Talk:Wheatbelt (Western Australia)

message: I just felt it was mind-numbing to read "Shire of" for all of these, so I aaaa (accidentally as an anon) removed the "Shire of" and then columnized it, which I felt added to the readability.  If any Aussies find this unacceptable for any reason, I don't care if they revert it. HuskyHuskie (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Columnization 

message: According to the Ecosystems sections:
But:
* The IBRA article does not list Avon Wheatbelt P1 (AW1) and Avon Wheatbelt P2 (AW2) - it has Merredin (AVW01) and Katanning (AVW02).
* There's no obvious connection between Avon Wheatbelt and Jarrah Forest, Geraldton Sandplain, Mallee. Possibly the latter are intended as other examples of subregions, but the sentence probably needs to be reworded to be a bit clearer as to what we are trying to say.
Mitch Ames (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Talking about #Regions or sub-regions, as we have been recently, does anyone have any thoughts on IBRA subdivisions? Mitch Ames (talk) 13:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The text of the main IBRA documentation is needed to be read and quoted from, no arbitrary wikipedian based playing with them please satusuro 15:15, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. And WP:CITEd please. The Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia (IBRA7) subregions and codes (from Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia#References) includes "AW1 Avon Wheatbelt P1" and "AW2 Avon Wheatbelt P2", but no context to allow me understand what it means. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  IBRA subdivisions 

message: There is inconsistency across various mediums when referring to the Wheatbelt region in WA
* Bureau of Met refers to a "Central Wheat Belt"
* The ABC refers to the Central Wheatbelt or just the Wheatbelt
* Tourism sites typically refer to the Central Wheatbelt or just the Wheatbelt
Thoughts on the space between wheat and belt, and whether Central should be included?  Jim (talk) 04:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wheatbelt is a legally defined region under that name - see e.g.  - and has been since 1983. One often hears the terms "Central Wheatbelt" and "Eastern Wheatbelt" referring to parts of it, but neither have a precise definition (the WA Government have a functioning definition of Eastern but it's never been gazetted and is not entirely uncontroversial in the area.) Orderinchaos 05:10, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

text: There are many versions of what the Wheatbelt constitutes - an addition to the article in a month or two after some research - will attempt to trace the origin of the term and the variants that have existed since the term was first used.  requires checking against sources that exist in Battye library... sats 07:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

text: Many thanks all, much appreciated. We will run with "Wheatbelt" for any publications. Jim (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 01:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheatbelt vs Central Wheat Belt vs Central Wheatbelt 

message: The article currently has this structure:
but this is probably not right, because the WDC (6.1) is not a "Region within the wheatbelt" (6).
Currently the only meaningful content of the WDC section is "The Wheatbelt Development Commision (WDC) breaks the region up into five ...". The actual list of regions/offices sensibly belongs under the section "Regions within the wheatbelt", the statement that the WDC subdivides the region also fits under "Regions within the wheatbelt", but the WDC heading does not.
So what are we to do?
* Make WDC a heading 2, and add some significant content? Does anyone have enough material on the WDC for that?
or
* Remove the WDC heading, and replace it with a , so that Wheatbelt Development Commission can continue to redirect to that specific text, and thus we can keep the bold style (per WP:R#PLA).
or
* Change the heading from "Wheatbelt Development Commission" to "As defined by the Wheatbelt Development Commission" - logically correct (given the text under the heading) but clumsy.
Mitch Ames (talk) 14:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheatbelt Development Commission 

message: * Wheatbelt Regional Profile: Background and context report to support the Wheatbelt Land Use Planning Strategy, April 2011 (archive url)
Looks relatively comprehensive, has sections on diversity, People and population, Settlements and land supply, Regional economy, Natural resources and environment, Heritage and culture, Infrastructure. - Evad37 [talk] 10:33, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source found 

message: This article did not consistently use a capital initial letter in wheatbelt, nor did it consistently use lower case.  So I changed it to lower case except where it was part of a phrase using other capital initial letters. 2601:2:4D00:27B:C46B:FAB4:D02E:D592 (talk) 22:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that Wheatbelt is the proper name of a specific region of Western Australia, hence the capitalisation. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capital or lower case?