Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 23

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Naming convention for geographic places - conclusion

After much discussion, debate, toing and froing and general mayhem at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places, the various views were distilled to the following logical and comprehensive decision tree:

  • All City, suburb, town articles use the format [[Town, State]], e.g. Mount Eliza, Victoria;
  • Unambiguously named geographic features use [[Geographic Feature]], e.g. Uluru;
  • Ambiguously named features that cross state borders use [[Geographic Feature (Australia)]] format, e.g. Snowy River (Australia);
  • Ambiguously named features that are unambiguous within a state use [[Geographic Feature (State)]], e.g. Mount Eliza (Western Australia);
  • Ambiguously named features that are ambiguous within a state use districts or regions, [[Geographic Feature (LGA, State)]], e.g. Mount Eliza (Gippsland, Victoria) (although option may exist here of simply using Mount Eliza (Gippsland) where there is little risk of confusing the location of the feature);
  • Ambiguously named features that are co-located and therefore cannot be distinguished on location use [[Geographic Feature (type)]], e.g. Wolfe Creek (crater) and Wolfe Creek (watercourse) (used only where there is no other Wolfe Creek anywhere else);
  • Pathological case: Features that include co-located features of different types AND features in other states use [[Geographic Feature (State-ian type)]] e.g. Arthur River (Western Australian river);

I've already summarised it at naming conventions, but I have to admit, I'm not too keen on the red links I have left behind. I encourage you to have a quick look to ensure it fits in reasonably well where it is. I haven't added it yet to Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian places itself - I imagine it should be. πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 07:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Re the last dot point recently added: "contradicts Wikipedia:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming" - I've just had a quick look and can't see a huge contradiction - in fact, generally speaking it seems to fit in quite neatly. The only problem that may exist is that they don't broach the point of "Pathological cases", which we needed to for a comprehensive guideline. πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Australian wikipedian census

I dont know if any else has suggested this but i thought with the 2006 Australian Census approaching we could have our own on wikipedia. This would mainly be a geographic census, a attempt to find out were most Aussie wikipedians are from. Not all wikipedians use userboxes and the categories mainly divide us up by state. I propose spliting each state up into regions like Regions of Western Australia, this would define were you are from without going into to much detail (eg. town, city). Hossen27 13:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Jervis Bay Territory

user:Felix Portier has made a lot of questionable edits to do with the Jervis Bay Territory, including saying some NSW towns are in the territory without any sources. He has also made quite a mess with some page moves. Could an admin please move Hyams Beach , Jervis Bay Territory back to Hyams Beach, New South Wales and protect it from further moves until this issue has been resolved? JPD (talk) 10:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

This seems to be an endless circle of redirects. Where is the actual article? --Bduke 11:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, there is a circle of redirects, and the article is at Hyams Beach , Jervis Bay Village, not Hyams Beach , Jervis Bay Territory as I typed earlier. JPD (talk) 11:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I've fixed it up, and speedy deleted most of the pointless redirects. Note I haven't semi-protected it yet, I will only do it if he continues to move it without discussion. -- Chuq 13:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Chuq. JPD (talk) 13:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The moving has continued, and I started doing some cleaning up before I found this discussion. It's now at Hyams Beach, New South Wales, reverted to a previous version, and move-protected. If further discussion could be diverted to Talk:Hyams Beach, New South Wales, I think that would help the situation enormously. Merci beaucoup, — sjorford++ 17:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Probable Mark Oliphant vandalism

I have been having a revert stoush with User:ICanDoItNineTimes over Mark Oliphant. He has been including that Oliphant was a triplet and is officially named Mark Oliphant III. As someone who researched Oliphant to produce the article I know this to be rubbish. After a couple of reverts, the user suggested that as a compromise he leave out the triplet business and just mention that Oliphant was the III. I am certain he is talking through his ring, especially as the user is considered a sockpuppet, but I don't want to be seen deleting edits without asking for a source, which I have done. Anyway, I mention this in case anyone wants to be bolder than me and revert his edits again and then possibly ban the account for repeated vandalism. --Roisterer 04:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] New cat: Category:Spouses of Australian Prime Ministers

I've started this up - we need some new articles - e.g. Sonia McMahon, Tammy Fraser, etc. Slac speak up! 04:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Unless someone has a formal title (such as Princess or First Lady), please don't create an article just because they're the spouse of someone notable. Please do so because they've managed to gain some notability in their own right. Andjam 05:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Making the distinction between "spouse who holds the title of First Lady" and "spouse who doesn't" sounds quite arbitrary to me. Slac speak up! 05:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Its pretty appalling to categorise someone based on who they were married to. And as Andjam says, they shouldn't have articles unless they were notable anyway.--Peta 05:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm surprised at this response. I'm pretty sure Prime Ministers' spouses would be notable - Tammie Fraser and Sonia McMahon certainly (news articles, public events, public comment all involve them). And if they're not we won't create (or categorise) the article. I don't see what's wrong with categorising people on the basis of who they're married to - it's factual, it's accurate, and here it is the reason, like it or not, for their notability. Let's face it, Anita Keating van Iersal and Janette Howard wouldn't have articles if they weren't the spouses of someone notable. The National Archives considers all of them notable, anyway. Slac speak up! 05:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Being maried to someone notable, doesn't mean that person meets WP:BIO - it pops up frequently on afd, spouses almost always get redirected. Not one of the wives of the 17 dead PMs (assuming she is also dead) has an article in in the Australian Dictionary of Biography. It might be beause Australians don't hold the PMs wife in high regard, but its also likely that most of these women didn't lead extraordinary lives.--Peta 05:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I suspect that Janette Howard has not lead a life more extraordinary than that of the 15 or so other Prime Ministerial spouses. My proposal is that we research, find sources, and create articles to remedy a systemic bias in coverage. And to re-emphasise, I don't hold the view that all Prime Ministerial spouses are ipso facto notable - but given they are usually participants in public life, most would be. If a given Prime Ministerial spouse is not notable, then we won't create an article - but I refuse to believe that can be the case for all of them. Slac speak up! 06:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the categorisation is fine, as Slac mentioned being married to the PM was a big part of the reason why they were notable. Of course they still need to meet WP:BIO. It's undeniably better to have this as a category than a list full of red links that would result in editors creating stubs that fail WP:BIO. --Mako 06:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
This site has some info on all of them.--Peta 06:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Not one of the wives of the 17 dead PMs (assuming she is also dead) has an article in in the Australian Dictionary of Biography. Not even Enid Lyons (wife of Joseph Lyons and an MP in her own right)? -- Chuq 06:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The ADB online only has people deceased before 1980.--Peta 06:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Snowsports interactive - notable?

An edit to Mount Buller led me to an article on Snowsports interactive, an Australian company incorporated last year that employs 30 people.

I suspect the company isn't notable enough for wikipedia. Googling for "Snowsports interactive" and whispar, for example, only gets 22 unique hits. However, it has got one or two technology articles for having the first wireless in an Aussie ski slope, and has won an award.

Another factor is that the only edits have been by User:Mbrett (who is presumably Michael Brett, Chief Engineer for the company), and by anonymous IPs, who (apart from User:203.55.158.100) apparently haven't edited any other articles (though that could just be dynamic IPs for you).

Any thoughts? Also, would mentioning that Mount Buller has wireless be more suited for wikitravel than wikipedia? Andjam 13:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is a notable event for a small company. Although their mention on Mount Buller, along with the name of the owner of the lifts, is questionable, the articles and award make them notable IMHO, and we'll have to assume good faith for the rest, since they respect NPOV. Comte0 14:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


It's a further notable event that this startup company, which has only been around for 12 months (and has about 15 people, not 30), is now installing a similar network at Sun Peaks Resort in Canada, and has successfully raised almost $1.5m in private financing, including from VC investors. Not bad for a scrappy little company.210.185.84.77 20:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Queensland legislative election, 2006

This seems likely to be called soon (thus of course necessitating a page move). Everyone is invited to help contribute to candidates, etc. as soon as it is. Slac speak up! 01:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

It's just been called. We'd better get moving with the article. Rebecca 00:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] William Carey Christian School

The article have been copied from several parts of the school website, for example the history from [1] and the school location from [2]. I guess it needs a complete rewrite. Comte0 23:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed those sections, as well as most of the intro. I didn't see any other blatantly obvious copyvios, but a cleanup is in order. Kevin 23:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Those were the one I noticed indeed. Thank you! Comte0 13:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Looking back at the history of this article, I noticed the two main editors are Tonyhall71 and ip 65.228.61.136. Now I'm convinced they demanded the removal of the ban in order to add some advertising to wikipedia, and I've been toying with the idea of putting the article on Wikipedia:Proposed deletion since then. Does anyone have a better idea? Comte0 14:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Yet another History ACOTF

The new Australian collaboration of the fortnight is Australian constitutional crisis of 1975. t follows the poorly-supported Australian Bicentenary and Military history of Australia during World War II, after the better supported History of Australia chronological series. The only remaining nomination is another history article, Military history of Australia during the colonial period. If you have a proposal for some other sort of article, now may be the time to suggest it. --Scott Davis Talk 15:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Australian think tanks

Currently, the Bennelong Society and Institute for Private Enterprise (both right-wing think tanks supporting various types of cuts in government expenditure and welfare programs) have text that is primarily cut-and-pasted from their respective websites. Anyone want to have a go and cleaning them up and de-POVing? Slac speak up! 23:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

If they are cut and paste jobs list them as copyvios.--Peta 01:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Which population figures to use in the city infoboxes?

Currently most instances of this infobox use the Statistical Division/District population, and rank the cities using the same. I propose we use the Urban Centre population figures instead, because Stat Divisions and Districts exist only for the 40 or so biggest cities, and major population centres like the Central Coast and Maitland are ignored because they are parts of other Stat Districts. There is an Urban Centre figure available for every town in Australia with more than 1000 people, allowing this box to be used for lesser population centres and also those big ones that belong to another larger centre. See also the discussion taking place at Talk:Sydney about the relative merits and meanings of both sets of figures. - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 02:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No opinions on this? I am thinking of at least changing the density data in each infobox, the average population density across the capital city Statistical Division doesn't really tell you anything useful and is misleading. - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 04:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
It would also be grossly misleading to use density data for one part of a city, especailly in the case of a place like Sydney. As long as the data has a reference defining what is covers and where it is from, and the same number is used thoughout the article there shouldn't be a problem. --Peta 04:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I would think Urban Centre density would be the best to use. At least the most representative. - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 04:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I think there definitely needs to be a reference in the infobox to which area is being described. I notice that London has figures for more than one area in the infobox, with appropriate labels. JPD (talk) 09:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Political party colors

I feel that this has been discussed previously but cannot recall where. Do we have/should we have some standards for table background colors for the various Australian political parties? And is there a clever way of implementing them by use of templates? My eyes started to bleed when I saw Queensland legislative election, 2006. {{Australian Senators}} used subpages and perhaps something like that could be implemented wiki-wide somehow. -- I@n 03:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Excellent idea. I don't know if the pendulum is particularly eye-bleedy: surely it's no worse than the portal up the top of the message board. Slac speak up! 03:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Some templates do exist and are used in election tables. The colours are templates eg. Template:Australian politics/party colours/Nationals. The colours are not bad and i doubt they will cause eye bleeding. Hossen27 09:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
2005 Legislative Assembly
  Liberals 37.6%
  Labor 21.6%
  Independent 20.6%
  Nationals 9.8%
These templates (as well as the duplicate ones I created about the same time) are fine if used in that way, as a small block of colour. I think the question I@n is asking is to do with using colours as in the background of table cells, as at Prime Minister of Australia#List of Prime Ministers and the places mentioned above. JPD (talk) 09:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Thats correct. I was asking more about background colours, but interested also in establishing a standards (if there's not one) for backgrounds as well as small block colours like those shown in the table above. -- I@n 09:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I was suggesting at the using the colours in the small blocks as the background. But I now realise they would make it harder to read the party names, they are a little dark. Lighter colours are the answer. Hossen27 09:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I think there was an agreement to use the colours that the ABC uses for its election coverage ([3]). --bainer (talk) 13:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
If there was it doesnt seem like it was followed. The ABC colours are fine. Hossen27 13:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Monarchy references

What do people think of some of Aussiebrisguy's contributions? Specifically:

-- Chuq 13:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with including the monarch in the Year in Australia articles, although the formatting was incorrect (and I've set up a redirect from the redlink HM King George VI in 1952 in Australia). The changes to the timeline seem a bit excessive though. --Canley 14:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the timeline changes are not really necessary, that material is already well covered at List of monarchs in the British Isles. --bainer (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it might be worthwhile to keep an eye on his contributions, and perhaps drop him a note about the neutral viewpoint. He made a series of changes to Monarchy in Australia which included several monarchist statements.--cj | talk 10:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] AFR Article

There is a massive article on Wikipedia in today's Financial Review written by Marshall Poe, in the Review section. πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 04:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Is it like this 6 page artice he wrote for The Atlantic's September 2006 edition? --james(talk) 10:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Not the same title, but the content looks the same - thanks. πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 08:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
It was a fairly good article. The only thing I disagreed with was when it said that content is decided by consensus - that 2 plus 2 can equal 5 if wikipedians agree on it. That isn't the way it works. 2 plus 2 equals 5 if reliable sources say it equals 5. I liked the bit about MUDs as "multiple undergraduate destroyer" - I'm glad wikipedia wasn't around when I was at uni. Andjam 10:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
You're spot on with your last statement. Re the 2+2=5 idea, it's true that weight of numbers will occasionally lead to, shall we say, an inconsistent application of wikipedia policy, but that is probably a slightly different problem to what he was intimating. Using his opening example, and changing the conclusion, weight of numbers may have declared him as not being sufficiently notable (he told that story with a good deal of humour, which I enjoyed) - but that is a far cry from, for instance, weight of numbers describing him as the current King of England - that simply will not happen, or if it does, it will not remain for too long. So 2+2=5 is not the correct analogy, we will correctly show 2+2=4, but the title of the article on "4", whether it has primacy or is part of a disambiguation page and what categories it should carry will nearly all be determined by those who have the keenest interest in that article (within certain limits). πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 12:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Dean Kalimniou or Dean Kalymniou?

I've come across what appear to be duplicate articles (the Greek spellings, Κωνσταντίνος Καλυμνιός, are the same), which seem to have been created at different times by the same anon user (the IP numbers being similiar). Since he's described as an "Australian-born Greek lawyer, writer and journalist", perhaps someone here has the knowledge to sort this out.--Calton | Talk 15:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I've redirected Dean Kalymniou to Dean Kalimniou for now, whiched seemed the logical thing to do seeing as the latter spelling is used in both articles. I've never heard of this chap however. Perhaps somebody else can vouch for his notability? -- Longhair 21:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Jihad Jack case

I've created an article on the Joseph Thomas case, R v Thomas. Since it's very late and I'm falling asleep, someone might like to check it for spelling mistakes and the like, and perhaps incorporate some of the background material into the article on Thomas himself. If there are any areas of the article which ought to be expanded, let me know. --bainer (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Merged referendum articles

I have merged Australian referendum, 1999 (Preamble) and 1999 Australian republic referendum into Australian referendum, 1999, per the discussion at Talk:Australian referendum, 1999. Could someone have a look to make sure I haven't removed anyhting useful, or left duplicate info. Thanks Kevin 09:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Isn't the wikipedia standard to have the date leading, so "1999 Australian republic referendum" as the populated article? --Steve 03:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Just on naming standards, is Australian republic referendum, 1999 consistent with others in the series?--cj | talk 15:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
The format used for elections doesn't really make sense for referendums. An election is an election, regardless what year it is in. The crucial thing with a referendum, however, is what the referendum is about, not what year is in. As such, where the former is entirely useful, the latter is entirely useless to anyone trying to locate the article. Rebecca 02:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Good point. So perhaps if we insert a descriptor between "Australian" and "referendum", for example Australian republic referendum, 1999 and Australian Senate elections referendum, 1906? It may get awkward for ones with longer common names, such as "Post-War Reconstruction and Democratic Rights". And Australian referendums referendum, 1977 is a mouthful. --bainer (talk) 14:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it's just a matter of working out the most concise and least awkward title for them. Rebecca 05:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
The most obvious options would be to follow the "Australian republic referendum, 1999" format, or to extend the existing format for multiple questions at a referendum (descriptor after in brackets) to all articles. I think either system would be an improvement. Are there any other suggestions? I think including the year is necessary, since there have been multiple referendums on the same question (monopolies for example). --bainer (talk) 08:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Google trickery help

While googling about Australian ski jumper Hal Nerdal, I came a hit for a web forum saying that Hal Nerdal isn't the only Australian ski jumper to compete at a large competition. (Technically, Nerdal competed in Nordic combined at the Olympics, but you all know that, right?) here is one hit. But clicking on the link doesn't give me what I want. The thread also mentions Aussie ski jumper Tony Mihelcic, but I'm not sure if he's the one.

Would anyone with experience with google (or an understanding of Polish) be interested in helping? Thanks, Andjam 13:08, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The post you are refering to mentions "Chris Hellerud in 1974 WSC in Falun, he finished 64th (last) in normal hill competition with a jumps of 53 and 48 meters (source Enzykopaedie des Skispringens, Jahn & Theiner)." Does that help? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 14:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Comments for Australia article assessments

I've just activated a 'comments' feature for WikiProject Australia article assessments. The new functionality appears to work quite well. Comments are automatically transferred to the Australia worklists here. Hopefully this will enhance the usefulness of the assessment feature and provide direct feedback between those rating articles and those actually writing them. -- Longhair 12:12, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] New ACOTF is Australian Wine

Off of history and back on economics this week, the new Australian collaboration is Australian wine. Last fortnight was Australian constitutional crisis of 1975.

--Scott Davis Talk 12:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Selected anniversaries

Thanks to some more magic from Tim, I've changed the Australian anniversaries template (shown on this page, and hopefully eventually on the Australia portal) to show anniversaries based on the date in UTC +10 rather than UTC, that is it corresponds with AEST. No more waiting until mid-morning for the new anniversaries to be shown, although Western Australians will now receive their anniversaries a few hours early. --bainer (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Frog photos

I have recently been working on getting as many Australian frog photos as possible, and creating the respective articles. Currently, we are missing many species, especially those found out west, and up north. I have had some success on Flickr, most people there are very helpful, but we are still very short of having anywhere near all the species found in Aus (~20% have photos is my guess). Does anyone have photos of frogs which don't have an aritcle and/or photo on Wikipedia? If you don't know the species, I can identify them for you. Thanks --liquidGhoul 14:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Good job, I hope you're uploading the photos at commons:. :) I found these two: Image:A small frog on green.jpg (from a zoo - so it might not actually be Australian) & Image:Frog.jpg need species IDs. Also, if you can ID anything in commons:Category:Unknown amphibians, that would be welcome too. :) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I've been uploading to commons, though I still need to categorise, will do that tonight. That first image is Eastern Dwarf Tree Frog (Litoria fallax), and the second I got help identifying a while back as Lesueur's Frog (Litoria lesueurii), I thought Fir had changed the description. Thanks --liquidGhoul 05:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
BTW, if one is interested in taking frog photos, do you have any suggestions? Are zoo pics OK if you can't see cages or small annoying children? pfctdayelise (translate?) 08:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Zoo pics are great, though they are pretty hard to take. Generally, frogs are behind glass in zoos, so if you have a technique which can prevent reflection (as flash is usually required indoors) then give it a go. I have had a lot of trouble, so if you, or anyone, has a technique, please tell me. If anyone lives near Melbourne (bolded to get attention), and goes to the zoo, try and get a Corroboree Frog photo. They are almost extinct in the wild (and too fragile to go near their habitat without permission and assistance), so it is our only chance at a photograph. We currently have one, but as you can see it isn't great.
In the wild, it is much easier. Frogs are probably the easiest wild animal to photograph, as they can't quickly run away (though I have lost many), and a lot of species don't move when you are around. The biggest problem is finding them, many species are great at hiding. It is best to go frogging with three people, and you can try out triangulation. You spread out around a calling frog, and point torches in the direction of the sound. Where the beams cross should be the frog. Also just look around the edges of ponds, dams, creeks and you will find them sitting there in the right season. The best time, I find, is the night after rain or the night after two days of rain in the right season. The season depends on where you live.
Now, to the photography. I recommend a point-and-shoot digital for frog photos. They are very easy to carry around, and they are so good now. I use a Canon Powershot A520. I will keep these instructions to point and shoot, as those with SLR should know how to use their camera ;). Firstly, as it is usually night time, bring a torch. Set the camera to macro mode (usually a tulip symbol, see your manual), and turn on the flash. I use the lowest flash setting, but test out your camera, and see what works best. Shine the frog with the torch, and auto-focus the camera with the other hand. You want it focused on the eye/nose area. Try and get a side-on shot, with as much of the frog in focus as possible, but remember eye/nose. Also, you don't want the photo to have a large reflection (frogs shine), so make sure it isn't 90 degrees. Take away the torch light once it has focused, and take the shot. Take a few until you are happy with it. This should result in a shot like this, which was shot at 11:14pm. --liquidGhoul 08:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Just thought I should note that before anyone goes out looking for frogs they should be aware of chytrid fungus. It affects frogs very badly and can cause mass declines. The best way to prevent its spread is by disinfecting frogging gear (boots, etc.). Also it would be worth reading this before frogging.--Tnarg12345 10:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Damn, I knew I forgot something, thanks for picking that up Tnarg. It is very important everyone. --liquidGhoul 12:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Talk:Australia (continent)#Continent definition August 2006

Hi, could at least one other editor please have a look at Talk:Australia (continent)#Continent definition August 2006? Contrary to the anon's view, I don't OWN the article. Be useful to have another view.--Arktos talk 01:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a send-up of 2006 redefinition of planet! Andjam 11:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Golden Wattle

The image of Golden wattle, Image:Acacia pycnantha.jpg, needs replacing as it is a copyrighted image. This is Australia's floral emblem and 1 September is Wattle Day! Be nice to have a new image in time.--Arktos talk 01:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Done--Melburnian 04:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Nice photo, Melburnian! --Canley 03:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, happy Wattle Day!--Melburnian 08:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Gathering species images

Hello,

I was thinking about the problem of animal and plant species images... we should work smarter, not harder, and organise pre-planned group photography excursions to places like zoos and botanic gardens to systematically and efficiently collect the free/better quality/ANY images we need. What I was thinking was we could somehow get ahold of species lists from zoos/gardens (?? do they maintain such things? I have a feeling they might, although maybe not publicly...), cross-check them against WP articles° and figure out which ones are needed. The great thing about zoos and gardens is that they label the species - no guessing! Then it's a fun day at the zoo for all, with a simple point-and-click. :)

What do people think, a viable idea? I guess such excursions would be wikichildren of WP:TOL and local WikiProjects, depending on the location...

° (Worth also checking them against Commons and Flickr first - masses of poorly described and sorted species.)

--pfctdayelise (translate?) 06:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

NB. found a partial Botanic Gardens plant list here - so I guess they do exist. pfctdayelise (translate?) 06:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it is a great idea. I can't find a plant list for my local botanic gardens (Hunter Region Botanic Gardens), but I have been there and it is very good. Zoos do have them, but I don't know if they all do. I will have a look around. Thanks --liquidGhoul 09:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I think this is the list for Melbourne Zoo. --liquidGhoul 09:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Great idea, I'd like to take part in such a project. The Botanic Gardens is closer (and free-er) for me. --Canley 03:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I've gone through all the Riparian scrub species at Melbourne Botanic Gardens, and searched for them on Wikipedia, but not commons. Most didn't have a photo, let alone an article. Those with an article and no photo:
Should we add this, and create lists for as many gardens as possible, to the photography section of WikiProject Australia? --liquidGhoul 03:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Category:TAFE created

I just created the category Category:TAFE. Should it be expanded, rather than an acronym? Also I notice a lot of TAFE stubs are listed as Australian university stubs. I thought TAFE was NOT university. Anyone clarify that.--ZayZayEM 01:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that TAFE colleges are NOT universities. Lankiveil 07:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC).
I thought so. There is the problem about universities that act as TAFE institutions (or at least certain faculties do), by offering TAFE accredited course; should they go in this category?--ZayZayEM 11:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
It's made even more complicated because some high schools also offer TAFE-accredited courses! (or, at least, mine did). However, I think that in these cases, the courses are actually offered by a TAFE college, and simply offered on another campus. So a course that was offered at my old high school would be attained through Brisbane North Institute of TAFE, not the actual school itself. I don't think it's necessary to put non-TAFE institutions that offer TAFE courses into this category. Lankiveil 02:09, 1 September 2006 (UTC).


[edit] Brian Booth

It is an accepted fact Booth was a member of the 1956 Australian Olympic hockey team, but doesn't anyone know for sure whether he appeared in any matches ? Tintin (talk) 05:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Colin Thiele

Colin Thiele has died too. Seems an unlucky week if you're a famous Australian.--cj | talk 07:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

... he said, just four hours before Steve Irwin hunted his last croc (or stingray). Confusing Manifestation 10:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
... he said, reading the page from the bottom and hence not noticing the above section. Confusing Manifestation 10:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hoax bio?

Can anyone vouch for Caragh Hansen? I've not heard of her and cannot find anything online suggesting notability.--cj | talk 10:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a load of codswallop to me Melburnian 10:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I smell a particularly lame hoax. Rebecca 10:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Nothining in the NLA catalogue and Australian writers would be. I vote speedy delete--Arktos talk 10:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Gone. Rebecca 10:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers.--cj | talk 10:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Germaine Greer

The article on Germaine Greer will need to be watched as she has dared to criticise Irwin. 'The animal world got its revenge'--Golden Wattle (formerly known as Arktos) talk 21:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Dared? When's the last time she's said something that wasn't "controversial"? The article could do with some work by those familiar with her work. There's only one sentence on her POV about female genital mutilation, for example. Andjam 11:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Government entities

There are a lot of articles on Australian government bodies, as per the List of Australian Commonwealth Government entities. There is a category for Aus. government departments, but nothing for their associated bodies. I think it would be overdoing it to classify them by tehir parent department, what do people think of Category:Government entities of Australia as a subcat of Category:Government Departments of Australia?--Peta 00:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. It'd be nice to see some more of these redlinks filled up, too. Rebecca 06:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More languages than you can point a stick at

Steve Irwin has wikipedia entries in 40 languages! Is he a "core topic" or subject of a "translation of the week", or is it just people from lots of different backgrounds deciding on their own to write about him? Andjam 12:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

He sure is a popular topic at the moment, in fact, the third most popular article in the entire English Wikipedia after the Main Page and search function. Stingray comes in at 4th place [4]. -- Longhair 12:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
And I note that Buggery Act 1533 is the fifth most popular article. I didn't even know there was such a creature. --Roisterer 14:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Maybe those hits are by web crawlers coming from more salacious web sites - the article isn't edited much, and quite a few other sex-related terms are in the top 50. Andjam 14:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] On this day

September 10 is empty and we're almost there. Please add anniversaries you know of for the On this day in Australia portal thanks. September 18, 21 and 22 are empty also. -- Longhair 22:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I've added four to September 10. Feel free to change if anyone can come up with some better examples. Rebecca 23:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Sept 10 is my birthday! Sunday morning sleep-in, breakfast in bed - bliss. -- I@n 00:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Happy birthday I@n! Why haven't we seen you at the quiz lately? Two Freo and Port supporters are currently waxing questioning rights, and I think we need some intervention! πίππύ δ'Ω∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 11:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Two requests for help

simple:Martin Bryant is effectively a de facto POV fork of en:Martin Bryant.

User:Scorpio80 has been uploading a lot of images, and I've got doubts about their copyright status. Would someone with a knowledge of the finer points of copyright be able to have a look?

Thanks, Andjam 01:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm betting User:Internodeuser took his ramblings over to simple:Martin Bryant. He's blocked here. -- Longhair 01:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Primary schools in Northern Ireland

I have been adding Primary schools articles for Northern Ireland, largely stubs, to which new contributors have started to add to and develop etc, but have come under attack by people proposing that all such primary school articles should be deleted as being non-notable etc. You can see the debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abercorn Primary School. A little help would be useful (assuming you agree with my arguments). I have been quoting Australia as a precedent area where primary schools are listed and articles appear. Thanks. Ardfern 23:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gardens trip

I went to the botanic gardens today, and took a lot of photos. The following species are ones I got photos (mostly macros of flowers), and were identified at the gardens. I am linking to the articles, not the photos as they will be uploaded later this afternoon:

Is anyone willing to create articles for those without an article (check spelling, as I was scribbling these down on a pad, and I have seen things spelt wrong)? I will be uploading them this afternoon or tongiht, and will post here when I am done. I also have many photos which aren't identified, so if anyone is interested, I will upload some unidentified ones. Thanks --liquidGhoul 04:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Here they are. --liquidGhoul 06:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Phebalium daviesii

Isopogon dawsoni

Chamelaucium uncinatum

Melaleuca fulgens

Grevillea triloba

Grevillea petrophiloides

Grevillea dielsiana

Grevillea aquifolium

Thanks. --liquidGhoul 06:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I made one, although I can't find the right link for McGill who is the name authority. Also I couldn't find a common name for it. pfctdayelise (translate?) 07:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think many are particularly common, so most won't have a common name. Thanks for making the article. --liquidGhoul 08:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your photos. Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life would probably be the best place to seek plant ID's, although plant ID from photos can vary from easy to impossible. Grevilleas can be particularly difficult to identify with all the species, forms, cultivars etc. Its good to have mutiple photos (if you have them) that show both leaves and flowers. Its also a good idea to show on the image page the location where the flowers are photographed for ID and encyclopedic purposes (also identifies if they are cultivated or in "the wild").Melburnian 13:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I know of TOL (have identified things there myself), just checking here first. I am also aware of the difficulty of IDing plants. There is only one Grevillea I want identified, and that is because it smells so beautiful and I want one for my garden. The others are mostly not native, and I will only upload those which I think are possible to ID with the photos I've taken. I will get onto expanding the descriptions later this week. Thanks for your help. --liquidGhoul 14:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty certain the taxonomic authority "McGill" is an abbreviation of D.J. (Donald John) McGillivray, a botanist who wrote Grevillea (Proteaceae): A Taxonomic revision in 1993 [5]. I've edited the article accordingly. --Canley 17:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Just a tip for anyone creating a plant article for this project: I've just discovered that the abbreviations for the taxonomic authorities can be looked up on The International Plant Names Index, along with plenty of other information on each species. --Canley 10:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
OK, I've done an article for St Helens Wax Flower (Phebalium daviesii). --Canley 10:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Great work. I had no idea it was critically endangered. --liquidGhoul 10:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
There was an existing article on Isopogon anemonifolius, I've added the photo. --Canley 12:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
I started the article but wasn't sure about the picture, I think it looks more like Isopogon dawsonii:

Isopogon pic

Isopogon dawsonii

than Isopogon anemonifolius (see links in article) but I'd like to hear what others think. Melburnian 09:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll ask Cas to comment, but it was labelled as such, and as a botanic garden, should be correct (of course it doesn't particularly mean so). Thanks for the help Melburnian. --liquidGhoul 11:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I am not sure about that one, looks a bit odd (Isopogon anemonifolius), actually am pretty sure it is something else.....I have an Isopogon expert I'll ask...Cas Liber 20:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Have sent of a message to David. I have addd a photo of Woorikee 200 from me garden so you can compare. Woorikee 2000 looks exaclty like a standard I. anemonifolius except more compact. Cas Liber 02:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

From the two photos, the foliage looks pretty different (I. dawsonii leaves look more branched)- but the unknown is tightly cropped and its hard to see the leaf detail.--Peta 02:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I got a response - the photo is definitely dawsoni (new stub then...). cheers.Cas Liber 22:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, I've created the new dawsonnii stub Melburnian 01:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warwick (Australia)

Can someone with more experience please take care of the Warwick (Australia) page? It's absolute nonsense: "Until 2002 Warwick was divided by a demilitarized zone that took up the Condamine river and the area of 700 metres between two towns - North Warwick and South Warwick" and "The main industries of Warwick are cold, farming, etc". Besides, we already have a Warwick, Queensland page. QazPlm 05:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Fixed.--Peta 05:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • (after edit conflict) Deleted as a nonsense fork. No need for redirect.--cj | talk 05:59, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prostitution in New Farm, Queensland?

I don't want to be called a prude, but surely this sort of information isn't encyclopedic. Should it all just be deleted, or is it be re-written in some way that is meaningful? And if so, how would you reference it? (and if you want a laugh, check out this earlier version where it looks like somebody has been undertaking original researchoriginal research.) -- Adz|talk 07:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Add the category Category:Red-light districts? New Farm is an area of such reputation, and has been since before my last visit, circa '88 (as a tourist only thanks - no business conducted :). Those edits are merely overactive teens enjoyed their freedom to edit. Wikipedia is not a prostitution guide. That said, the article on St Kilda, Victoria has come under some anon edits of late and been updated with similar crap and could do with some eyes and responsible edits. -- Longhair 08:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Cyberjunkie has jumped on St Kilda. And done well. Strike that. -- Longhair 08:42, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
It's a pretty notorious red light district, even moreso now that all of the girls have been flushed out of Fortitude Valley. But I think telling people where to pick up, and how much they can expect to pay is a bit much. Lankiveil 08:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC).
When I read the headline, I thought it was the next featured article candidate! The info in the New Farm article would even have violated wikitravel's sex tourism policy. Andjam 12:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another aussie on charges of shipping drugs through Asia

A young Australian has found herself under arrest in India on drug trafficking charges. IANAL, but I'm aruging here against a families wishes to censor the event from Wikipedia. See Kelly Rae Trueman. Any legally minded assistance is welcomed here thanks. -- Longhair 12:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

If someone's concerned about whether or not they have a wikipedia article, then they're probably not notable. If someone's notable, then many people would have heard about her, and whether or not she has a wikipedia article wouldn't make a difference. Andjam 13:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Talking about notability of (alleged) criminals, Lindsay Michael Hearn has plead guilty to some fairly vicious crimes. I was mulling today over whether he qualified for an article, but leaned against it. What would be your views on his notability? Andjam 13:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I could only find one mention of this guy: "LINDSAY Michael Hearn impersonated a policeman, stopped an autistic man on the F3 freeway and repeatedly sexually assaulted and threatened to kill him in a seven-hour ordeal in March that shocked even the most experienced police officers." Is everyone who commits a crime notable? Or all violent crime? We don't even have an article on Kathleen Folbigg! (And I note Dianne Brimble seems to be about the court case concerning her death, rather than the person herself - maybe it should be split up?) pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't think we need an article on every alleged drug smuggler. I think that India's drug punishments aren't as draconian as those in Singapore or Indonesia either, so I don't think this will be sensationalised reported by Naomi Robson and Karl Stefanovic as much as those other stories. Lankiveil 23:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC).
I'd delete them. It's only really notable if, as with Van Nguyen or the Bali Nine, it blows up into an international incident. Rebecca 22:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles on umpires

Well, today two articles from our list of umpires for the AFL have been nominated for deletion, I was wondering what you all think of such articles. Are umpires in the elite level notable? The articles in question are Damien Sully and Stefan Grun for anyone interested. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 09:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Generally, if they do their job properly, they're non-notable. They provide an important service, but games shouldn't be about the umpires. Andjam 10:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
They're no Scott McLaren or Hayden Kennedy. But I think umpires at the AFL level (at least field umpires, maybe not goal or boundary umpires) are notable enough. Sully is a more obvious keep because of the 2004 VFL award for ump of the year. Go on, give the poor bastards a chance! They've a tough enough life as it is. --bainer (talk) 13:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmmmm, boundary umpires are certainly not notable until they do something stupid, and the same is for goal umpires. However, surely AFL umpires are notable, as most have done some good stuff to get there. Thanks for your input. Daniel.Bryant 03:48, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Why not just have a detiled list for these guys rather than individual articles?--Peta 03:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Army on YouTube

Do we have an article? The user is pomstar on YouTube. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Unless the story gains momentum, should it be part of the Jake Kovco article rather than something separate? Andjam 14:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Islamic community leaders

I've created small bios for both Ameer Ali and Waleed Aly, certainly the most visible Muslim leaders in Melbourne (probably Australia), so please add to them as you see fit. I know there is much more to be said of Ameer Ali in his current roles. Harro5 23:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Foster

Is anybody interested in giving a hand over at the Peter Foster article. Foster, as some may remember, is a Australian conman linked to Cherie Blair (aka the Cheriegate affair), a handful of other celebrities, and diet/slimming scams. An anon editor believed by some to be linked to Foster is editing and turning the article into a vanity piece and removing references and cleanup notices. It's now been proposed for deletion, but I think it's a worthwhile article which could be kept if a major cleanup is undertaken by some Australian's who may remember this chap and can assist in researching the truth. -- Longhair 02:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You'd think I'd be the perfect person to handle this, given my username, but I don't really know that much about Foster outside of a few news articles. He's certainly more than notable enough to warrant the deprodding, at least. From the looks of it the first thing to do to fix the POV problem would be to just remove the trivia section - most of it's just vanity-style stuff, with very little that would belong elsewhere in the article. Confusing Manifestation 04:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Starling

I Thought I would point people to the fact that User:Tim Starling has recently undergone surgery in Melbourne, and there is a Wiki Get Well Card at User:Tim Starling/Get Well Soon - even if you haven't personally dealt with him, he has done a lot of coding work for Wikimedia projects and I'm sure he would appreciate fellow Aussie Wikipedian's messages! -- Chuq 09:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and anyone on the wikimediaau-l mailing list would notice an e-mail to that effect as well. (pokes some people to sign up to it) Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 12:16, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Visit to the Zoo

LiquidGhoul just recently dropped a line on my talk page asking if I'd be visiting a zoo in the near future and if so to mention it on this page. What are the chances of that I thought to myself when I read it. I'm actually heading off for revision lectures in Melbourne tomorrow and I'll be there for a week. I'm planning on visiting the zoo to give my 70-200 a decent workout. So yes I will be visiting a zoo soon! --Fir0002 09:07, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That's great!I will have a look at the zoo list, and see what photos we are in great need of. Currently, it is the Corroboree frog. If it is on display, it will be indoors, and through glass. So it will be a challenge, but you are probably the best chance at getting a good photo of it. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 10:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Make sure you take a good zoom lens for the Corroboree frog - they're tiny. A good photo of a platypus would be useful for that article, and we are pretty short on photos of native snakes.--Peta 01:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The 70-200 is quite a lens! It should be capable of the zoom, it is the lighting I would be more worried about. --liquidGhoul 01:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Well the other thing is, if it is a small frog I wont be able to get a decent shot of it as the 70-200 has very limited macro capabilities. But I'll see what I can do. --Fir0002 09:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
We already have an image of the Corroboree frog. Do you mean you'd like a better one? Dysprosia 08:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah. There are a few problems with the current one (lighting and focus, probably caused by the subject being far away?) Do you have any better photos? Though, the main problem is that it is a but shot, not the most appealing view :). --liquidGhoul 14:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately no. I would have taken this at a higher resolution, but my camera was almost full. You're sort of lucky I got the shot, in a way, since I came back after I took the shot and the frog had gone and hid somewhere behind a log :) Dysprosia 04:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Please be sure to copy down all the species info when you take photos!!! We don't need any more image:frog.jpg :) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 06:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
We should be able to identify any frog at Melbourne Zoo (no way of confusing the Corroboree frog!), but the snakes are a whole different ball game! Oh, and the above frog ended up getting identified, just took a while :).--liquidGhoul 08:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Do we have any photos of Australian bird-eating spiders? Andjam 10:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

What is their genus or species? I know there are a lot of very large spiders at the Australian Reptile Park, of which I will visit by the end of the year. --liquidGhoul 14:47, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Report. Will I went to the zoo on Monday (sorry for the delayed response) and got a few OK shots, but largely I was disappointed - the weather was terrible! Gray, overcast to the point of spitting at some points - no where near enough light to work with (and the lighting I got was flat). Anyway the only decent shots I got where outdoors. As mentioned my 70-200 has poor macro (1.5m min focus distance) and that just wasn't effective to work with animals behind glass. I plan to get a macto lens before the next school holidays (December) so I can effectively photograph inside the Butterfly enclosure - now there's a fantastic photo-op! I found that largely the animals were behind too much wire to be able to photograph. If anyone else is planning to go I recommend only going to the butterfly enclosure, the giant bird aviary, and the Australian Animals exhibit - these are well worth visiting!
The other problem was that I went with my Dad who was not as keen as I was to stick around and get ID's etc so I'll have to rely again on other's expertise ;-(. Sorry. --Fir0002 22:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Was the Corroboree Frog on display? --liquidGhoul 13:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Channel 10 conspiracy theory film

An American conspiracy theory film about September 11, 911: In Plane Site is currently being nominated for deletion. The film's best claim to notability is that is was aired on channel 10.

Is a film screening on Australian free-to-air a strong claim to notability? Does the fact that it was created elsewhere affect that? Andjam 09:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Not when it was screened on Channel Ten. And not when it was only shown as filler, to try to trick viewers who were actually wanting to watch The Path to 9/11 on 7. --bainer (talk) 10:04, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
How did Channel 10 manage to trick viewers to watch a "filler" on another channel? And what is it about 10 that makes it "non-notable"? I don't know about the fact that it was created elsewhere though. Ansell 04:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian/American war of 1963

This is a classic piece... Ansell 05:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that's some pretty thorough vandalism. Copying to BJAODN! Lankiveil 09:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Middle Park, Victoria

Anyone care to give an opinion at the article on Middle Park, Victoria? I appear to be the lone voice of reason there against a political candiate who's, well, I'll let the edits speak for themselves. He's had several biographical articles deleted of late by myself and several other admins and I seem to have raised his ire. Politics ain't my thing sorry. The current disagreement is over the inclusion of an external link in the article itself which he appears to be webmaster of. Any outside opinions are welcomed thanks. I'll clean up his other efforts in the article history after a break. -- Longhair 14:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I just removed all the rubbish. There's no point wasting time arguing against partisan individuals like that. michael talk 14:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Michael :) After a few weeks of it, I was tiring of his constant ranting and block evasions. I've arranged for an admin with Oversight persmission to clean up the personal contact details from the article history. RfC may be the next step if it keeps up. -- Longhair 03:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Irwin

Sadly, Steve Irwin, Australia's "Crocodile Hunter" has just died, apparantly after being stung by a stingray in Queensland. There's already been some silly and offensive vandalism to the article, and some of the article tense will need to be updated. Can some Australians help me keep an eye on the article for a few days? --Canley 04:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Crikey! I've already reverted one vandal. Perhaps one for the definite watchlist for now. -- Longhair 04:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Page copped a lot of vandalism and is now semi-protected. BrightLights 04:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that's a shock. (And I can't believe I'm reading news for the first time on WP:AWNB. Probably I should visit a news website before Wikipedia!) Probably should also keen an eye on Terri Irwin. pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

His Wikipedia article is linked to by several online reports, including those by ABC News, so it's best kept semi-protected. As well as watchlisting the article, maybe some Australians could help improve it.--cj | talk 05:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, it seems the ABC website is only just coping with traffic in the wake of his death, most probably because we are directing readers there through references.--cj | talk 05:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I see a tonne of edits - I don't see much vandalism. Many of the edits claimed to be reverting vandalism were not reverting vandalism as we would normally call it, misguided edits perhaps and worth reverting but not vandalism - see for example this claimed reversion of vandalism. I think it should be unprotected - it is like protecting a main page article - against the spirit of the wikipedia to restrict editing this way.--Arktos talk 09:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the sad news had spread far enough now for enough eyes on the article and I'd give unprotection a chance. There's also a request up at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection for it to be unprotected which hasn't been acted on yet. It's a sad day all around... Irwin, Thiele, and to top it off, some damn dog got into my chickens, leaving a sole survivor :( Couldn't get any worse could it? -- Longhair 10:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Peter Brock has also been reported dead, in a rally accident. Possibly one for the watchlist as well. His article already has the info on his death added. -- Longhair 05:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like it has been confirmed [6]. It's been a very bad week. --liquidGhoul 05:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Could some Aussie admins please watchlist the Steve Irwin related articles over the next week or so. A very persistant spammer (latest effort [7]) is at work who appears to have access to multiple ips and accounts. They vandalise not only articles, but talk pages, user talk pages, and article histories. They're currently blocked, but I suspect they'll return again tonight, or in a few days time. It might pay to have their URL blacklisted as well if the problem is going to exist.

Affected articles and pages:

Steve Irwin (already highly watched, but worth monitoring)
Terri Irwin
Talk:Bindi Irwin
Bob Irwin, won't be long before they move here.
John Stainton
Australia Zoo

The URL is the name of the Irwins' daughter. I won't repeat it here giving it even more exposure. Also keep an eye on the ip talk pages, which cop a lot of rubbish post-blocking of the offender. Thanks. -- Longhair 13:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I left a blacklist request at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist. -- I@n 15:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Ian. He's back tonight (and getting craftier [8]). It seems he's using new domain names to spam articles with every time we add previously used domains to the blacklist. See Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Universe Daily.-- Longhair 10:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bindi Irwin

Is Bindi notable enough for her own article, or should Bindi Irwin redirect to her father, Steve Irwin? See Talk:Bindi Irwin. -- Longhair 01:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bindi Irwin article issue/DRV

For the curious or interested, you may wish to review this. · XP · 16:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

"She does not get a lot of press yet in the United States, but gets what appears to be massive media coverage in Australia, the next most populuous English language country.", uhh... Lankiveil 23:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archiving of this noticeboard

This page could do with regular archiving. Perhaps discussions with no new replies after 14 - 21 days could be automatically archived? What's the general opinion on enabling bot archival here? I make use of a bot to archive my talk page, which works very well. -- Longhair 02:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

concur with both suggestions --Steve 02:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
good idea the same --SatuSuro 04:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I've activated archiving (I'm currently on dialup, and this page is a real test to view). If anything breaks, feel free to revert my edits. -- Longhair 04:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Looks like it worked fine. The most recent archive is here. -- Longhair 06:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I added the archive infobox in as eventually this section will be archived and we'll forget where to look ;) Remove it if you think it's superfluous --Steve 01:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
I placed a note to the same effect at the top of the TOC. Small font, but it's there. That big banner looks kind of out of place I think. - Longhair 01:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Yep, yours is much better, sorry to have missed it --Steve 03:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
It is very small, but in the right place I felt, under the archives link. People don't really need to know how we archive, just that it's done, and it's there if they must know. -- Longhair\talk 03:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Port Adelaide

If someone has the time and energy, there needs to be a cleanup and sorting of information in the articles on Port Adelaide Football Club (an AFL team since 1997) and Port Adelaide Magpies (the historic team). All the history on the SANFl team is in the AFL article, and should be moved so that the AFL team's article covers only the lead-up to its creation in 1997 and from then on discusses the last decade. I may have a go if I get time, unless what I'm saying is in someway incorrect. Thanks. Harro5 04:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

This is a common misconception. Essentially the present AFL side is the same side that competed in the SANFL until the end of 1996. It moved to the AFL, and remonikered itself the Power. To fill the big hole left by Port, the SANFL created a new team called the Port Adelaide Magpies. Hence it's entirely appropriate that the SANFL history of Port be included in the Power's article. --The Brain of Morbius 06:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia-based Guidebook to Sydney: What would you include?

Hi All, Question: If you were trying to make a tourist's guidebook to Sydney, composed only of as-is Wikipedia articles (i.e. you can only include an article wholesale, or not - you can't edit it), and you were limited to just 400 pages (of which only 360 pages were usable), or around 90 articles, which articles would you include, and which would you not include? I've had a quick go - list of included articles is here, and a 15 Mb PDF print preview of the result is here. What would you add, and what would you take out? Including everything (or even most things) Sydney-related in that many pages is impossible, so you have to be very selective; and because it's a guidebooky-type-of-thing, it probably shouldn't be very hard to read (i.e. a quick overview of what people are likely to encounter is sufficient), and it has to be reasonably general (e.g. the reader may be from overseas, and/or may like different things to you). Thoughts? -- All the best, Nickj (t) 09:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting article

Anybody here who gets The Age, look on page nine of the Sep 28 green guide, it has an article relating to the blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 23:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Or you can read about it here. Newspapers are so last century ;) --Steve 00:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes actually, the article is almost a year too late, and it says nothing we didn't already know, but it's good that it's there anyway :-) Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 00:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
The article is from Reuters (link) and has been published in several newspapers around the world. --Canley 02:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thought I'd ask before running it through AfD...

Is Kenja Communication real, notable, or whatever? Looks like a cross between a presskit and... something. [ælfəks] 10:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

  • A cult? Looks like it was only created due to Cornelia Rau's involvement, but I may be wrong. The name Hamilton and the word cult strikes a chord in me somewhere but I'm wondering where... -- Longhair\talk 10:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Got it - I was thinking of Anne Hamilton-Byrne and The Family cult [9]... strike that last bit. Some of those external links need dropping and replaced with reliable sources, but the organisation has had some mainstream media exposure heaped upon it. I'd vote a weak keep and suggest a cleanup if it were AfD'd. -- Longhair\talk 10:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the multiple replies, but I just found Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Dyers and Kenja Communications also. Worth noting. -- Longhair\talk 10:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tim Tams and G11

For those who are not aware, the article Tim Tam was speedy deleted yesterday under the provisions of one of the new criteria for speedy deletion: G11 ("Blatant advertising"). The article was restored by an editor who doubted the "clean-cut" nature of the case and nominated it for AfD instead. The article was speedy kept 4 hours later.

The Tim Tam article had over 100 edits and was clearly not a promotion for Arnotts. I am concerned that the G11 criteria can be too easily misused (with good intentions, I'm sure) by a few nominators and admins to expeditiously delete well-written, notable or encyclopedic articles on brand names and companies. Where this particularly affects Australian coverage is where such an entity is a cultural phenomenon in Australia, is little-known in the rest of the world, and where external references are scarce.

Any suggestions or comments of this matter are much appreciated, perhaps Aus-related articles we can keep an eye on/clean up so this doesn't happen again. --Canley 06:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

While this was a bad application of G11, there are heaps of trivial (ie. nonencyclopedic) products, companies and websites on Wikipedia that should be speedied. If an admin makes a bad choice, a deletion can always be undone.--Peta 06:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh, absolutely, I agree that G11 is a necessary measure to cope with the deluge of spam on Wikipedia these days, but certainly in this case a clean-up tag or AfD would have been more appropriate. I notice on the Village Pump there is some discussion on how to spot "blatant advertising" - written in the first person, glowing superlatives, copied directly from company website, etc. It's not a good start for G11 but hopefully the criteria can be better defined and applied in future. -Canley 07:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Some people don't get out much, or look outside the square they live in I guess, but you can't blame them when they live on the other side of the world and the only link in the Tim Tam article is to the manufacturer. Here's what I do - and I've had no complaints yet... If you come across any article without any references whatsoever, tag it as unreferenced, even if you know the article contents to be true. Kick-to-kick is one recent example. I play kick-to-kick myself with my son, but the article still needed references when I spotted it a few weeks back. Since the {{unreferenced}} tag went on, external links have begun to arrive - and everyone's happy. The article is somewhat safe from deletion, and I can verify the information within by following the new external links. In time it'll be cleaned up.
There's a lot of unreferenced articles out there needing a slap with the unreferenced tag. Be bold an slap them on where needed. Another Aussie editor recently let me know a while back that they liked my approach (I forget who it was sorry, maybe Snottygobble?), and suggested if I keep the unreferenced push up, the category for unreferenced articles will grow so large, there'll be a greater push for referencing in the first place, avoiding this problem altogether. -- Longhair\talk 06:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Still, what a debacle. Obviously G11 needs further refinement before it's turned loose on peaceful, innocent articles. Lankiveil 08:44, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Great ideas, Longhair, and tagging with the WikiProject Australia template as you've done with Tim Tam is a good indicator that the article is under the consideration of a WikiProject and should not be speedied. --Canley 00:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
What if the Australian wikiproject had a quality-rating lower than "stub" for articles that are liable to be (speedily) deleted? Andjam 13:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jose Ramos Horta to speak at the ANU

Hey,

I know some people on here are at the ANU so i thought i would ask if anyone would be able to get along to this lecture next thursday, where Jose Ramos Horta (the PM of east timor) is speaking to take a photo. The photo our article currently has makes him look kinda like the devil. I hope to be able to make it but aren't really sure. Sorry for the kinda OT post. The bellman 05:42, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

It's in Coombs; so space is limited, and I don't fancy your chances of getting close enough to get a good picture. Drop an email to his office, they might be happy to provide a PD publicity shot for Wikipedia.--Peta 05:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] British nuclear tests at Maralinga

Hi folks,

I've recently been working on this article, thoroughly sourcing claims (and rewriting where needed), adding a map, eyewitness quote, and table, and so on, and I'd be grateful for any comments or assistance with any work needed to improve it further.

(Copied to: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history)

Thanks, Jakew 14:12, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Corkman Irish Pub, Carlton

For those in Melbourne, is this pub notable enough for an article? I'm certain I've actually been there myself in times past, though I don't consider it to be notable enough to be remembered in an encyclopedia. IMHO, places like the Punters Club are noteworthy , but I'm failing to see why this one should be kept. -- Longhair\talk 06:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of it. I'd vote delete; it isn't really cultural icon material. Rebecca 07:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree, plus there are no sources to back it up.--Peta 08:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I've listed it for deletion. -- Longhair\talk 08:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
It's actually been AfD'd (and kept) back in March 2006. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corkman Irish Pub.
These days it's best known as the pub across the road from the law school at Melbourne Uni, and not the most prominent of the local venues. But it's age in that part of Melbourne is unusual, and if there are some sources for the Carlton Brewery connection that would be good. --bainer (talk) 09:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I've scratched the surface of something bigger here I think. What actually makes an Australian pub notable, or any hotel for that matter needs to be decided. I think the fact that being built during the 1800's isn't enough, as is being established at the AfD above. Take Albion Hotel, Balmain, St Patrick's Inn, Balmain, Bald Rock Hotel, Rozelle and Mertonville Hotel, Balmain for example. Whilst those articles contain a reference, all the reference really provides without looking deeper into the facts is that the hotel merely existed. There's a heap more linked at List of pubs in Balmain and List of pubs in Rozelle and possibly others. Before I suggest an AfD on those pub articles which claim no notability, perhaps somebody can tell me why these pubs should have an article in the first place? -- Longhair\talk 22:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I'd suggest the Balmain and Rozelle pubs be given some time. User:Amitch has only recently started work on improving the articles, and I believe we will see notability develop in the near future. I plan to help out on these articles too as soon as I can find some time and some more references. A couple of reasons why these articles should be given a chance to improve (strongly based on Amitch's thoughts):
  • These pubs (like a number of other buildings in the area) are of historical significance in the local area
  • The area itself is of particular significance to the history of Australian drinking establishments in general
  • In general, there is a shortage of information about this topic online.
These articles will 'not' be of interest to the vast majority of wikipedians, but is significant to those interested in the history of the area. I'd really like to see this information move from the domain of short-run local print to WP, lest it become even harder to research in the future. Chovain 00:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Chovain. I suspected the pub articles needed expanding rather than deletion, considering where they're located. As they currently stand, the articles may very well be deleted by another admin for citing no claim to notability. -- Longhair\talk 00:39, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/u/s/Wikipedia%7EAustralian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board_Archive_23_c3a5.html"