Talk:Rous Head

Australia: Western Australia / Maritime Low‑importance

	Australia portal Rous Head 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian maritime history (assessed as Low-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.

the result of its current condition[edit]

In the sentence Various schemes and plans were put forward before the result of its current condition., what is "the result of its current condition"? It's not at all clear from the article. Should the sentence just be "Various schemes and plans were put forward before ~~the result of~~ its current condition."? Mitch Ames (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were a number of schemes put up but insufficient public discussion about the affect on beaches north of the location - oceanographic and hydrological studies found that the whole structure might seriously affect suburban beaches north of the location. Stuffed if i know how to dig up refs on that. I knew some of the geographers who were involved who actually had models and hypotheses as to the negative effects on the coastline. The sentence is irrelevent in the end - the three refs show that there were reports and studies as to the effects. It was a political storm as well - but I dont have anything to hand apart from the trove refs. As to whether the various schemes and plans that are cited are the ones that resolved the issues or were the problem, I cannot quickly ascertain. So like many things - the back story, should anyone with the knowledge or the relevant refs could be able to explain whether the refs refer to the solution or the problem. I think leaving them out is no help. but leaving them in with the uncertainty as to whether they are the problem or the resolution might cause you problems. I do not know JarrahTree 12:38, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it should be something more like "Various schemes and plans were put forward before before the current plan was adopted."

All I ask is that the sentence make sense to the reader, which currently it does not. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:58, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

well re-write it then - I am unlikely to find the press clippings for some months probably - from the public discussions JarrahTree 10:21, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done [1] Mitch Ames (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]