Talk:South-west Corner Marine Park

Name of the "reserve", and thus the article

edit

The cited web page [1] does not mention "South-west Corner Commonwealth Marine Reserve". Searching from that page for South-west Corner Commonwealth Marine Reserve (no quotes) finds this list which includes "South-west Corner Marine National Park Zone II", but that's as close as I get. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place. In the interests of pedantry accuracy, it would be helpful if either:

  • we had a reference that listed the name of the reserve as used by the article, or
  • the article title and lead sentence matched the name of something in a ref,

whichever is appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

  Fixed, no need to change the article title - Evad37 [talk] 04:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)Reply
Would http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/marine/marine-reserves/south-west/sw-corner be a better (more specific) ref - for the lead sentence - than http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/marine/marine-reserves/south-west ? Mitch Ames (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2013 (UTC)Reply
Good question, (1) if it remains the stand alone article about a single reserve that is a component of the larger range of 12 reserves - then the second is better as it alerts to the other reserves, however (2) if all the other component 11 reserves have articles created, then the first would be better. (It will be unlikely that I start 11 stubs before bedtime...) satusuro 14:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)Reply
The problem with the more specific link is that it doesn't actually have any information on it's location, and so doesn't verify "lower south west and southern coast of Western Australia". - Evad37 [talk] 15:10, 14 December 2013 (UTC)Reply
Good point Evad37. I've added the specific ref, and also mention of the network (keeping the network ref).