Talk:Canning Dam/GA3

GA Reassessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article does not currently meet the well-written, verifiable or broad in its coverage criteria. Specific issues are as follows:

• Large amounts of text with no citations.
• Use of phrases that have become outdated such as "newly completed" or "Recently".
• "state of the art" is wording that should be avoided.
• Short paragraphs, some only one sentence long, hinder readability.
• "and the work was completed on schedule to a date that was calculated seven years previously." This is hard to understand and does not make sense.
• "loss of linkage". This is poor writing.
• "Periodic flooding of the Canning River from the dam is required to disperse seed, stimulate germination and ensure seedlings survive". Seedlings of what types of plant?
• Some of this feels like its written about the Canning catchment rather than the Canning Dam. Why is the highest point in the catchment important for example.

Steelkamp (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.