Talk:Mount Henry Peninsula

message: Comment: we try to avoid the level one heading, single equal sign, so I increased each heading a level. RJFJR 20:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comment on style

message: Please consider the policy WP:CITE on how to format references. Additionally please read WP:V as to what is considered a reliable source. Other poinst that maybe of interest for this article are WP:NPOV and WP:NOR. I like what you have got here once cleaned up with that picture added it'll be a good article. If you have any questions just ask, if its about this article ask here and I'll answer here. Gnangarra 01:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  some suggestions 

message: This whole section reads like an essay and doesnt directly contribute to the information on the subject, as such i've removed the whole section and placed it here for now while we discuss if any of this needs to be returned to the article. Gnangarra 06:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essay section 

message: I agree, the section shown above does read as an essay but there is some good information in there about the flora and fauna wich inhabit the Mount Henry Area, some of this information should be placed under the Flora or Fauna headings and re-worded to explain how the species affects the environment (eg: introduced or not?) what is being done to remove or preserve the species inhabitants of the peninsula and of course what the species is. for example gladiola are found on mount henry peninsula and action is being taken to remove it. the information about the rabbits being removed is also useful
:Thats why I moved it here, now what we've go to do is isolate that information a put it in a coherent form in the article. Gnangarra 11:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essay Section 

message: mabey this should be renamed to "organisations involved"? i am completely neautral and do not care weather this section is removed or not, but would it not be denying readers the freedom to information? the section in question is simply noting the organisations who help conserve the peninsula and may be able to support infomation given or provide other information to the reader.
:With this type of stuff we walk a fine line between POV advertising and providing information, in the section above City of South Perth, CALM, Western Power, have been attributed to actions and providing a service. Instead of saying CALM donates money, you can credit CALM with an action in providing the nest for the opsrey, dept of ag for spraying for yellow soldier. Gnangarra 11:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: when doing this references are required, have a look at the Kings Park, Western Australia article or read WP:CITE. Gnangarra 
1:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i have an image of Scott Andrews (Aquinas Student) and Jan King (Co-ordinator getting a cheque for funding of the resotration work...should i add it? message me. Smbarnzy 10:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funding 

message: I think the ifo box was actually helpful, and should be replaced, i think i can provide a map, and the "claim" was not untrue or unsupported it simply had to be reworded
:Where a statement is made that xzy is on register abc unless theres a reference/citation that supports the statement then it must be considered unsupported and removed. This is because the biggest complaint in the general media is that Wikipedia is full of unreliable information, WP:OR and WP:CITE have more detailed reasonings. When the article is nominated at WP:GA and WP:FA these are basic requirements and it easier to do it now while you've got the source then to try to find it 6,12,18 months later. Gnangarra 11:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note also WP:V = "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." I've had a few situations where some part of me is nagging myself to include something which I know is true, which is provably true to myself, but which is not referenced anywhere reliable, and until it is, it can't be included because it fails the verifiability test. (If I did include it, that would be WP:OR.) Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 02:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox and unsupported claim 

message: I've done a bit of rewording and ref checking. Seems like many things do present OK but just needed (or still do need) verification. I agree with everything Gnangarra's said above.
A tip for new editors - Unless the reference applies to the entire article, please try not to put them at the bottom and use the ref tags and cite templates to pin the references to particular claims. I've done this on a few of them, if you look at those you'll get some feel for how to do it (that's actually how I learned). Also read Template:Cite web and Template:Cite book, they have instructions on there that I still wander back to sometimes to refresh my memory.
In the "Books" section I've commented out several entries as there are references to an encyclopedia but it is not clear which one, and two pages of a high school textbook. Goes without saying that such references should only be quoted as a last resort - as we're talking about pretty non-controversial science and ecology, and a project or series of projects managed by public organisations, trusts and governments (which are required by law to publish reports and so forth), the information should be, and no doubt is, out there. If it's not online, it'll be in books. Don't forget to search Wiki too - it may be some complicated concept you're just about to explain has already been done and with a nifty pair of square brackets you can link to the relevant piece and save yourself the work.
Hope these notes help - we are all new/novice once and my first few well-intentioned edits got howled down. Orderinchaos78 (t|c) 02:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refs etc 

message: I right aligned it - I hope that's OK as it looked a bit weird I thought.  Very nice photo - memories  of my youth on that very beach and in the bush above (l o n g time ago). Cheers — Moondyne 11:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: None of these have anything to do with Mt Henry.  I've scanned them all and they are all related to fishes.  Why are they here? Am I missing something? — Moondyne 13:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. — Moondyne 17:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Internet references 1 to 11

message: Geology is the science and study of the solid matter of the ground, its composition, structure, physical properties and process that created it.  Where as the piece I moved is about the history of the area from POV of human interaction in causing the rehabilitaion of the plant life and preventing errosion. Gnangarra 08:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geology vs History edit 

message: The City of South Perth seems to have many mentions and records on the Mount Henry Peninsula
here are some other pages wich may be of interest. (I have not been able to check them all, because the computer I am using is extremely dodgey)
# http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/environment_man/bush_fore_man_plans/bush_fore_man_plans.htm
# http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/.../environment_man/bush_fore_man_plans/mthenry_peninsula_fore_man_plan.pdf 
# http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/meetings/docs/2004/feb/ordinary_council/Attachment621.PDF 
# (this one includes a review of the previous managment plan and also provides information about funding, wich has been a subject of disucssion previously over its neutrality), found under the heading "Review of the Mount Henry Peninsula Managment Plan."http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/meetings/docs/2002/oct/ordinary_council/Agenda.PDF 
AC Boy 04:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: more

message: My curiosity makes me ask who owns the land underneath the freeway and west of it now?  I had always assumed that (pre the bridge and freeway) it was crown land, but suspect that it was always Aquinas property.  And post freeway, I assume that Main roads purchased that parcel off the college. — Moondyne 07:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This reference pg 54, Aquinas owns the areas east of the freeway reserve, MRD owns freeway reserve (include area under bridges) and western side of the freeway owned by mrd to vest excess portions to City of Sth Perth as reserve. Gnangarra 07:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes Aquinas once owned the land which the freeway is now on, the school had no choice in the matter, (this is not cited and should not be put in the article until such time as citation is found).AC Boy 10:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Main Roads will have it documented as it would have been a compulsary aquisition(sp) Gnangarra 09:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership

message: I was just wandering wheter anyone thinks that the this page should have it's name changed to, ""Mt Henry Peninsula (Western Australia)"
What does everyone think symode09 08:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As there's no conflict with any other article it doesnt need the (Western Australia) qualifier,  Gnangarra 08:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing of the name 

message: I am not suggesting this location is not notable, but I would suggest that the current length and level of detail of this article does not seem to be supported by the subject's notability.  From the article, I would surmise that this peninsula is quite small, just 1/10 of a square kilometer, but there are sections on its geological background, flora, fauna, and history that indicate it is a hugely important and/or unique location or region.  Can someone explain the importance of this peninsula that might justify the length of the article?-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 17:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but it doesn't work like that; we don't degrade coverage of an topic just because more important topics have poorer coverage. If you think this article is disproportionately long, I suggest you expand all the other articles on Wikipedia. Hesperian 22:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Wikipedia's essay on "The Perfect Article" notes that articles should be of appropriate length and not delve into unnecessary detail or subject matter that might be best left for other articles/sources.  I am simply humbly suggesting that the geographical history, florae, and faunae of a very, very small spit of land might be construed as unnecessary detail. -Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 03:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is an important conservation area the only remaining area of that biodiversity type along the canning river, such detail is very necessary within that context. In fact to ommit or remove such information would render the article incomplete, "Wikipedia:The perfect article" should also be comprehenisve. Gnangarra 04:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Ah, unnecessary detail and notability are entirely different things. I agree that the article would be very much improved by, for example, changing the flora section to simply state that the vegetation is typical of the Swan Coastal Plain, then characterising only those ways in which the vegetation differs substantially from that of surrounding areas. The entire subsection on Banksia should be compressed to a single sentence, as should the two paragraphs on the osprey. Hesperian 04:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Can someone explain the importance of this peninsula that might justify the length of the article?
My response is, It's related to the Aquinas College, Perth. I don't think there is anything inherently significant about the location (historically, geologically, or ecologically), and I don't think it has been the subject of any intense study beyond high-school level.Garrie 04:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would beg to differ on the last point. There are various management plans written with the city of south perth on the area and its bio-diversity etc. Im not too sure about much else, but in my dealings with Aquinas College (as a student and wiki editor) the area is of extreme importance, for pete sake there is even an environment project run 3 days a week for students/staff to volunteer time to help the area. There are also groups like Friends of Mt Henry which help out and stuff. Twenty Years 12:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aquinas college is the reason the land still exists, and they have had significant input to the restoration of that environment. With or without the aquinas association the land is a significant area of biodiversity on the canning river, its the only remaining area of its type along the river. Also if you had looked at the discussion it was concluded 2 months ago, please dont make troll like comments about articles because its associated with aquinas. Gnangarra 13:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: Substituted at 00:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mount Henry Peninsula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060921151456/http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/town_plan_info/townplanning/3_COSP_STREET_NAMES.pdf to http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/town_plan_info/townplanning/3_COSP_STREET_NAMES.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:36, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)