Talk:Dryandra Woodland National Park

Dryandra Woodland National Park was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 23, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
March 4, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
February 13, 2010	Good article reassessment	Kept
January 27, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Australia: Western Australia Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Dryandra Woodland National Park 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 Western Australia (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 Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Western Australian Wheatbelt

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Western Australian Wheatbelt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Wheatbelt 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.Western Australian WheatbeltWikipedia:WikiProject Western Australian WheatbeltTemplate:WikiProject Western Australian WheatbeltWestern Australian Wheatbelt articles

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

Good article

... as far as I can tell. I gave it B class because it needs peer review, not mine. It is class A in my view.

Nyungar section needs a little development.
Great structure and scope in content. Like discussion of different uses by people.
Strongly in favour of articles on country (bioregion?). They can outline a 'unity' of elements and create a portal for histories.

Are there others like this? What team of editors created and developed this? Just one! Another great article by Moondyne. Fred 17:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on Fred's talk page. —Moondyne 08:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rare flora

I checked each entry in the protected flora list against Florabase, and found a number of spelling errors, some species that had changed priority code, plus a few that had been declared taxonomic synonyms, and some that had been published (i.e. no longer ms). Chorizandra pinnatifida simply doesn't exist, and seeing as the next entry in the original list is Dryandra pinnatifida (i.e. same specific epithet) I'd say it is a typographical error in the original. What species was intended is irrelevant as no Chorizandra species appears on the priority list now. I couldn't find any mention of Schoenus aff. clandestinus either, but have left it be for now. Hesperian 12:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My review

From WP:WIAGA:

Well written - Meets MOS requirements, clearly structured and flows well. Wording may need a third pair of (not glazed over like mine) eyes to go over it just to iron out small issues here and there - although I know I'm being harsh and judging the prose here to FA standard - but it's overall good to excellent. Not many articles of this type hold my interest from beginning to end!
Factually accurate and verifiable - Pass. Extensively referenced from a mix of literature and Web resources with inline citations in all cases. Cite.php used for most, the ones it isn't used for appear fine to me.
Broad - Very comprehensive (see NPOV). Pass.
NPOV - Covers several different uses (per Fred), original inhabitants, forestry, conservation, tourism. Pass.
Stable - Pass.
Images - Good selection of images, all appropriately tagged. Pass.

Overall - excellent! I really hope this one can get to FA and that this feedback is useful. Orderinchaos78 04:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio broadcast - a reliable source?

The radio trail broadcast is used as a reference here. This might be queried as a reliable source. ~~While i have been unable to definitely determine the author of this information, it appears to be endorsed by the park manager,~~ The WA government's department of conservation,is the author of the material. I would certainly rate this as reliable at GA, if not at FA. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC) I have now provided a link to the page from which the text can be downloaded. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. It could probably be reworked somewhat to conform better with the manual of style guidelines for layout and list incorporation, but all in all it's a good article. Lampman (talk) 08:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dryandra Woodland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070921220806/http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/nature/management/dryandra.pdf to http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/nature/management/dryandra.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dryandra Woodland. 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/20070921220806/http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/nature/management/dryandra.pdf to http://www.naturebase.net/pdf/nature/management/dryandra.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noongar name

I was editing Dryandra Woodland a few days ago and added it’s Noongar name as alt_name into the infobox, so it shows in the top (as “Noongar: Wilgadjny”). At the same time I noticed that Canning River and Swan River show their Noongar names in the infobox under “Native name” as “Nyungar: Djarlgarra”.

Can I please ask which may be preferred by Noongar, and if there are any objections to making at least these three pages use the same scheme? Betterkeks (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was persuaded to start using Noongar, but I'll provide some source you are interested. cygnis insignis 11:58, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Delisted. Steelkamp (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Dryandra Woodland National Park/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has not been significantly updated since it became a good article in 2007. Since then, the Dryandra Woodland has become a national park. There is no mention of it being a national park in the article's body, with only a single sentence in the lead stating that it became a national park in January 2022. Other than that, there are many sentences that have no sources and the sectioning seems unusual - recent history covers history from 1903?, why is Mallet its own section? Steelkamp (talk) 05:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.