Draft talk:West Kimberley

oh-my
what an aweful lot of unnecessary guff, the heritage listing criteria is a quagmire of offensive european perspectives on events and totally unnecessary to improving the knowledge of the region. It ignores all of the many myriad Indigenous communities their languages and cultures, dumping australian government whitewashing in Wikipedia like this is the best example of worst practices when working with cc-by Australian government databases. Gnangarra 16:44, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

40,000 years
this is way out of date, which isnt suprising snce the content itself was written 10 years ago accepted evidence now refers to Indigenous people being here for over 60,000 years. Ther is some speculation that there may have been outward movement from Australia to the islands in the north-west. Gnangarra 18:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * , re these edits – the current cited reference (Heritage Database) says 40,000. If that reference is not reliable or up-to-date, then replace it with a better reference - one that says 50,000. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:11, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime-history/50000-years-before-present/index.html Gnangarra 12:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So add it to the article in the appropriate places. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:13, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not yet too much wrong with this article, most likely outcome is still I'll just delete it. Gnangarra 13:38, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

proper noun
Is "West Kimberley" a proper noun? The article is not consistent about whether or not to capitalise "west". Mitch Ames (talk) 03:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Is the Fitzroy River valley part of the West Kimberley?
Is the Fitzroy River valley part of the West Kimberley? Fitzroy River (Western Australia) says:

implying that it is, but the lead section of West Kimberley says (with my emphasis added here):

implying that Fitzroy River Valley is not part of the West Kimberly. The reference says:

but that's not stated in West Kimberley.

Some clarification is required. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


 * its a sub region, in other words its part of but has unique identities, the source used specifically divides the communities, which in reality should be divided in the various indigenous countries because there are a lot of diffferences in languages & culture the use of Kimberley Aboriginal People is the biggest piece of ignorance and most racially offensive way to politely ignore and devalue these individual communities. Gnangarra 04:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)