Talk:Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 2, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed

This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Australia: Tasmania Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Tasmania.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Protected areas Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Untitled[edit]

This is a highly ambiguous title for an article and is potentially misleadingUser:SatuSuro 01:14, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about moving it to Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area?--Peta 01:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which would be a s the Tas Nat Parks people have it - but this one is a good form of disambig clarification. User:SatuSuro 01:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes to the text improved the clarity.--Peta 01:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

De-listing[edit]

"In 2014, the Abbott Government proposed de-listing the Tasmanian Wilderness as a World Heritage Site so as to allow the logging of trees within the protected area" This is a gross exaggeration of what was proposed. I think a better reference would be something like http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-24/unesco-rejects-bid-to-delist-world-heritage-forest/5538946 There was never a proposal to de-list the whole WHA, but rather a proposed boundary change which in effect still left a net gain on the pre-2013 boundary area. Tilgrieog (talk) 02:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Team-B-Vital Improvement Drive[edit]

Hello all!

This article has been chosen as this week's effort for WP:Discord's #team-b-vital channel, a collaborate effort to bring Stub and Start class Vital articles up to a B class if possible, similar to WP:Articles for Improvement. This effort will run for up to seven days, ending early if the article is felt to be at B-class or impossible to further improve. Articles are chosen by a quick vote among interested chatters, with the goal of working together on interesting Vital articles that need improving. This is the second article chosen and a trial run for the effort.

Thank you! -- ferret (talk) 13:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is really odd - as the Rater assessment already has it at B level JarrahTree 14:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We pick and vote on random topics from the category of Vital Start-class articles. Also, fairly significant expansion has already occurred. The diff that we started on was rated C (52%) by Rater, though I didn't check before hand. That said, ORES prediction isn't quite everything. -- ferret (talk) 14:47, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I would agree with your comment re ORES - the main fault with the article from a quick look is the usage of ext lins in the text - the components of the entity (what makes up the park, how it came about, and current threats) are sufficiently out there if anyone has a sense of working with australian materials - for the lack of local knowledge could easily be a stumbling block - (we once had someone go to considerable effort to establish tasmania was a separate country to that of Australia, as a former resident I refrain from further comment)....

The main source for materials for oz is Trove - although the newspaper 'catch' runs out in the 1950s, sufficient state and federal goverment reports and publications should show up, if asked the right way (sometimes sideway queries elicit as much as direct) - JarrahTree 15:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]