Talk:Huascarán National Park

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Protected Areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected areas worldwide. It may include the protected area infobox.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a group related to the the study of World Heritage Sites. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

	Peru Portal This article is supported by the Peru WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
???	This page has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
	Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. See how to rate it.
WikiProject Peru To-do: edit  Assess and prioritise articles (log) Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate Create: Wildife of Peru, Fauna of Peru, Jorge Eduardo Eielson, Alberto Flores Galindo, Morococha Expand: new articles; top importance articles FAC / FLC: Mario Vargas Llosa GAC: Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes Translate Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive Wikify: articles needing attention

[edit] wrong category?

I don't think a national park should be categorized in the Archaeological sites in Peru category. Sure, there are archaeological sites within the park, but the parks themselves are primarily parks, not archaeological sites. If nobody has objections I will be removing the archaeological site category from this page as well as Rio Abiseo National Park for the same reason. Gsd97jks 14:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I put it in because part of its world heritage mission was to protect the sites whithin it. If, later on, those sites are enumerated and have thier own article then yes I think you can remove this cat, but since right now they are not (at least I don't think so) I think it fits in the category, albeit at a more general level than some others. I think about people using the category to find information about archaeological sites in Peru, and I think it would be useful for them to be directed here. Then at least they will know they exist in the area of the park and can do more research to find the specific sites. For a category to be a useful research tool, I think it needs to tend toward the inclusive. Same for Rio Abiseo.Pschemp | Talk 22:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

According to UNESCO the park was made a world heritage site primarily because of its "superlative natural features, exceptional natural beauty." [1] I'm not trying to be argumentative here, but I do think that over-categorizing is not so beneficial. But, given that archaeological sites such as Chuchumpunta get a mere 6 Google hits, you do have a point... I don't see there being a Wikipedia article any time soon.

However, while Rio Abiseo National Park was added as a world heritage site because of the archaeological ruins located there, there is a Wikipedia page for those ruins (at least the major one, Gran Pajáten). I do feel that including the park as an archaeological site, in this instance, is misleading rather than beneficial as a search tool. Gsd97jks 23:52, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. Didn't see the separate listing for Gran Pajaten, so go ahead and take the cat off Rio Abiseo. I know overcategorization can get weary, but IMHO it is WAY better than huge long lists ( Like List of archaeological sites sorted by country that are static and impossible to maintain. (Once I make sure everything in there is in the right cat, I'm going to ask that it be deleted.)Pschemp | Talk 00:22, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

oh yes, agreed, those lists are indeed annoying. Sounds good to me. Gsd97jks 00:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)