Comments
- " is meant to " -> "is intended to"
- "value of a property" an odd phrase for "natural sites"
- Not sure what issue you have with it. The sentence says "scientific value of a property", which seems fine to me and is also a term used in this context in the operational guidelines (ref 3). bamse (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- You could link logging.
- "insufficient management system " - systems.
- No need to relink World Heritage Committee in the key.
- coordinate or co-ordinate?
- Would expect whatever you apply to apply to cooperation too.
- "cooperation" was already present, nothing changed. bamse (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- " in ha and acres " ha->hectares.
- Done in the key. Shall I also change it in the table headers? bamse (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- worth noting in the key that location sorts by state.
- Done. Added "column sorts by" bamse (talk) 22:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Would expect sites without areas to sort as having a zero area.
- I was trying something with {{sort}} but it did not work. Also asked at the help desk. bamse (talk) 07:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Centrally align "upright" images.
- "the Gambian river" appropriate link would be useful.
- "Sites previously listed as being in danger, but later removed from the list after improvements in management and conservation. " not a complete sentence. Perhaps "There exist a number of sites that were previously..."
- "UN controlled " -> United Nations-controlled" or "UN-controlled".
- Changed to UN-controlled. bamse (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "to inflict the integrity" to inflict what?
- Changed to "inflict damage to the integrity". bamse (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Djoudj bird sanctuary, really need six refs?
- I generally referenced the start and end dates (and reasons) of being endangered. Since Djoudj was twice (1984–1988, 2000–2006) on the List of World Heritage in Danger, it has more references than other entries (which only appeared once). bamse (talk) 00:08, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Iguazu's refs are out of order.
- Will run the article through AWB when done which should take care of this. bamse (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you not tell me why all of the previously listed sites were delisted?
- Not sure I understand what you mean. Could you eloberate please? bamse (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- In the notes column which explains why they were at risk, some explain why they no longer are, some don't. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I would prefer not to explain all of these since if done in detail it would get very lengthy and since not much could be learned from it. Basically the reasons for delisting (from the List of World Heritage in Danger) are that the the threats that caused the site being listed have disappeared. This is hinted at by the section intro ("...later removed from the list after improvements in management and conservation."). How about moving the reasons for delisting that are currently present in the notes column to the section intro as examples? bamse (talk) 14:37, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Mixed date formats in the references.
- Fixed. All should be "day month year" now. bamse (talk) 14:37, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Usually we expect to see
format= parameter used for things like PDFs.
- Done. Added
format=PDF to all linked PDF. bamse (talk) 14:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Any reason why "sixteenth" is lower case in the Sixteenth Session links? And "twelfth"?
- For those with more than two links, you could make a general link and then just list title and page number(s) in the references to reduce the overwhelming mass of links in refs.
- Just to make sure, that's for those with "two or more links" (2, 3...) or "more than two" (3, 4...)?
- More than two. If it's just two then you don't make a particular saving on text. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fix the spaced hyphen in the refs to en-dash per WP:DASH please.
- Any reason you haven't used "row" scopes?
- Added row scopes to the first table (they were already present in the second table). Also made the two tables look more similar stylistically (centering of columns). bamse (talk) 09:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 17:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I addressed all of your comments (see above). With some I am waiting for additional input from the help desk or project pages or from you. bamse (talk) 07:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Link "Colon"
- To what article? bamse (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- To whatever you're talking about! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd do that, if I knew what I was talking about. In the references I used it is only mentioned as "Colon Road" without specifying what "Colon" is meant here. Possibly it is one of those mentioned at Colón, but I am not sure. Also asked the Wikiproject Brazil for help (will do the same with the Argentinian wikiproject), but no reply so far. So, at the moment I can see the following options: i) leave it as is, ii) red-link Colon road, iii) remove "Colon" since the name is not really of importance here. bamse (talk) 18:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I've been searching a bit more about this road and it appears to be a local, 18 km long road running through the park. As such it is probably not important enough to get its own wikipedia article. It is named after Christopher Columbus but linking to that article does not make much sense IMHO. bamse (talk) 09:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I reworded "Colon road"->"road ("Colon Road")" to emphasize that it is the name of the road. Please let me know whether this is better, or whether I should remove the parentheses. bamse (talk) 11:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|