Talk:North Island (Houtman Abrolhos)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleNorth Island (Houtman Abrolhos) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 12, 2011.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 8, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted

Industry[edit]

after a quick look first thought is that a Industry in the Houtman Abrolhos article maybe an alternative as its all generally the same for each island anyway. Then all this article needs is see main plus a two/three para summary highlighting any location specific info. Gnangarra 12:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Industry in the Houtman Abrolhos would be able to provide more detail, including restrictions like bag limits, seasons, sizes, licensing, exclusion zones etc. for things like;

  • Fishing
    • Lobster
    • Prawn
    • Scallop
    • Fish
      • Commercial
      • Recreational
  • Tourism
Thanks Gnangarra. I've got the shell of this at Houtman Abrolhos#Human uses - no prawns though. I agree that there's no need to give a lot of detail on stuff that is common to the rest of the 'Brolhos. Hesperian 12:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shark bay has a real issue with some of this stuff hope you both keep an eye on me when i start that stuff - red salmon fishery restriction is the most intriguing though - apparently the stock is very local and does not move much SatuSuro 12:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prawns[edit]

The total landings of major penaeids for the 2006 season were 1 559 t, comprising 1 091 t of king prawns, 467 t of tiger prawns and less than 1 t of endeavour prawns. In addition there were also 115 t of minor penaeids (coral prawns) landed. The total landings were within the target catch range (1 501–2 330 t). Tiger prawn landings were also within the target range for that species (400–700 t). King prawn landings were slightly below the acceptable catch range (1,100–1,600 tonnes). For the 2006 season, the king prawn effort levels affectedcatches as the fleet targeted larger king prawns for economic value. The 2006 season had a similar total catch of major penaeids to that of the previous three seasons. In 2005 the total catch was 1 628 t, in 2004 1 748 t, and 2003 had 1 632 t. Scallop landings by the prawn fleet in 2006 totalled 432 t whole weight.

From [1] via [2] lots of fishery info from there. Gnangarra 14:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody brilliant. I had no idea those documents existed. Thanks. Hesperian 07:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except that this info is for Shark Bay not the Abrolhos. Still haven't found any evidence of prawn fishing at the Abrolhos. Hesperian 12:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC) (But the overall resource you've pointed me at has proven absolutely marvellous. Hesperian 12:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Gratuitous feedback[edit]

  • The sentence under Human uses makes not much sense to me, but maybe it's just that I am tired...in any case it scans funnily.Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:49, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense to me; doesn't even sound clumsy to my ears. Third opinion maybe? Or can you suggest a rephrasing?
Overall, do you think it's ready for FAC? Hesperian 12:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked a third party to look over the prose. The only other thing is finickyness these days with referencing (I will be glad when we can get a show/hide tool for inline refs...) I will read that line again (scratches head) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per Casliber's request, I have had a look at this article and it will need some work on the prose before heading for FA. Please let me know when everything else is ready (refs, etc...) and I'll try to do a polish. It will take a me a few days. Eusebeus (talk) 14:58, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can we link wetliners? I don't know what that means. Eusebeus (talk) 16:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know either. It seems to be a Western Australian term. Google '"commercial wetliner"': 4 hits all from Western Australia. Google '"commercial wet-liner"': 4 more hits, all from Western Australia. Hesperian 00:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Found it.[3] Hesperian 00:03, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to anglers. Hesperian 04:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responses to embedded hidden questions:

  • "Meaning discovered by Westerners? Was it known to other populations?"
    • Regarding the Houtman Abrolhos as a whole, no indigenous artefacts have ever been found to suggest Aboriginal habitation, and no known oral tradition suggests knowledge of them. The islands cannot be seen from the adjacent coast, and the indigenous Australians of the adjacent coast did not have/use boats. For the Houtman Abrolhos as a whole, it might be possible to find a source explicitly rejecting the notion that Aborigines knew of them; but for North Island in particular, it would not be possible. Similarly, there is no published evidence to suggest that the Abrolhos was ever visited by Macassans, Chinese, etcetera. There are speculations regarding the early discovery of the Abrolhos by westerners—see Houtman Abrolhos#Discovery and naming—but again no source mentions North Island. In short, all the sources that I have found suggest that the first humans to see or set foot on the island were the crew of the Beagle, and it is highly likely that this is actually the case. Hesperian 04:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This seems a rather trivial level of detail. Did they publish relevant accounts?"
    • Some did, and they have been cited where relevant. Hesperian 04:29, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation[edit]

Shouldn't there be a disambiguation for this page? A better-known North Island is the North Island of New Zealand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild (talk • contribs) 06:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hesperian 07:14, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newzild (talk • contribs) 11:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discovery[edit]

Since North Island is part of the Wallabi Group, which is the location of the 1620s wreck of the Batavia (ship), how is it the history of North Island doesn't begin until 1840? Green Cardamom (talk) 18:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, that's an odd question. It's a bit like asking why the history of Missouri starts in 1803 when it is part of North America, which was discovered by Columbus in 1492. Hesperian 11:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Uh no. North Island is within sight from the peak of Flag Hill on East Wallabi Island, where the Batavia castaways were encamped for months! Further, the relief ship came from the north and couldn't have missed seeing North Island. It's open to question if anyone set foot on North Island at that time, there's no evidence of that, but they unquestionably knew of another island to the north. At the very least the article should mention that the Wallabi Group had been known since the early 17th century Batavia incident, which was within sight of North Island. Green Cardamom (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're using logic. We don't work on logic, we work on verifiability. Show me a source that says any of the above. Hesperian 12:39, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We're supposed to use logic in discussion pages, at best, although we sometimes make logical fallacies, we do attempt to be logical in our discussions. Article space is a different matter. I understand what is written above couldn't be added verbatim to the article without sources, and wasn't (though much written above is verifiable). But what is added to the article is easily sourced and verifiable. I'd be happy to expand on it here or in the article if you have any questions or concerns. Green Cardamom (talk) 19:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Take out the novel synthesis, and you're left with something entirely irrelevant. Hesperian 23:57, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Island (Houtman Abrolhos). 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:

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) 14:02, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on North Island (Houtman Abrolhos). 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:

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) 22:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Island_(Houtman_Abrolhos)&oldid=1199947550"