Talk:Kakadu National Park

}}

Other discussions

The bit about lightning strikes more than anywhere else is wrong. The congo has most, and various mountains.

I think the cool picture should be up at the top, so it will be the first thing that a reader sees when the page comes up! Stan 22:42 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I originally had it there but thought it dominated the article and was not in line with the standard formats Tiles 00:29 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Policy prescribes the syntax for controlling placement, but it's up to editors to decide what is an appropriate and aesthetic layout for each article. The number one thing to keep in mind is the reader. Use me as an example; I'm halfway around the globe, never been to Australia although I've considered it, and I've never heard of Kakadu before. What are the most important things I should know? It's a park, it's near Darwin (I already know where Darwin is, probably unusual for non-Australians - "northwestern corner of Australia, near the equator" would set context for more people), and it has excellent wetlands. Your first sentence covers the first two points, and the picture tells me the third instantly. If all that gets my interest, I'll read further and learn more, perhaps even put it in my future trip plans.

For completeness, I'll mention two lesser points to consider. First, the tabular data leaves a big blank space at the top of the article, wasting limited screen space. Tabular data should go at the end or in a sidebar, out of the way. Second, if someone is viewing on a smaller screen, say 800x600, the picture will be pushed down below the visible area, and the average person seeing this article will go "ho hum, another boring text-only article" and probably never scroll down to see the pic. (I've rescued a number of pictures that had suffered this fate; all that work and nobody even knew the pic was there! The most kick*ss pic I've added to Wikipedia had to be in running text partway down - I bet only ten people see it in a month, and am scheming for an excuse to put it front-and-center somewhere else.)

Anyway, these are all points of style and not hard rules, but they can help make your article one of the exciting and interesting ones that readers look for. Stan 03:38 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I inherited the start of the article but have tried reformatting. Thanks for the advice and driving me to try a table. I'm not Australian but I love the country and places like Kakadu. If you have the time try it. I cannot do it justice Tiles 08:32 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

Kakadu is a huge park. Is anyone able to describe any of the other parts of it, because it's not all like the pic?

Additionally, there was the controversy about uranium mining. --Robert Merkel 03:32 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

could someone write an article/section about the uranium mining controversy? - franchez update: I´ve started an article on the topic: Uranium mining controversy in Kakadu National Park - franchez

I spent a week in Kakadu this past July, I have amazing pictures of waterfalls, gorges, and panoramic views that would add a lot to this article (taken by me so they're freely distributable). Since, I'm new to adding to wikipedia, can someone tell me how (or if I should) add these pictures? I can also describe other areas in the park (not currently in this article) in great detail, but I'm unsure how to organize these into the article. AZRobbo 21:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Cape Arnhem

Unless they have drastically enlarged Kakadu while I was having my lunchtime nap, last time I was there it was in Arnhemland. Pity cos it's a good shot. billbeee 08:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus for merger. --Kralizec! (talk) 12:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I suggest the article Uranium mining controversy in Kakadu National Park be merged into this article. franchez is right that this needs to be covered, but i'd make several comments. First, controversy about mining in Kakadu is broader than just about uranium mining - other proposals have been subject to debate (esp. a gold mine at Gurutba / Coronation Hill). Second, I'm not sure that the uranium mining controversy on its own might fit criteria for notability, but I think it does when put in the context of Kakadu's World Heritage values etc etc. Third, there is an NPOV problem that may be more easily dealt with by placing the discussion into a broader context. I hope to get around to making a contribution, and doing the work on the merge if others are comfortable with this proposal, but may not get to it for a few weeks. hamiltonstone 04:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Nanguluwur

It seems that there might be a bit of a mix up with the names, the main article is called Nanguluwu but the link name reads Nanguluwur. I don't have anything on that one, does anyone else have any clarification on this one? Cheers Akerbeltz (talk) 19:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

COOL DUDE SO LOL

This place is so cool its not funny. - The Pics !WOW! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.131.141.92 (talk) 05:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Nourlangie

I understand the traditional owners have requested that Nourlangie be referred to as Burrunguy and Anbangbang. Should references to "nourlangie" on this page and on the nourlangie page be changed? ---- ed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.228.81 (talk) 12:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Plagurism

Some pages in Landforms have been plagiarized

Read the first paragraph of the website below and then, compare it with the second paragraph of Landforms [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hubew (talk • contribs) 07:54, 3 September 2008

Unfortunately it is not that simple. The section in question was added [2] on 13 February 2007 by Nttc (talk · contribs). This editor is a registered Wikipedia account for Tourism NT, which is itself part of the Northern Territory Government. So ... this looks like one arm of the government lifting the work of another arm. Perhaps we can resolve the issue with some careful re-wording and some citations ... ? --Kralizec! (talk) 15:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)