Juukan Gorge 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Western Australia Pilbara, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Pilbara on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Western Australia PilbaraWikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia PilbaraTemplate:WikiProject Western Australia PilbaraWestern Australia Pilbara articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The only photos showing up at a Google search, the shelters (the grottoes under a rock ledge, if I interpret correctly what I'm seeing, because there's no explanation in the captions) are still there. What's gone is the mildly sloping hill above them. Which should never happen with a major heritage site, where the immediate environment is essential to the understanding of the site and also to its visual impact. But that's not the point. Did I misunderstand what the photos are showing? If yes, it's not my fault. Especially in politically charged situations, precise information is essential. On WP it should be detailed as well as concise, and if possible illustrated with pictures. It isn't, and the endless text w/o a structure (paragraphs with meaningful headings) make it useless to the user, who usually doesn't have the time to study the text like a lawyer does with a law or a researcher with unprocessed experimental data.
What HAS been destroyed? What has been documented beforehand, maybe even saved and is in archaeological storage or museum displays? What's the talk of Rio Tinto "restoring the shelters" - using what, cardboard or cement? Are there 3D computer scans and photos of destroyed shelters, if indeed there are any destroyed shelters, and of rock art there? That's what needs to be documented here, anything else is regurgitating useless journalistic superficial products. I don't give a damn about Jacques, and nobody will remember his name pretty soon, but I do care to know what was there, what's gone, and what scientific documentation of it we've got left. Arminden (talk) 10:23, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
To my knowledge nobody has ever released images showing how the site did look after the blast. I do very much agree that there is some lack of information, about the size/shape of the cave before the explosion, and about its remains (if any). --2OO.3OO.2OO.3OO (talk) 14:38, 24 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=logo}
