Talk:Mount Henry Peninsula

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mount Henry Peninsula is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
April 21, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Flag
Portal
 Mount Henry Peninsula 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.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Perth.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] comment on style

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)

[edit] some suggestions

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)

[edit] Essay section

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)

[edit] Living Factors of the Environment

All animals and ecosystems rely on a delicate food web to survive in this changing environment. The Swan-Canning River system has too complicated a food web for every organism to be accounted for but the following food web is an example of the categories each organism may be grouped in, it describes the feeding preference of fish and other organisms currently present in the Swan-Canning River ecosystem.

[edit] Predator/ Prey

Predation is a feeding relationship where one organism kills and eats another. The attacker is the predator, and the organism which is eaten is the prey. Usually this refers to animals eating other animals, but some native flora, on the Mt Henry Peninsula, are also known to digest animals as a source of nutrients.

[edit] Parasite/ Host

Parasitism is another example of one organism’s dependence on another; in this case the parasite usually depends on the larger organism. Parasitism can be harmful towards the host, it could be beneficial, or it could be mutual. Parasites are organisms which live on or inside another organism, Parasites then feed off the host organism and in this way the parasite sustains life. The parasite usually harms the host but rarely kills it. Parasitic organisms native to the Mt Henry peninsula area include a native variety of mistletoe and a monogenean flatworm which is known to live in Black Bream.

A study has found Acanthopagrus butcheri (Black Bream) to host two species of parasitic monogenean flatworms. Forty fish were sampled from the Perth region and from Stokes Inlet on the south coast of Western Australia. Haliotrema sapriensis, which infects the gill filaments, was found on 97.5% of Acanthopagrus butcheri from Perth and on 10.0% from Stokes Inlet. Allomurraytrema robustum, occupying the gill arches and the corner and roof of the mouth, was found to have infected 10% of Perth fish and 2.5% of the Stokes Inlet sample. These parasites are geographically widespread around the Australian coastline and are also hosted by other Acanthopagrus species.

The Australian native variety of Mistletoe found on the Mt Henry peninsula is an air-born parasitic plant which lives off the sap of its host. This particular variety of Mistletoe thrives in almost every type of climate and soil in Australia, and is found everywhere except Tasmania. Those living on the coast tend to flower in spring and summer, but many types of mistletoe are at their peak of flowering in March, particularly in the drier inland areas. The Mistletoe on the Mt Henry peninsula is wide spread and currently in bloom, it is found on heoaks and sheoaks by the foreshore strand, the mistletoe does not kill the host and is a source of nectar which supports the continuity of many species of bird in the Mt Henry peninsula area.

[edit] Mutualism

Mutualism is a relationship where two organisms live closely together to benefit each other. Mutualism can be found in many forms, it can be used to describe the process of pollination; many flowering plants depend on animals for pollination. Pollination is the transport of pollen, the male sex cells, to the female parts of the flower. This helps to produce the seeds and fruits which some animals eat, in this way the survival of both the organism and the plant is guaranteed, through mutual interaction both organisms involved benefit.

An example of mutualism in the Mt Henry peninsula area is seen with the parasitic native variety of mistletoe and the native “mistletoe bird” which plays an important role in the mistletoe plant's life cycle. The life of most mistletoe begins when a viscous, gluey seed drops onto a branch from the rear end of the brilliantly coloured black, red and white Mistletoe bird. Found throughout Australia, these birds are highly mobile and go wherever mistletoe is in fruit. Once eaten, the seed of the fruit quickly passes through the bird, emerging just 10-15 minutes later. The sticky seed fastens onto the branch, although many seeds fail to adhere, and are lost. Without the mistletoe birds this native variety of Australian mistletoe would not be able to reproduce, through the reproduction method of this mistletoe the bird gets fed, both organisms gain from this and each relies upon the other for survival.

[edit] Competition

When organisms need the same resource and there is limited supply of this resource, the organisms must compete for it. Competition occurs between members of the same species and between different species. For example the introduced Cain Toad competes between its own species for food but also competes for food with native frog species, this is environmentally destructive and has already collapsed many delicate food webs, and destroyed the surrounding environment. The native frog simply cannot compete with the multitudes of Cain Toads due to their inhuman reproduction rate; this competition is causing the extinction of many frog species which are food sources to varieties of birds and other predators.

In the Mt Henry Peninsula ecosystem there are forms of competition present between Lizards and Spiders, the Bobtail Lizard, the Legless Lizard, and varieties of spider all compete for insect prey, this competition is healthy and each organism keeps the numbers of the other species down; this competition is between native animals who have developed structural, functional and behavioural adaptations to suite the surrounding environment. These animals are built to cope with competition.

Mt Henry Peninsula once had an environmentally destructive competition present between multitudes of introduced rabbits and the bandicoots, the bandicoots were losing the battle for food and therefore were dying out in that area, not until the fire of 1997 did the rabbit epidemics show any signs of stopping. With the help of CALM officials and approval from the Swan River Trust and other councils, the rabbit epidemic was stopped and all rabbits were removed from the area with the help of traps, Mt Henry Peninsula no longer has any population of rabbits and a presently stable, growing population of bandicoots.

[edit] Effects of Introduced Species

Currently a number of situations exist where foreign species have been introduced into the Swan-Canning River ecosystem. The impact of these introduced species on native flora and fauna has in some cases been quite devastating, resulting competition for resources between feral and native animals which are not built to cope with this struggle for necessities; this can cause major reduction in the numbers of some native species of flora and fauna to endangered levels.

Introduced species of flora and fauna have been able to enter the Swan-Canning River ecosystem for a number of reasons, either accidentally or deliberately. Once established these introduced species are very difficult to remove and can have devastating effects on the surrounding eco system.

A feral population of the South American “pearl cichlid” Geophagus brasiliensis, estimated to be about three years old, has recently been located in Perth in the Swan-Canning estuarine river system.

Cichlids are a group of tropical freshwater fishes originally from South America and Africa which have managed to infiltrate the Swan-Canning estuarine river system. Studies show that this infiltration was caused by the rising salinity rate in the Swan-Canning estuary.

There are over 2500 species of Cichlids, and they are highly prized as aquarium specimens. They are aggressive, territorial, and can survive a wide range of temperature and water conditions. Some form harems, laying their eggs on hard substrate, and both parents guard the eggs and young. Others are mouth brooders, where the female lays, then transfers the eggs to her mouth. These are then fertilized by the male, and remain in the female's mouth until they hatch.

They compete aggressively with native species and have the potential to dominate freshwater food chains in favorable areas; they can be extremely destructive if introduced to any freshwater ecosystem which is not built to cope with their adaptations. The popular aquarium fish can devastate major waterways as they compete and predate on native species and damage delicate aquatic ecosystems.

Control methods have been carefully applied according to local conditions, including water depth, local wildlife, whether the area is man-made or natural and the amount of cichlids in the area. Hopefully the quick response to the infiltration of this feral species will minimise the effect it has on the Swan-Canning River ecosystem. The quick response prior to the frog breeding season means there will be minimal impact on the frog population and overall the impact of the introduced pearl cichlid on the Swan-Canning River system will be minor and all traces of this epidemic will hopefully be removed over time.

A wildlife rescue plan was also implemented during the control period but Mr Astbury from Department of Fisheries, Biosecurity, said despite the effectiveness of control measures, it is unlikely that cichlids will be completely eradicated from all areas. Longer term monitoring will further evaluate the effectiveness of the control program and establish if further control measures are required in the future.

[edit] Essay Section

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)

[edit] Funding

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)
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)

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)

Yes, all images are welcomed, but it might be recommended that you post it in the discussion section first, so that the community can agree on whether it will be useful in the article or not. AC Boy 11:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox and unsupported claim

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)
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)

[edit] Refs etc

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)

[edit] Infobox

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)

[edit] Internet references 1 to 11

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)

Removed. — Moondyne 17:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] For Future Reference

The Official Name of the Landmark Relating to this article is "Mount Henry Peninsula"

The changing of the original the title of the page to mount henry (Western Australia) was strictly following the guidlines of Wikipedia Articles, but removing "Peninsula" from any occurance of the name is wrong, According tho the Australian Government, City of South Perth, State of Western Australia and Aquinas College, the area in question is Legally and Officialy called "Mount Henry Peninsula" abreviated it is "Mt Henry Peninsula" it should not be wroded in form other than the names given here. Removing the official name can be considered an act of vandalism, because it is denying information that has been supplied to the public.

This Note is for the future refrence of Editors, please adhere to these guidelines.

AC Boy 08:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Since the correct name is Mount Henry Peninsula then the article Name should be at Mount Henry Peninsula (Western Australia) with a redirect from here. Gnangarra 08:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I have moved the page to the correct name Gnangarra
all links have been dab Gnangarra 09:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Mt Henry is a geographic feature rather than a place name (ie. unlike Mt Lawley or Mt Pleasant) and therefore favour the article name "Mount Henry (Western Australia)". This is based on:

  1. My UBD says Mt Henry is in the locality of Salter Point and that there is no locality called Mt Henry
  2. per the geoscience placename database [1] there are multiple placenames called Mount Henry, but none called Mount Henry Peninsula.
  3. Per the Wikipedia naming convention for geographic features in Australia: we qualify geographic features as "placename (state or LGA)" if the name is ambiguous, else just use "placename". Consistency in naming is important and where a convention has been agreed by consensus we should follow it. — Moondyne 10:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
sorry I jumped to soon, I'll fix it to whatever this discussion results in. The reason I was happy just to do was this [2]
as these government bodies City of South Perth, Swan River Trust and Department of Planning and Infrastructure where involved in the plan I assumed that naming of the area was correct. (silly me for assuming) Gnangarra
Hey, no need to apologise. As long as we get there in the end, it's all good. — Moondyne 11:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Firstly let me start this by saying I wish there to be no dispute, we are all working together to make this article as good as it can be, I have no problem with the Article name, I simply proved that in the article it should be related to as Mount Henry Peninsula. I must apologise for any offence to you moondyne but knowing that you have been to the place in question and mabey even attended the school i am dissapointed in your ignorance, but it is understandable, I myself over looked this fact and the final blow. Mount Henry "Peninsula" is actualy the peninsula of Mount Henry, i know that sounds dumb and i am sure u already knew that, but what I am trying to get at is that Mount Henry is actualy a larger geographical area, you may have heard of the Mount Henry dental clinic or the Mount Henry Housing development, they are all a fair distance away from the peninsula and have no relation to the peninsula, and yet they take the place name of Mount Henry, this is because they are on the larger geographical feature of "Mount Henry". The peninsula is simply an outcrop of the larger geographical feature of "Mount Henry" Therefore the Peninsula is rightly named by the Australian Government, City of South Perth, State of Western Australia and Aquinas College, as "Mount Henry Peninsula". Thankyou. Your logic is well acknowledged moondyne but mine is fact (no offence).

No offence is taken - we don't work like that here (if it was I would have left a long time ago!). But, the official name of the hill and immediate surrounds is "Mount Henry", per the Geoscience link above. MH Peninsula is an unofficial term which I do not dispute is widely used. You mention various people using the term but don't provide any citations - and beware, they need to be in the context of an official nomenclature, not passing references to the place. When someone says "Mount Henry", without a qualifier at the end, there is no doubt what they are talking about - and that's because it's the official name. — Moondyne 13:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine I give in, there is no point aruing over something this insignificat, but i was wondering if you had actualy read the citation Gnangarra provided, [3] for further citation please contact aquinas college at 9450 0600 and see what references they have in thier library on the topic, i for one know each and every one of them refer to Mount Henry Peninsula, this includes the Mount Henry Peninsula Foreshore Plan. But as i said I give in, have it your way. Lastly i forgot to sign my last post sorry, AC Boy 14:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't be like that. Sure, lots of documents refer to MH Peninsula, just like references to "Swan River Estuary"[4][5][6] and "Darling Range Escarpment"[7][8][9] — Moondyne 07:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • To resolve this I've ask User:Hesperian who has been able to provide Official gazetted names for most if not all locations in Australia. Gnangarra 08:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
As Moondyne rightly pointed out, the gazetted name of the hill is "Mount Henry". Other than this hill, there is no place in Western Australia gazetted as "Mount Henry". It is not the name of a suburb, locality or precinct, so if there is a "Mount Henry Dental Clinic" in the area, then that dental clinic is named after a nearby hill.
There are places in Western Australia gazetted as "Mount Henry Bridge" and "Mount Henry Bridge Reserve", but there is no place in Western Australia gazetted as "Mount Henry Peninsula".
What exactly is this article about? If it is about the hill, then the article title should be Mount Henry (Western Australia), end of story. If it about the peninsula on which the hill sits, then it is an article is about a geographical place that does not have a gazetted name. In that case, I would be exceeding my brief if I suggested a name, but I don't see anything objectionable about Mount Henry Peninsula.
If you go with Mount Henry Peninsula, there probably should be a separate article on the hill, to be located at Mount Henry (Western Australia).
Hesperian 12:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. The article is in fairness about the reserve, an area of 11.9ha. On that basis I'm happy to go with Mount Henry Peninsula. I'll move it accordingly and leave Mount Henry (Western Australia) as an empty placeholder for a future article about the hill. — Moondyne 14:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Which brings me to another point; it's not clear to me that a reserve can be owned freehold. I thought a reserve was land that was reserved from sale, so that it can be used for other purposes such as public access, public recreation, future infrastructure needs, conservation, etc. I suggest that the Aquinas land should not be described as reserve. Hesperian 22:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Importance rating

I noticed this has been increased from low - mid on this scale. The normal practise is to request a re-assessment first on that page and let an unassociated reviewer change the assessment, I would like to see this occur. Anyhow what is the basis for the increase? Gnangarra 07:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

comment from User_talk:Gnangarra formatted to fit discussion flow by Gnangarra

sorry, I don't know all the procedures yet but hope to learn them this weekend (I am at school)
My basis on the change of rating is that it is not so specific, It relates to one single small point or fact. Ineteadf, it describes a large area which is a highly used page - at mid year, year 9 science students at the college get an assignment - this is specifically helpful to them
You are a lot more experienced then me so, I trust whatever you do - even if you revert to the origioinal rating will be correct. symode09 08:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geology vs History edit

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)

[edit] References

This information may be good for a reference, or on other pages about the decline of banksia woodland.

REMNANT BANKSIA WOODLANDS

Banksia woodland originally covered much of the Swan Coastal Plain, however most of it has been cleared in the face of suburban sprawl. Different types or “complexes” of Banksia woodland can be identified, based on differences in vegetation structure. According to Trudgen (1993), the general consensus among botanists is that less than 5% of the original “Bassendean Complex - Central and South”, which the Goss Avenue / Koonawarra sites are representative, remains. Only 1.6% is protected in reserves (Burbidge and Hopper 1989). Trudgen (1993) states, in an ecological survey of the nearby Gillon Street bushland, that:

“...areas of this complex are of significant conservation value, with the degree of this significance related to the size and condition of a particular area as well as other factors such as the particular vegetation types present and the presence of any flora or fauna which is declared rare, or are on the Department of Conservation and Land Management priority lists.”

Subsequently, the conservation importance of any remnant sites of the Bassendean Complex - Central and South, is highlighted.

As at February 1997, City of South Perth has within its boundaries several other remnant Banksia woodland sites. These include the Gillon Street bushland, Manning Primary School bushland, Mt Henry Hospital bushland, the remnants surrounding the Aquinas College ovals and the Mt Henry Peninsula bushland. Only Goss Avenue bushland can be considered relatively safe in the long- term. Most of Mt Henry Hospital bushland is already earmarked to be redeveloped, the Gillon Street bushland may be cleared for subdivision redevelopment in the near future and the Education Department has been reviewing the retention of remnant bushland surrounding schools. This could include the Koonawarra and Manning Primary remnants. In addition, the bushland surrounding Aquinas College, including the peninsula, is privately owned and does not have zoning protection for conservation.

This can be found at, http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:CBZGDZm1JAwJ:www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/environment_man/bush_fore_man_plans/goss_ave_koonawarra.pdf+Mount+Henry+Peninsula&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10 AC Boy 04:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] more

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)

  1. http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/environment_man/bush_fore_man_plans/bush_fore_man_plans.htm
  2. http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/.../environment_man/bush_fore_man_plans/mthenry_peninsula_fore_man_plan.pdf
  3. http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/meetings/docs/2004/feb/ordinary_council/Attachment621.PDF
  4. (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)

  1. I just found another reference which tells of the origin of the name Mount Henry. http://www.southperth.wa.gov.au/eservice/SouthPerth/town_plan_info/townplanning/3_COSP_STREET_NAMES.pdf AC Boy 13:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Register of the National Estate

Are you aware that "Canning River Wetlands", which takes in Mount Henry Peninsula, is on the Register of the National Estate? See this link. Hesperian 04:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

what does that mean, are you implying that it does not belong to Aquinas?
No, the Register of the National Estate is merely "Australia's national inventory of natural and cultural heritage places which are worth keeping for the future".[10] I am providing you with a piece of information relevant to the article, and a link to a source of information that you might want to use and cite. Hesperian 06:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, i just didn't understand what you are getting at, sorry. AC Boy 09:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ownership

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)

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

[edit] Changing of the name

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)

As there's no conflict with any other article it doesnt need the (Western Australia) qualifier, Gnangarra 08:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

This article is related to the category of Aquinas College, Perth. This is because it is managed and maintained by the school


[edit] Notability

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)

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)
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)
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)
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)

Dmz5, you asked

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)

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)
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)