side), actual Francophone speakers in the Thousand Islands region are few and far between, being far more populous downriver in Québec. Pronunciation of French-named landmarks tends to hew closer to actual French pronunciation on the Canadian side, while in the North Country it is heavily localized ("Chaumont", for example, is pronounced "sh'-MOE", while "Frontenac" is "FRAHNT-'n'-ack").

In spite of these wide differences, there are still points of commonality. In terms of weather, "Lake Effect" is heavy snowfall due to the influence of nearby Lake Ontario (though relatively few travelers come to this area during the winter), while "the Ice Storm" was an event in January 1998 that felled many trees and knocked out power across much of the North Country and Eastern Ontario. Be prepared to be outclassed in nautical terminology unless you grew up near a body of water. And of course, don't forget that "the River" is always the St. Lawrence River, no exceptions.

Disambiguation

The way the articles for the various destinations named Thousand Islands are structured now seems somewhat unconventional. There is the Thousand Islands at the Canada/US border, and the Thousand Islands National Park in Indonesia. However, both are commonly known simply as Thousand Islands, and both contain/consist of a National Park. According to the Anc guidelines (of using the most common English name, and of disambiguation) I would say that Thousand Islands should be a disambiguation place, referring to Thousand Islands (North America) and Thousand Islands (Indonesia). Is that correct? --ErwinFCG (talk) 11:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I would say absolutely, that is correct. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

One's a city/village-level article, the other is a park article. We don't have a city-level article for "1000 Islands, Indonesia" so I don't see a need to disambiguate. I've removed Leeds and the 1000 Islands from the hatnotes as that's just one tiny rural municipal township (already mentioned inline) which was only being hatnoted because one specific user from Mallorytown (who's no longer active) seemed to be promoting "Front of Yonge" township here for whatever reason. K7L (talk) 12:38, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Why does it matter that one article uses a city template and the other uses a park template, when it comes to making a decision about having or not having a disambig page? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

It matters because it means the names are already different; the article with the park template has "park" in the name. You're trying to fix something that's not broken. K7L (talk) 12:32, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

I think it is broken, actually. For someone looking for Thousand Islands, there is a 50/50 chance that is for the one in North America, or the one in Indonesia. Similarly, Thousand Islands National Park exists in both cases, so someone looking for the NP also does not necessarily look for the one in Indonesia. Based on the guideline that the most common name should be used, also in the case of the one in Indonesia that should be Thousand Islands. --ErwinFCG (talk) 12:49, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Much like, if someone searches for "Manhattan", there's a 50/50 chance that they're looking for Manhattan (Kansas) and not some backwater in New York (state)? I tried looking for "thousand islands" on a couple of search engines... it's sending me to Clayton (New York), it's sending me to salad dressing, it's sending me to Gananoque, to some place stateside with "ten thousand islands" and to basically anywhere but Indonesia. Wikivoyage:Naming conventions#Disambiguation indicates "if one place is so much more famous than others with the same name that the disambiguation is a hindrance rather than a help, leave it without a disambiguator on the end". By that standard, the main entry would not be Indonesia. K7L (talk) 15:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

To me, that sounds a very North America-centric way of thinking. Also, Google may give different results based on location, as for me on the first search results page, 6 are on US/Canada, 1 on dressing, and 3 on Indonesia. Nevertheless, my main point was that the current way of disambiguation is unconventional. If the Thousand Islands in North America are indeed "so much more famous", then I think according to the guidelines Thousand Islands National Park should be moved to Thousand Islands (Indonesia), and Thousand Islands National Park should redirect to Thousand Islands. --ErwinFCG (talk) 15:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Another possibility, if you move the existing park article to Thousand Islands (Indonesia), is to leave a disambiguation page at Thousand Islands National Park. Thousand Islands State Park is unambiguous, it's in New York State and nowhere else, but there is a 1000 Islands National Park in each of Canada and Indonesia. K7L (talk) 16:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I have followed your suggestion. --ErwinFCG (talk) 08:36, 25 November 2016 (UTC)