| content | |||||||||||||||||||||
 |
This page is not highly watchlisted, and so posts made here may not be seen by the wider community. A better place to try to receive feedback would be at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board. |
 To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia: |
· history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|
|
|
| WikiProject Australia (Rated Category-Class) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 1 2 3 |
Contents |
Listed on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion
City vs. Town
What exactly is the difference between a “city” and a “town” – is it an official designation or an internal, Wiki one? Cheers, Roo72 (talk) 00:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- Have a look at the article on town - there is a section on Australia and that might help - see the ABS reference for the statistical difference (ie state legislation relation to local government areas) --Matilda talk 01:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- Doh, thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. Roo72 (talk) 02:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- Follow up question - can you list the exact criteria why all the articles in Category:Cities in Victoria (Australia) were described as "cities" rather than "towns"? For example http://www.ga.gov.au/map/names/ lists Traralgon as "Locality (bounded), Town, Village, Populated place, Local government town, Town site (no population)" where exactly on the ABS page is it listed as a "city" (I've downloaded the document so please direct me to a relevant page on it). Roo72 (talk) 23:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Most of those places were declared cities prior to the Lcoal Government Act 1989 (Vic), and their city status was not revoked by the Act. These sorts of issues exist all over Australia, as there is some confusion between "city" as related to a populated area, and "City" as local government area under the various acts in each state from the early-mid 1990s. Orderinchaos 00:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Follow up question - can you list the exact criteria why all the articles in Category:Cities in Victoria (Australia) were described as "cities" rather than "towns"? For example http://www.ga.gov.au/map/names/ lists Traralgon as "Locality (bounded), Town, Village, Populated place, Local government town, Town site (no population)" where exactly on the ABS page is it listed as a "city" (I've downloaded the document so please direct me to a relevant page on it). Roo72 (talk) 23:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Doh, thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. Roo72 (talk) 02:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Help request: 1875 Australia-related articles needing geographical coordinates
Based on a search of Wikipedia's articles related to Australia, I've found some articles that I believe are about places in Australia, and could usefully have geographical coordinates added.
The articles in question are listed in Category:Australia articles missing geocoordinate data. At the time of writing, some examples included:
- Blundell's Cottage
- Chermside, Queensland
- Fairy Bower, New South Wales
- Geoffrey Bay, Queensland
- Karrabin railway station, Queensland
- National Alpine Museum
- Phosphate Hill Power Station, Queensland
...and there are many more, as well. At the time of posting this notice, there were 1875 articles in this category needing geographical coordinates.
Why add coordinates?
By adding coordinates, a Wikipedia reader can easily view the location on a street map, nautical chart, topographic map, by satellite photo, realtime weather map, and in many other ways. Coordinate data makes an article eventually appear in various services such as Google Maps' Wikipedia overlay, Google Earth, and Wikipedia's own internal map service. Coordinate data also helps readers looking for geographically-based data, such as locations near a reference point, or related information.
How can I do it?
The articles are all marked with {{coord missing}} tags, which need to be replaced with {{coord}} tags that contain the location's latitude/longitude coordinates; or you might be able to add coordinates to an existing infobox. You can find out how to do this at the Wikipedia:Geocoding how-to for WikiProject members. Please let me know if this is useful, or if you have any questions! -- The Anome (talk) 09:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Waverley Cemetery
A previous discussion was held on the removing of images from this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australia/Archive3#Waverley Cemetery by 203.108.239.12 and warnings were placed on his talk page by admin Sarah. Yet he still continues to remove the images and reword the article to make it like a promotional page, which he has been doing for the last 3 years. Now that Sarah is away i am wondering if this person can be blocked or at least the article page locked, as i have placed the picture at Wikipedia:Picture peer review and would hate to see him delete the image again from the article. I know that Winston who took the photo is getting annoyed also as he mentions it on his user page. Boylo (talk) 13:05, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- I've blocked the IP, left them a message that when they are ready to comply with community policy they can request to be unblocked. Gnangarra 17:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Didnt take him long to come back. I see he is now deleting the image but using a different ISP address 124.19.68.138 since the other one is blocked. With him doing all these changes continuously for the last 3 years, he is determined to run the article the way he chooses, so dont know how you will ever be able to stop him. Boylo (talk) 09:26, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- I just noticed on Talk:Waverley Cemetery that User:Sardaka is wondering who keeps deleting the images also. He suggests adding South Head Cemetery to the article with a picture, but shows he dont realize the difficult problem we are having with this article, so will direct him here. Boylo (talk) 09:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
-
- Nice to see that some order is being established. Was someone suggesting that we need permission to use shots of the cemetery? That's crap, of course. Does anyone have any thoughts on including South Head Cem, since it's also run by Wav. council? I already have a potted entry, but it's not important or anything like that.
Sardaka (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- It was more than just suggestions there was even legal threats at one stage, hence why I have no hesitation in blocking the character whenever they turn up. The problem lies in that the a person with a COI believes that they own this article and can control what is written and what images are used no matter how good. Its a shame they dont realise how negatively that such action can reflect on the place. South Head as with most cemeteries are generally considered notable providing theres the sources but as its managed & operated as an extension to Waverley it should have some coverage in the article. Gnangarra 07:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
-
Have started the section on South Head. Will expand on it tomorrow, with refs.
Sardaka (talk) 09:56, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
More eyes needed
Please help to improve the article. Uncle G (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Peter Hollingworth
I'm really surprised at you antipodeans. This article on your ex-governor general generated a personal complaint from the subject to Jimmy Wales, broadcast on the radio. Months later, the article had to be gutted as it was still a BLP disaster with masses of unreferenced claims. Since then, it has lain idle. Does no-one care about this former deputy head-of-state? It would be great if some of you could write a properly referenced, BLP compliant, neutral article. Message over. God save the Queen.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 11:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- This is one of these difficult ones where censorship and BLP clash. This guy was full-on in the public glare for two years over the sexual abuse allegations and his handling of them both before and after becoming Governor-General, including his own statements on national television, and it's, sadly, probably the main feature of his notability. For many Australians, that's in fact all they know about him. There was protests in the streets demanding him to go and he wasn't able to perform many of the functions of the office of Governor-General - which again speaks to encyclopaedic coverage. We can't simply censor an article because someone doesn't like what we write, but we have an obligation to be fair with it at the same time and be neither salacious nor sensationalist in our coverage. Orderinchaos 11:09, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
-
- Agreed. it wasn't censored. It was gutted because it was negative AND unsourced. There shouldbe good sources to write a good article here.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 11:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't at all suggest it had been censored - I was putting a model to move forward and was urging caution on over-application of BLP at the expense of encyclopaedicity, which sometimes can happen. The original version of the article was very negative, and the current version contained a lot of irrelevant stuff while not at all indicating why he was controversial. I've made some changes and added refs along the way. Orderinchaos 12:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. it wasn't censored. It was gutted because it was negative AND unsourced. There shouldbe good sources to write a good article here.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 11:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
C-class articles opinion needed
Hi! We at WP:INDIA are debating the introduction of C-class articles for our assessment. Since WP:AUS has been using the C-class ratings for quite a while now, could someone from this project please weigh in on Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics#C class articles? We need to know:
- If the implementation of C-class has been effective for this project?
- Does C-class articles involve more red tape?
- Are the lines of distinction between Start and C, and Start and B classes blurred?
- Does C-class complicate the assessment process?
Eagerly awaiting feedback. Thanks, =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:08, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Just a personal observation, but from my own rating point of view it filled a gap that was sorely noticed and meant we didn't have to artificially stretch our "B"s and "Start"s any more into contortions. I personally see a "C" as "definitely not extensive enough for B but definitely more than a Start" and use few other formal criteria. Others will undoubtedly hold different opinions. Orderinchaos 09:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- I see it as a waste of time/resources either its in a position to be made into a GA(hence B) or just its starting out missing basic structure, citations, infoboxes etc. I just dont see a benefit or encouragement to get an article from start to C or C to B its just reflection of the state of the article. What I do see is cynical process to give people more reason to run meaningless bots. Gnangarra 12:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Historical Imagery
Hi folks - I'm pretty excited to be involved in uploading quite a lot of historical imagery which I hope may find a home in many and various articles - I have many ideas, and look forward to working on this over the next little while, but for now, here's the link, and do feel free to incorporate these pictures where you feel they fit! There are currently two sets online - one being 'Sydney City' (self explanatory really), the other being 'Rural Life' which features shots from all over NSW :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
- Please use the template PD-Australia in preference to PD-old which is tied to the date the author died for the images. I dropped a link on your Commons user talk page to the templates for more information. Gnangarra 09:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Commonwealth reserves on Commons
Hello,
I am considering adding a new template on pictures taken in Commonwealth reserves, in order to warn people about the restrictions on photographs in these areas.
If you have time, please read the proposal and comment at :
commons:CT:L#Category:Kakadu_National_Park_and_other_Australian_commonwealth_reserves
I also need help to make a list of the concerned areas.
Teofilo talk 00:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
