Talk:History of Burnside

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Burnside article.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This History article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.
Featured article star History of Burnside is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Peer review History of Burnside has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
Flag History of Burnside is part 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.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

This article has been selected for the featured article queue of the Australia Portal.
This article is supported by WikiProject Adelaide.

This page is related to the WikiProject Adelaide. This Project is an attempt to enhance, organise, and standardise articles about the city of Adelaide, Australia.
You can discuss the Project at its talk page, or see a list of open tasks here.

Contents

[edit] Headings and images sizes

Just an FYI: I modified the article headings to use lowercase lettering where appropriate and removed "the" and "A/an" per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings). Also, I again removed the fixed sizing from the images. Generally it's best to leave pics in the text (other than infobox pics) without a specified width, because the thumbnail image can be resized based on the user preferences. Images default to 180px but people that want them larger or smaller can get it their way. Specifying a fixed width overrides this option. It isn't a prefect solution, but realistically there's no guaranteed way to format the images that'll look good on everyone's computer. --NormanEinstein 19:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

It looks to be extremely high quality as always. A few notes

  • Is it NPOV and appropriate in a technical sense to put Kaurna people as "stone-age"
  • In one of the sections, there is a link to Rostrevor, South Australia but it is labelled St Bernards -which is supposed to be correct?
  • World Wars I and II sent many of the sons of Burnside to fight in aid of allies and also Like much of Australia, Burnside held true to the phrase "Lest We Forget" seem to not be as formal as is desirable in an encyclopedia, and the second may be a personal judgement?

Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 07:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure about the Kaurna, while it is an accurate description it may be seen as offensive to some; if further qualms are brought up I will see it changed appropriately (unless you suggest a replacement).
  • St. Bernards is the old name for what is now Rostrevor. There is similar linking using old names to link to their modern ones throughout the article when a name change is not specifically mentioned in the text itself.
  • "Held true to the phrase lest we forget" is in relation to the huge array of monuments (hence they are not forgetting). It seems appropriate.

Big thanks for having a look for me :D michael talk 07:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

With regard to the lest we forget business, I think it might be possible to convey the same things without being quite so colloquial. Apart from that, though, it's a fantastic article. Ambi 10:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Any suggestions as to what it should be changed to? michael talk 10:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Great article. I have made one pedantic redirection but besides that I couldn't find much wrong with it. --Roisterer 12:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy-edit

I've gone through the article and made changes where I thought they were necessary. Please review these to ensure I have not affected the context in which the were written. I've also slapped a "citation needed" tags on a few statements. Moreover, the assertion that Norwood-Kensington was the first munipality in Australia is incorrect so far as I know - the City of Adelaide was the first local government authority established in Australasia in 1840. I didn't remove the claim as I think there might be some confusion with terminology. Although I was concerned at first that the article wasn't entirely Burnside-specific, I think the article is overall pretty comprehensive and well-written.--cj | talk 07:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Citations added. With regard to Norwood-Kensington, it lies in the detail. It is the first official municipality. Thanks for the copyedit cj. michael talk 07:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Also:
In the line "Much of Burnside's history has been compiled and kept by two institutions that have remained an important part of resident life: the school and the Church" you asked "which church??". I'm referring to the Church as an institution and not as any particular one. Burnside residents were particularly devout.
You also asked "what is the relevance??" in relation to "Somewhat strangely, no learned activity developed in Burnside's centre near Tusmore where the present Council Chambers, Community Centre and Library are located." Tusmore was in the centre of the region (and as populated as any other at that point) and was devoid of the educational institutions that the other villages had the benefit of, a strange anomaly.
michael talk 08:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
On the first point: okay, but "Much of Burnside's history has been compiled and kept by two institutions" would seem to imply particular entities. I'll see if I can reword it. On the second point: this can again be clarified. Thanks, --cj | talk 08:24, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Programme/Program

There has been some discussion over whether the correct Australian English is "program" or "programme". Unfortunately, as Google seems to interpret "programme" and "program" interchangably, it's difficult to gauge how popular each is.

However, the Australian Government seems to prefer "programme" [1] [2] [3], as does the Queensland government [4], and local governments [5] [6].

Universities seem to like "programme" too. See QUT [7], UQ [8] [9], Monash [10] and JCU [11].

Given that there is no definitive list of "Australian English" words, but given the use of the non-US version by the government, and higher educational institutions, coupled with the fact that I was taught to use "programme" myself as the "Australian friendly" choice in school, and that I've never heard anyone ever mention that "program" is Australian English (except where it refers to "computer program"), I'm fairly confident in saying that "programme" is the correct au-en spelling of the word, when it is used in the context it is used in this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lankiveil (talkcontribs) 22:05, 14 May 2006.

"Programme" is indeed Australian English, but its use has been so diminished in recent years due to the styles used by such dominant players as News Limited and Microsoft, that a standard cannot be said to exist. Thus, it is not inconsistent with Wikipedia conventions for either to be used. However, as there is a conflict, the spelling used by the article's original author should be continued, whatever it may be. See WP:MOS. --cj | talk 05:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)