Talk:Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument

IUCN Category

The infobox lists this as category IV, and I could not find this National Monument listed in the ICUN database (probably because it is new). Where did you find the category? Unless you have a reference that lists it as IV, I would be tempted to show it as III (Natural Monument) as a quick check of other National Monuments listed in the IUCN database showed most came up in that category. There were a couple of exceptions (such as Scotts Bluff National Monument - V) though.

When I make a guess at the IUCN category, I add a version of this line of text just after the infobox:

<!-- Note: site is not listed in IUCN database, but appears to conform with Category V -->

&#151; Eoghanacht ^talk 17:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that info...I pretty much guessed (!) and I don't like doing that..I think National Mounments more related to history than biology are most likely iucn cat. V...the emphasis of the breaks region is going to be biology.--MONGO 03:26, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Clarification: From our statements, it seems like this should be III: Natural Monument, but you put V: Protected Landscape on the page. Did I miss something? My sample code was just that -- a sample -- rather than a recommendation for this particular page. I am going to mod the page. Change it and let me know if you disagree. &#151; Eoghanacht ^talk 18:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

There seems to be some ambiguity between III and V and overlap...either one probably works and I'm not beholden one way or the other, although I prefer precision if possible...I'll have to reexamine the IUCN categories, but level III works fine for me.--MONGO 01:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Name?

Am I missing some discussion about the name somewhere else? "Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument" appears to be both the formal name[1][2], and the 'most common' name[3], and yet the current title is "Upper Missouri River National Monument". But I don't want to just up and move it if this has been hashed out before somewhere. Fixbeforeigo 05:36, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Going to do a move now.--MONGO 12:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

External Links

As of today (June 2009), all the external links go to 404 pages. --71.168.124.11 (talk) 04:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC) Mongo, the official name is the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.127.126.32 (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Not NRHP-listed

Removing NRHP template from article, and removing from NRHP wikiproject here. It appears this NM is not NRHP-listed (like many other NMs). doncram (talk) 18:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050217045711/http://www.doi.gov:80/news/archives/Missour.html to http://www.doi.gov/news/archives/Missour.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)