Talk:Jackson Creek (Victoria)

	Australia portal Jackson Creek (Victoria) 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Inaccuracies

This article has been substantially copied from Deep Creek (Victoria) without careful consideration of the articles' content or references. The article therefore contains many inaccuracies and incorrectly referenced facts. The article requires detailed checking and revision. Scottius11 (talk) 03:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Scottius11. I've made substantive changes to this article; e.g. Jacksons Creek→Jackson Creek, as per VICNAMES and the Gazetteer of Australia; description on how the creek rises as the confluence of three streams, etc. As I'm not local the area, I'm relying on info that I have to hand, duly referenced. Would you please review? Thanks Rangasyd (talk) 10:18, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coord

This is showing in Google maps in the Japan Trench at 37.5826 N. The coord template looks correct. Any ideas why this is wrong? Randall Bart Talk 18:56, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]