Talk:South West (Western Australia)

earlier conversation
I dispute the recommended merge. I have no opinion on merging South-west Corner of Western Australia (which appears to be about a catchment) into Southwest Australia, which is obvious defined in terms of biodiversity criteria. However the South West region of Western Australia is about a region defined by the government under the Regional Development Act. Neither its geographical boundaries nor its purpose coincide with Southwest Australia, and the articles must not be merged. One might just as well suggest merging Swan Shire into Swan River. Hesperian 12:14, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Feel free to remove the merge notice if you disagree. However, consider adding some sort of disambiguation notice at the top of each article (e.g. This article refers to the government region. For other uses, see ...). The differences between those articles may not be obvious to those who don't live down-under. Rl 12:58, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * All three of these units describe different regions; South West region of Western Australia is about a governmental region (23,970 km²), Southwest Australia is an ecoregion (356,717 km²), but I'm not sure what sort of region the South-west Corner of Western Australia (140,000 km²) happens to be. I agree that they should not be merged, but it won't hurt to cross-reference the articles, for example to explain which ecoregion or ecoregions a political unit is part of, and vice versa. Tom Radulovich 16:01, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * I think South-west Corner of Western Australia refers to a drainage divisiont, because the "See Also" section links to a number of articles on various drainage divisions, all with the same organisation as South-west Corner of Western Australia, and all contributed by User:Tannin. I will add cross-references for the articles.  Hesperian 23:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)