Talk:Hanging Rock, Victoria

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hanging Rock, Victoria. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://delwp.vic.gov.au/news-and-announcements/hanging-rock-review
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413062518/http://www.countryracing.com.au/hanging-rock to http://www.countryracing.com.au/hanging-rock
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413045603/http://www.mrsc.vic.gov.au/Council_the_Region/News_Media/Latest_News/More_concerts_planned_for_Hanging_Rock to http://www.mrsc.vic.gov.au/Council_the_Region/News_Media/Latest_News/More_concerts_planned_for_Hanging_Rock

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 16:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Traditional owners and colonisation not substantiated on facts.

The entire section of Traditional owners and colonisation is based solely on the word of one man, and a Vice article. This is unacceptably low quality, and both sources are utterly inconsistent with the existing documentation in local town records from the magistrates, diocese, and other colonial records. There is also no archeological records at the site or in the vicinity of human occupation at any time in the past, let alone 26,000 years of occupation. As an outsider looking in (due to the case of the missing girls) I find this starkly contrary to the very foundation of encyclopedic documentation. Vergilianae (talk) 06:52, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

I second this statement, I only arrived on this talk page after finding the facts interesting, but being unable to find any verification of these facts aside from the Vice website. The Vice website also does not reference it's sources. (Jacob. 23 December, 2019) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.159.71 (talk) 07:58, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Geology

There is no mention in the geology section of the composition of the lava. It is a solvsbergite or soda trachyte 2001:8003:2810:F900:A9AD:7756:CA1C:1E9C (talk) 02:10, 5 June 2023 (UTC)