Talk:Guanacaste Conservation Area

message: I have created a sandbox for my group's proposed changes to this page. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Nicholepanico/sandbox&redirect=no
P.s. I realize now that I accidentally submitted my sandbox info to become a new article and therefore it was rejected because this article already exists. However, the sandbox link can still be used to view the draft of proposed changes. 
Nicholepanico (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed additions to the Guanacaste Conservation Area page 

message: ...Executive Decree 22909.[2] ,[7]  is citing the article about fish, while "uch rare species include an undescribed fish. Belonging to the Poeciliopsis genus, this freshwater species is endemic to the Potrero Grande river system..." is missing the citation.  Also the paper describes the new species, so it is no longer "undescribed".  Embruna (talk) 15:41, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some mistakes in the citations 

message: I suggest merging the "Area de Conservación Guanacaste World Heritage Site" page into this one. Although the two regions do not entirely overlap, the World Heritage and the Conservation Area at large protect the same regions and ecological communities. With a "World Heritage Site" section in this page, the topics covered by the World Heritage Site page can easily be integration into this one. This merger will also reduce confusion, as there be no need for the disambiguation at the beginning of this page.Brshipley (talk) 22:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I somewhat agree, the World Heritage details can be added into each protected area listed own infobox, just as the Ramsar information is already in many of those (and there are no individual Ramsar articles in those cases).  My concern is if does it really apply in this case? Are there other UNESCO WH Sites treated this way in Wikipedia? I was working on the related articles some time ago and almost did the proposed merger, but they are different entities so I didn't proceed (One is UNESCO's, the other CR SINAC's), so I'm still undecided. Adding everything related to the WH Site in a section of the SINAC area seems like a good compromise, the embedded infobox would also be needed. :) --Roqz (talk) 00:18, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Just another detail, Guanacaste Conservation Area have less inter-language articles than Area de Conservación Guanacaste World Heritage Site, so the precedence in the subject importance would be to merge the former into the latter. This merge should be done carefully if at all, hmm… --Roqz (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

text: I think you're right, the best option may be just to add the WHS infobox to the Guanacaste Conservation Area page, add a brief description in a section, and link to the Area de Conservación Guanacaste World Heritage Site page. There are a few examples of World Heritage Sites like this being relegated to a section of a larger article (see most Historic City Centers or the Colombian coffee growing axis, for example), but those are generally sites that are not already managed by a governmental agency (like SINAC). Brshipley (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! I still think that maybe they can be merged, I'll read a bit more about this in the future, SINAC's ACG have more protected areas than the WHS, but all that can be made clear in a section and itemized list. The Colombia coffee growing axis is a actually a good basis for the merge, keeping the WHS as the target/main article, the merge would be a bit complicated as it needs to be done in Wikidata and a couple of other languages too (just noticed in Spanish we have only the WHS, but have all the other SINAC areas), but just a bit of extra typing in the end. --Roqz (talk) 16:34, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

text: Closing, with no merge given the lack of consensus for any action and disussion stale for more than a year. Klbrain (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal