Talk:Kings Park and Botanic Garden
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Kings Park and Botanic Garden 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. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Perth. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Name
Is this gardens officially called Kings Park and Botanic Garden per [1]? --Peta 04:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like it - [2] Cas Liber 05:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- "Kings Park & Botanic Garden" (406 Ha site) is synonomous with Kings Park. The Western Australian Botanic Garden (18 Ha site) is a component of that entity. Therefore, I think that the information on this page should me merged into the Kings Park article.--Melburnian 03:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think the title should be changed. Remove 'and' to identify this part of Kings park. - Fred 03:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to ATMOSS, "Kings Park and Botanic Garden" is a registered trademark of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority. I vote for using the registered name, rather than imposing our notion of an "improved" name on it. Hesperian 03:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that we currently have two separate articles on the same entity--Melburnian 04:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right, Melburnian. "Kings Park" is the gazetted name of the park. "Kings Park and Botanic Garden" is a registered trademark under which the administrators of the park sell hats and teatowels. Both are official names, but there is really only one notable entity here. Hesperian 05:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- My thoughts now are that we either redirect this article to Kings Park, Western Australia, where I've now put in a (tiny) section on the Botanic Garden, or expand this article but move it back to "Western Australian Botanic Garden" [4] focusing solely on the botanic garden component of Kings Park/Kings Park and Botanic Gardens.--Melburnian 05:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I think you're right, Melburnian. "Kings Park" is the gazetted name of the park. "Kings Park and Botanic Garden" is a registered trademark under which the administrators of the park sell hats and teatowels. Both are official names, but there is really only one notable entity here. Hesperian 05:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that we currently have two separate articles on the same entity--Melburnian 04:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to ATMOSS, "Kings Park and Botanic Garden" is a registered trademark of the Botanic Gardens and Parks Authority. I vote for using the registered name, rather than imposing our notion of an "improved" name on it. Hesperian 03:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think the title should be changed. Remove 'and' to identify this part of Kings park. - Fred 03:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History
As I understand it, the botanic gardens were part of the original plan by George Temple-Poole, et al, and was originally intended to emulate Kew Gardens. The shift to endemic flora and its current focus was a later move. I will try to find the reference, but I suspect that it was Ray Oldham in her book on Poole. This pushes it back from 1965. - Fred 13:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC) How about - [Alexander Campbell, Kings Park gardener in 1895, talks about his landscape plans for "the park on top of the Mount".] Found in West Australian, 22 May 1895, p.5a for you history buffs :) SatuSuro 05:51, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Redirect
Any objections to me redirecting this page to Kings Park, Western Australia following the above discussion? --Melburnian 04:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
