Talk:Knowsley Safari Park

Corrections needed

The species list is incorrect for the safari park and the walk around area. Remove american bison on the safari park list and remove red river hogs on the walk around list. Change red river hog for warthog. Adelophryne (talk) 14:19, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

There are no plans for an new elephant house. This information is incorrect. Adelophryne (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

There are no plans to extend the bug house. This information is incorrect. Adelophryne (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

There are no domestic pigs at the safari park. This information is incorrect.Adelophryne (talk) 14:55, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggested changes, but you need to point us to where this information can be verified. The most helpful would be a link to the zoo map, and then just list animals that can be found there, which are presumably the ones the zoo would like to emphasize. Or, a page on the website can often provide this information. Your personal knowledge froma walk around the zoo does not count, since it would be original research (see WP:OR and WP:CITE). Don Lammers (talk) 17:39, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. It is helpful to receive comments as I am new to adding information and I wanted to start by adding simple changes to a few pages. I of course understand about requiring sources, however the safari park's website isn't complete with regards to the species list. The information is from the guidebook that can be purchased from the safari park. Also there are no references for the original species list so there is no difference between my contributions and the one that is on the wikipage at the minute. There are limited references for much of this page, the RAF satellite air base that is mentioned for example. How did this information appear in the first place without references and can remain even though some information is incorrect? Adelophryne (talk) 10:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Press coverage section needs some additions: In 2012 the Olympic torch came to the safari park [Liverpool Echo]Adelophryne (talk) 18:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The mention of a RAF airfield (No 49 Standby Landing Ground (No 49 SLG)) situated at the Safari park has no reference. A reference for this information can be found here [Airfields of Britain Conservation Trust] Adelophryne (talk) 11:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

The RAF airfield situated at the safari park was also known as Knowsley/Knowsley Safari Park/No 49 SLG/RAF Knowsley Park and was in use between 13 May 1942 - November 1944. [Airfields of Britain Conservation Trust] Adelophryne (talk) 11:13, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Unless anyone has any issues I will add the previous information about the temporary RAF airfield to the article. I also think that this piece of information is in the wrong area of the article as there is a heading for History. I will include the information about the station and move the reference to the airfield to the history area of the article. It makes more sense to have it there.Adelophryne (talk) 09:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Species Collection Lists

Not sure how these should be compiled for an encyclopedia as they change so frequently. Should there be a table of species formally kept as well as the current species in the collection? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adelophryne (talk • contribs) 12:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

A complete list of species at a zoo is not encyclopedic information. It cannot reasonable be kept up to date, and it cannot be cited (see WP:Verifiability). For instance, I have a complete list of birds from the Denver Zoo that my son got a couple of years ago. Nobody can verify this information (it's on my computer, and it is not information we were given permission to publish) and by now it is undoubtedly out of date. There are some 200 species listed. Since we frequent the zoo, we notice changes, and they are constant. But they are not listed anywhere that others could verify without going to the zoo -- which is original research (see WP:OR). It's fine to have some animals listed as part of a narrative (if you describe an exhibit, that narrative will inevitably include the more "notable" animals in the exhibit). You can look at Denver Zoo, Phoenix Zoo, and San Diego Zoo (there are lots of others) to see how this might be done. Personally, I stick with the animals that can easily be pointed to either on the Zoo Website or the zoo map. These are presumably the animals that the zoo thinks are "notable", and you can point too the Website as verification. Remember that just because you know something does not mean you can put it in Wikipedia. It must be verifiable by others in a reliable source. This article is ab out the zoo and its exhibits, not about individual animals. Mostly, long lists of animals just distract from this. Don Lammers (talk) 13:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

That's what I was hoping to hear. It does seem impractical and boring really. Species of note, any specialist exhibits or enclosures such as the London zoo penguin listed building sort of information is ok but lists of species are best avoided. I will work on this thanks. I will check out the articles you mentioned. Adelophryne (talk) 15:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Species list deleted as discussed for reasons above. Species added to the article should be of specialist note. I understand the safari park is almost one of the top breeding collections of white rhino in Europe. So if they reach this position then White Rhino should be up for discussion as to whether it should be included. Adelophryne (talk) 15:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

• The RAF base came and went long before the Knowsley Safari Park started. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:40, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Knowsley Safari Park. 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/20140201184702/http://www.ewt.org.za/programmes/CCP/sponsors.html to http://www.ewt.org.za/programmes/CCP/sponsors.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203174359/http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/NewsUpdate/index_117162.htm to http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/NewsUpdate/index_117162.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 05:53, 7 May 2017 (UTC)