Talk:Pink Lake (Western Australia)

Pink Lake (Western Australia) was nominated as a Geography and places good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 9, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Lakes Low‑importance

	Lakes portal Pink Lake (Western Australia) is within the scope of WikiProject Lakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lake-related articles on Wikipedia, using the tools on the project page. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LakesWikipedia:WikiProject LakesTemplate:WikiProject LakesLakes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Western Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Pink Lake (Western Australia) 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).
	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.

Birds Low‑importance

Pink Lake (Western Australia) is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Lake_Hillier

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is this not the same lake? --Juliana (talk) 16:42, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

No, Lake Hillier is on middle island off the south coast, pink lake is just north of Esperance. Hughesdarren (talk) 23:47, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

(no title)

What does the statement "approximately 12-12000" mean? I am more used to narrow ranges when suing the word, 'approximately', and seeing a low end of 12 communicates nothing of approximation, especially when used with a high range estimate that is 1000x bigger. The author goes on to use wide ranges 2 more times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.153.209 (talk) 2015-11-05T01:58:18 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pink Lake (Western Australia). 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110706102341/http://www.birdata.com.au/iba.vm to http://www.birdata.com.au/iba.vm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pink Lake (Western Australia)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nkon21 (talk · contribs) 08:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm Nkon21. I will be reviewing this GAN. Review coming very soon. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 08:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Hello, thanks for your GAN. However, I will have to quick fail this because: 1) This article has many instances of unreferenced claims, 2) You have not contributed enough to this article–only 2 edits logged to this page, and 3) This article is very far from being broad in coverage. I have a tough time believing that the article can achieve GA-status quality within a week.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.—ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 08:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic