Talk:History of the Australian Capital Territory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of the Australian Capital Territory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Featured article star History of the Australian Capital Territory 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.
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.
Flag
Portal
 History of the Australian Capital Territory is maintained by 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.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been selected for the featured article queue of the Australia Portal.
This article is supported by WikiProject Canberra.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian history.
Assessment comments

This 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.

Contents

[edit] Historic Map of the ACT

Map of Historic ACT
Map of Historic ACT
Map of Historic ACT
Map of Historic ACT

I have been working on a map to show houses and villages that where already in the area around the time the ACT was created. I have just been going off the top of my head adding places as I think of them. Any suggestions as to other notable places I should add. I have already thought of oaks estate since I uploaded the image. --Martyman-(talk) 10:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Since its the whole ACT, you could potentially include all the homsteads that were in Namadgi, there is a big list here- they're all marked on the Namadgi park map if you have one. Hill Station Homestead, Mugga Mugga, Calthorpes is more recent (1927) but it is registered with the National Trust. And I just found this list of the Hertiage sites in the ACT which lists everything! --nixie 11:21, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Also, a map of indigenous artefact sites might be neat too.--nixie 11:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Good ideas. I will look into them. But I will be in Syndey for two days starting tomorrow so I might not get to them for a while. --Martyman-(talk) 11:26, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I have added a few more places now. Still working on it. A lot of the huts in Namadgi date from fairly recent times (1960s), though a few of the older ones predate Canberra and I have added them. Does anyone know of a list of indigenous sites in the ACT? I think this would also make a useful map. --Martyman-(talk) 09:25, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I just realised I need to remove the other dams off this map. Does anyone know where abouts at tidbinbilla "Rock Valley" homestead is? --Martyman-(talk) 09:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Rock Valley can be seen on this map, it was severly fire damaged- something that wasn't mentioned in the 1991 document I was using earlier. [1]--nixie 10:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


They're all recorded on that ACT heritage list, the big ones are the three in Tidbinbilla, Yankee Hat in Namadgi- apparently there are 25 known shelters in the park, 6 quarries, 6 rock art sites, and so on- but the only one I know the location for is Yankee hat, the two chert quarries in Canberra (one in Symonston and one in Gungahlin), there is a rock shelter somewhere in Belconnen.There are numersou artefact site and scarred trees- probably too maky to but on the map.
All the dates for I added to the history section should be right for the original settlements in Namadgi, there is some more detial here [2], I also haven't added Cuppacumbalong- it was established in 1839 and Bobeyab run which was first settled in the 1830s. There was also a school in Alum Creek from ~1886 [3].--nixie 09:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
What's been happening with this map? Is it finished to the point of being able to be added to the article? Ambi 01:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Good question. I have not made any changes to it for a while, but I don't vouch for it's completeness. Any suggestions about content or format would be appreciated. --Martyman-(talk) 01:20, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
How about use numbers on the map, and then a key with large text so that it can be read without the high resolution version? Maybe a light outline of the districts of Canberra?. But in any case I think it would look fine in the article now Astrokey44 11:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I will give the numbers a try tomorrow. I have already tried a version of the map with a light outline of Canberra included, but it seemed to just confuse matters. I might try again and see if I can get it to work. --Martyman-(talk) 11:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Fixes:

  • Canberry was demolished in 1941
  • Lambrigg would be a good addition, its near Tharwa
  • Gungahlin homestead also known as the Squire- built in 1861- currently occupied by CSIRO
  • Woden homestead (in Hume) ~ 1870s
  • Cotter Homestead- 1830s (gone now) near the cotter hut

But, on a 300px thumb, the text is illegible. Does it look really crappy with a larger fot size?--nixie 11:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I will try and go through and add these tomorrow, and I will try out bigger text (not sure there is room) and key with numbers (the key would have to be pretty massive to be ledgable). I am not sure where in relation to Tharwa and Lanyon Lambrigg is located. I will double check my maps but I don't think it is noted on any of them. --Martyman-(talk) 11:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

  • I can't find it on a map either, if it helps the national trust gives this description of the site:

The Lambrigg Precinct (Block 7) is situated on undulating ground fronting onto the Murrumbidgee River. From gently sloping river flats the land rises to a low ridge then flattens out into undulating country until the property's western boundary, along the Tidbinbilla Road, is reached. Barnes Creek cuts through the property running west to east, entering the Murrumbidgee on the eastern boundary. A low ridge and saddle running approximately north to south through the centre of the property provides a commanding view in all directions. The view to the north takes in the southern extent of the Tuggeranong Valley, whilst the easterly and southern views encompass the Rob Roy Range, the Lanyon bowl and Mount Tennant. The view to the west takes in the lightly timbered hills of the Tidbinbilla Range.[4]--nixie 11:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I have uploaded a newer version fo the map. Unfortunatly I have guessed the location of the Gungahlin, Woden, Cotter and Lambrigg homesteads. If anyone can pinpoint their location better it would be great. I am also still missing some dates. I had better call it a night, but I will see what I can do about makign the text ledgable tomorrow. --Martyman-(talk) 11:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, here is a newer version of the map with larger text and Canberra suburbs lightly showing. If we decide this is the way to go I still need to do a bit of tweaking of text locations to avoid overlapping. Opinions? --Martyman-(talk) 10:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

The map looks great! I wonder if it would be a good idea to do it in a series? So you have say maps from say 1850, 1880 and 1910 showing increased development over time? Astrokey44 12:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
While I would certainly see the benefit in doing that, maps need to be fairly large if they're to be legible, and that takes up a lot of space in the article. If we want the three maps to be the only illustrations, that might work, but otherwise I think it might be best to leave it at just one. Ambi 13:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Given that we really don't know all the information about what was settled and when and this map just shows the historically well recorded places- it would be difficult to make a set of more detailed maps without some very serious research. I think the current version looks great, thanks again Martyman.--nixie 21:12, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Links

[edit] Article structure

Does anyone have an opinion on how the article should be structured? I'm probably in favour of a basically chronological article- but a thematic histroy could work too. I could definately use some help dividing history up into chunks.--nixie 02:14, 7 November 2005 (UTC) So far it's:

  • prehistory,
  • european settlement - could probably be further divided,
  • choice of a capital - this section could possibly go as far as the end of WWII, eht end of WWI may be a better cut off,
  • ? ACT Supreme Court Act 1933
  • ? 1949-first house of reps seat, 1950s establishment of the National Capital Development Commission
  • 1960's - satellite tracking stations, development of "new towns"?,
  • 1970s and 1980s self-government, telstra tower high court case, Senate (Representation of Territories) Act 1973?
  • recent- fires

[edit] Geologic History

Do you think the geologic history of the area should covered here? It is already briefly described in the ACT article. --Martyman-(talk) 01:44, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Not really, I think it is more relevant to the ACT article. I don't think there is anything to be gained by mixing natural hisotry with human history.--nixie 21:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough. --Martyman-(talk) 22:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Photos

Here are some possible photos from the NLA that could be used as illustrations for this article. --Martyman-(talk) 11:32, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Nice find! I think one of the Tharwa bridge ones is a must (they're both good, but only one is probably necessary), and the first and third surveyors camp ones would do wonders in this article. Ambi

[edit] Peer review

Edits to this article have slowed in the last few days and I think it's really not far from being featurable. What would you all think about putting it on peer review? Is there anything not covered which we should do first? Ambi 12:09, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I have a pretty good idea about what peer review would bring up, (1) the lead needs to be expanded to summarise the content, probably 2 to 3 paragraphs (2) the 21st century should probably have something in addition to the fires (3) we should stubbify some more of the red links and remove useless wikilinks (4) html markup needs to be added in some sections. Since the bulk of the reviewers know nothing about the suject they wouldn't be able to point out specific deficiencies.
From my reading I know that the indigenious and european sections are poor, they lack detail and are still disorgainzed I'm planning to work on them further- but I don't have much time to spend on it at the moment. I also think we need to do something about the ugly template, which takes up too much space that could be used for related images.--nixie 12:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I have been creating some stubs for red links in the article. I agree that the history template is ugly and big, unfortunatly it's modification will effect lots of articles and therefore may meet with resistance. --Martyman-(talk) 23:51, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I've tried to get discussion happening on the template page- but not much has happened yet. Ideally the template would be half as long - and in a really ideal world it wouldn't have states and territories and capitals (I think that they should be on their own template). I might make some dummy ones later and put them on the talk page.--nixie 02:37, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
I think some dummy templates are good idea. They at least will give people somehitng definate to discuss. --Martyman-(talk) 02:53, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
See, Template talk:History of Australia.--nixie 03:02, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

We really should attempt to find some reputable sources for the activites decriminalised in the ACT- mabye the ACT hansard? There are assorted bits and pieces commented out in the text that could be added or need verification.--nixie 13:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The entire register of Hansard is online and indexed by Google if we're after quotes or such (handy resource, too, and one I've used quite a bit in writing articles on ACT politics), but it might be easier if we're just looking for verification to go straight to the legislation register, which has every act of the Assembly indexed by year. Ambi 14:33, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Photos

For the sake of variety, it would be nice if the photos here were different from the ones used in History of Canberra, and especially show areas outside Canberra. I think photos of Hall, Tharwa and the Cotter Dam would look good here if anyone is going out in those directions? Astrokey44 08:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for inclusion

I was thinking that the settlement of Brindabella is probably worth adding to the article. It is an example of the conflict between the europeans and aboriginals in the area. --Martyman-(talk) 10:08, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure if its the same story but there was conflict surrounding the establishemnt on Berridale by Richard Brooks in 1827. I will add it to the article at some point.--nixie 11:04, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
No, I htink it was a different case. This was Joseph Franklin in 1849 see: [5] --Martyman-(talk) 01:31, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] LinkFix Dump

As per request of User:Petaholmes. See User:Ambush Commander/LinkFix dump.

================================================================================
LinkFix Dump
History of the Australian Capital Territory
2005-11-25.00-32-00
================================================================================
12  [[Jervis Bay]] -> DISAMBIG
12  [[Goulburn]] -> [[Goulburn, New South Wales]]
17  [[George Palmer]] -> DISAMBIG
45  [[Freehold]] -> DISAMBIG
71  [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration]] -> [[NASA]]
87  [[Canberra bushfires of 2003]] -> [[2003 Canberra bushfires]]
# DONE
Checked: 129
Skipped: 26
Errors: 17
Hits: 5
Time: 13:19

— Ambush Commander(Talk) 05:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Removed all errors. Wikipedia must have been slow when I ran the bot. — Ambush Commander(Talk) 17:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Links have been fixed. — Ambush Commander(Talk) 19:07, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Photos

Just a couple of things: would it be possible to get photos of some of the historic buildings outside of Canberra? A few of our photos in this article are a little bit random, and I think some nice colour photos of surviving historical places would look beautiful. Secondly, is Ginninderra Village worth mentioning here? Ambi 01:10, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Lanyon Homestead would make a good photo if anyone is heading out that way, once the hisotric map gets added there won't be much room left for historical images. A good pic showing the lake and the parliament houses should go in the development of Canberra section. The only images that I'm not sure of is the stromlo one.
Ginninderra is mentioned in the history section- beyond that all I know about it is that there are some touristy things there- I don't know of anything significant, beyond that which is already mentioned, that happened there.--nixie 04:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I added the stromlo photo, but am not overly attached to it. A shot of the burnt out admin building with the telescope domes visible would be a better photo for stromlo post 2003.--Martyman-(talk) 05:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New version of map

Map of the ACT and Jervis Bay
Map of the ACT and Jervis Bay

I have created a new version of the ACT-Jervis Bay map including Sydney. I am not sure if it is an improvement or not over the existing map. I think it may reduce the size of the ACT and Jervis bay too far. What do you guy's think?

PS. I know there are a couple of errors like the names of two towns being cut off the top, also the different sized dots may not accuratly describe settlement sizes... ;-) --Martyman-(talk) 10:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Looks good- it just needs those two names cropped off--nixie 10:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
done. --Martyman-(talk) 11:16, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Public Service

I notice Public Service is a redirect to Public Services we really mean Civil service. I will change where the article links, but maybe we should look at changing the redirect or creating a disambiguation page. --Martyman-(talk) 01:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, Public Service (capitalised) is a stub on some band's album of that name, public service is the redirect to Public services. Agree that the appropriate dab notices should be affixed to the former, and possibly to have the latter also a dab, pointing to both Public services and Civil Service. But for AU articles, we should probably retain the local terminology, ie use something like [[Civil Service|Public Service]]. Or perhaps, maybe an Australian Public Service article would be warranted.--cjllw | TALK 02:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Wow that is more complicated than I thought. I would think the best arrangement would be to make [[Public service] a disambiguation page with links to Civil service, Public Service (EP) and Public services. Public Service should be made into a redirect to the disambiguation page. An article on teh Australian Public Service could be written or included in Government of Australia. --Martyman-(talk) 02:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
A really easy soultion would be to delink the phase in this article ;) --nixie 02:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Alas, my inner pedant got the better of me before I saw Nixie's low-cost solution, and I've already gone ahead and moved Public Service to Public Service (EP), and turned Public Service into a dab with the appropriate links. Public service is still a redirect to Public services, I've left that alone for the moment. From the pages which link to it, Public service could be either Civil service or public services, dunno whether it's worthwhile making this a dab as well, or leave as-is.--cjllw | TALK 04:14, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm sure there are probably capitalization isses, but I redirected Public service to Public Service.--nixie 04:26, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Linguistic group

The Ngunnawal people and other linguistic groups are known to have inhabited the region for at least 21,000 years before the present.

Can anyone think of a better alternative than linguistic group? Andjam 07:51, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Two minor issues

I just thought of two more recent legislative moves that may warrant mention here: the 2002 decriminalisation of abortion and the government's recent steps towards potentially legalising civil unions in the not-too-distant future. Any thoughts on adding either of those? Ambi 03:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Abortion is probably noteworthy, on civil-unions - it seems kind of silly to speculate in a history article.--nixie 04:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hume pic

Hume never really explored in the Canberra region.--nixie 01:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Cool I removed it. Can you think of any other images that might be appropriate for that section? --Martyman-(talk) 01:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Cunningham is the only one that already has a pic on Wikipedia- I'm searching around for others.--nixie 01:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Googong picture caption

The newly added caption for the googong pic may be a bit misleading. The dam is actually in NSW but was built to service the ACT (and Queanbeyan). --Martyman-(talk) 05:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Better now?--nixie 06:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/i/s/Talk%7EHistory_of_the_Australian_Capital_Territory_46e8.html"