Talk:Environmental issues in Australia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Library of Congress Country Studies
WikiProject icon This article contains information from WikiProject Library of Congress Country Studies, an attempt to incorporate useful information, text, and images from the Library of Congress Country Studies and the related Country Profiles. These are public domain documents with extensive information on many countries. You may see what other Australia-related contributions have been made by looking at the project's subpage for Australia, which tracks progress for articles on Australia, and look for what contributions you can make, including updates to this article.
 
WikiProject Australia (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Environmental issues in Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.

Merge/or speedy Delete[edit]

This material is already at Conservation in Australia - is not referenced and is an offshoot of out of australian experience - an embarrasment for the australian project that such weird uninformed orphans still exist SatuSuro 00:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I have tried to delete and/or hard merge it in the past. If I recall correctly, the creator insisted that this was a useful article since it is a section in the CIA world fact book or LC country studies.... I agree, it is appalling. --Peta 00:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  • That is no reason to keep an article under any sense- the article is replicating material in three other articles - usefulness is rubbish - redirect to something else at least. The australian project does not need this sort of rubbish SatuSuro 00:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


Disagree. The article is needed. Not all environmental issues are regarding conservation. There are significant issues which are related to the economy and also landcare which aren't covered anywhere else. I have made an effort to expand and clean up the article. --Biatch (talk) 05:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Erroneously constructed sentence?[edit]

A passage in the Native Fauna section currently reads:

"The arrival of humans is attributed to the extinction of Australian megafauna and . . . ."

I suspect that this should read:

"The extinction of Australian megafauna is attributed to the arrival of humans and . . . ."

but I'm reluctant to change it without being sure of the original intent. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Biased Opinions[edit]

Reading this article, it seems very biased, especially the section on the Wonthaggi Desalination Plant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.142.141.146 (talk) 23:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, it also lacks references, and has a personal opinion attached to it 182.239.163.107 (talk) 08:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Turn "Controversial land use projects" section into prose?[edit]

The Environmental issues in Australia#Controversial land use projects might be better off as prose rather than a table? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Unintentional Racism[edit]

The line: "is attributed to the arrival of humans and since European settlement" is vague. Arrival of "humans"?? Does that mean Australian Aborigines or that these aborigines are not classed as humans since "human", within the article, seems to be only meaning europeans? Maybe the article should be more specific in actually mentioning native humans (aborigines being the first traditional peoples of Australia) and maybe the commonly accepted time period (approx 40,000 years of settlement), however, knowing what species has gone extinct within that time may be difficult to accurately measure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.80.179 (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2013 (UTC)