Talk:Ellenborough Falls

[Untitled]
Wallaman Falls in Queensland is the tallest single drop waterfall in Australia. Both claims to "tallest of" and "largest of" listed under the Features section likely stem from tourism organizations attempting to capitalize on aggrandizement.

Bryan Swan &#124;  World Waterfall Database (talk) 05:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Untitled

 * Certainly it seems odd to have two waterfalls cited as the tallest single drop waterfall. I'm supposing that the Ellenborough claim rests on Wallaman Falls not being listed as a single drop waterfall (World Waterfall Database lists it as tiered) - although it appears to have the tallest single drop. I verified the height claims using "In Search of Australia’s Highest Waterfalls Australian Geographical Studies 38" (reference number 4 in the article) but I don't have access to that article anymore. I seem to recall it discussed the issue.

Although weasel words are frowned upon I suggest that the second sentence in the Features section be ammended to "The falls are claimed to be the tallest single drop..." and also that Wallaman Falls should have a "See also" link. I get the impression that which waterfall is highest is still something of an open question but I'm no expert on waterfalls. Nick Connolly (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The link to the federal governments Geoscience Australia website was broken which I've now fixed. It discusses the claim for Ellenborough, Wallaman and Wollomombi and asserts that Ellenborough is the tallest single drop waterfall. I think that clinches it unless there is a better source. Nick Connolly (talk) 02:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I can assure you that Wallaman Falls is indeed the tallest single drop waterfall in Australia. The main falls drop 268 meters, its unclear how substantial any cascades or further falls below the main drop are.  The data currently on display on the World Waterfall Database hasn't been updated in a while - we've recieved information from several sources in Queensland who have confirmed the height of the main drop of the falls.  Government data on waterfalls is generally something that needs to be taken with a grain of salt, because to the best of our knowledge, there has not been a government sponsored survey of any country's waterfalls in an extensive manor.  The only countries we know of who even maintain even a partial record of their tallest waterfalls are Canada, Norway and Australia.  All three lists are grossly inaccurate.  Bryan Swan  &#124;  World Waterfall Database (talk) 09:47, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt you Bryan - however a Wikipedia article needs a verifiable reference from a reputable source. The sources currently list Ellenborough Falls. I've edited the article so the claim is watered down a little. If you have a published source for the data on Wallaman falls than the claim can be adjusted accordingly. Nick Connolly (talk) 19:29, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for Wikipedia as a whole, but I've noticed that much of the data cited on the various entries pertaining to waterfalls cite questionable sources. I completely understand the need to present accurate data, but its somewhat of a paradox to me that contributors have taken almost any source on the internet as a legitimate account of the truth when accuracy is desired.  As far as Ellenborough goes, look at the Australian Geosciences page again - they contradict themselves, suggesting Wallaman Falls is the tallest in the country... "abruptly plunge[s] more than 300 metres", then go on to suggest Ellenborough is the tallest in one drop.  For what its worth, I have updated the data on the World Waterfall Database to reflect our recent examination of Wallaman Falls and our conclusion that it is a single plunging drop waterfall, not a multi-stepped falls.

Bryan Swan &#124;  World Waterfall Database (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)