Talk:Miami, Queensland/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

First posts

Is This a good artical —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nathannoblet (talk • contribs) 16 July 2006.


No. Things it is missing include:
  • picture
  • history
  • population
  • major industries
See WP:GA for more info, and Waterfall Gully, South Australia for an example of a Featured article (which is a bit better than Good Article). --Scott Davis Talk 09:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Well,i were only a holidaymaker there Nathannoblet 07:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


Great. Are you going to provide some of these things Scott? --WikiCats 11:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry - no idea where to get them from (except the photo, 2000 km from here). I was just answering the question. Simply saying "No" seemed a bit rude. --Scott Davis Talk 12:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


If this article has been judged low class and totally unimportant by the administrators them what is the point of working on it? --WikiCats 12:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I did not say "low class and totally unimportant", as you know from the dscussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australia/Assessment. I said (in the assessment) "Stub class and of low importance" which means (quoting the assessment criteria:
  • The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible.
  • This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.
  • The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it).
I also provided some reasons in answer to the question for why I did not consider this article to be a Good Article yet. Do you dispute any of these reasons? I don't think I have ever been to Miami. This article at the moment tells me how to find it, but gives very little indication of what I will find when I get there. I have contributed to many of the town articles in my state, most of which still would be rated as stub, and almost all will remain of low importance, as that is simply the reality of encyclopaedia articles about individual towns. However, articles about these towns improve the breadth of Wikipedia as a whole, increasing the value of the total project.
Also, please note that the ratings are not done "by the administrators". yes, I am an administrator, but these rating can be done by anyone involved in Wikiproject Australia, and do not require any administrative privilege to make or change. --Scott Davis Talk 00:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

The assessment

So now we have anonymous contributors determining the unimportance and low class of the article now. Is that the situation? --WikiCats 00:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has always been open to contributions from anonymous editors. Assessments are a valid contribution. They're not set in stone however and can be disputed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australia/Assessment/Disputes. This assessment has been listed there by User:Nathannoblet, and already has a reply. -- Longhair\talk 06:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The assessment process was started for purposes of the Version 1.0 project. Outside that project assessments serve no purpose at all. It will take one and a half million edits to tag all the articles and another one and a half million edits just to update them once. This will involve millions and millions of edits to place these judgmental comments. Time wasted on Talk pages that could be used to actually improve articles.

Now these judgments can apparently be made by inexperienced people who don't even have the wherewithal to log in. Then this will initiate an extended debate about the merits of decisions made by people who are confused about how to create a log on. More effort wasted that could be put to improving articles.

There seems to be some dream that if lists are created somewhere of articles that need help people will refer to them when they have run out of things to do. The reality is people edit subjects that they have an interest in or some knowledge about.

We already have a stub tag which is placed when the article is created. We have a process for Good articles. And we have peer review for GA.

Beyond the Version 1.0 project, the assessment process serves no purpose other than the cheap thrill someone might get by running down the work of others and wasting hundreds of hours that could be spent improving articles.

The testament to how judgmental these tags are is the use of words class, quality and importance. --WikiCats 09:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You're bringing your beef with assessments to the wrong place. This isn't the only WikiProject using WP1.0 style assessments. Many find them useful. If you don't like them, ignore them. I'm not interested in re-opening this debate. it's been had before at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australia/Assessment#What_is_the_purpose_of_these_Assessment_tags. -- Longhair\talk 09:06, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you could explain what use they serve. --WikiCats 09:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Not at the Miami, Queensland talk page I won't. This discussion isn't helping to improve the article on Miami in any way. In short though, I can now tell at a glance how many Featured Articles cover an Australian topic (prior one had to sort through a very large list), and how many Australia-related articles are of Good Article standard. Take this over to the WikiProject Australia Assessment talk page if you really want to flog this dead horse. There's only a handul of editors I'm aware of that oppose article assessments, and many many more in support. I guess you're not ready to learn about the bot software I have ready to tag (not assess) the remainder of Australia-related articles then? -- Longhair\talk 09:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Link

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Australia/Assessment#This_Assessment_process_is_a_monumental_waste_of_time --WikiCats 09:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

The photograph

Scott, you demanded that a photograph be provided for this article. I spent $500 on a digital camera and $1500 on Photoshop, drove miles to Miami, edited the photograph, uploaded it and carefully placed the image in the article in the article. Only to have you came straight away to flip flop the photo all over the place because you were not happy.

So Scott if you not happy, I certainly would be happy to remove my licence from the image that I own and you can come to Miami and do what you like to your own photos. So what is it? --WikiCats 01:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I moved the photo of the welcome sign across to the right of the lead paragraph instead of above it, as it is not usual to place a picture before the first text of an article, and marked it thumb so that the caption you provided is actually displayed in the article. Is that what you mean? I did something similar to Nathan's historic photo moving it next to the history text instead of below it.
My request (not demand) for more photos in the peer review is for some photos of Miami, not just the sign (see point 3 of Wikipedia:What is a featured article?). Perhaps for example, the main street, the beach, and a couple of the identified landmarks. Look at examples of other good and featured articles about suburbs and towns. This article is not yet anywhere near that standard, although it is improving, including the addition of the photos so far. If people don't want a critical review of an article, they shouldn't ask for it! At least I fixed the spelling instead of just noting it needed work - incidentally, is either Pizzery or Pizzey Park Sporting Complex wrong? They both appear in the text. --Scott Davis Talk 11:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Who ask for it. Maybe we should go over to South Australia and pass judgment on your articles. If you think that I am very angry about the treatment that this article has been singled out for then you are not far off the mark. This is the situation we are at on the Gold Coast:Suburbs of the Gold Coast, Queensland As you can see many of our suburbs have not even been created yet. But you are demanding that this should be a featured article. Who do you think you are? When you've turned all your articles into featured articles then maybe come back and complain about the Gold Coast. --WikiCats 12:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Come and take your own photographs Scott. --WikiCats 12:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Your an admin. Scott. You should know better than anyone that this article is now near ready to be peer reviewed as a feature article. Its nothing more than a stub. This is our main article: Gold Coast, Queensland We have been working on it for months but there is still no way we would be requesting a review for featured article. There is just too much more work to be done. So why you are even dreaming that this article is a FA indicates you don't understand the priorities we have in Queensland. For example our first priority for FA would be Gold Coast then possibly Surfers Paradise, Queensland then Southport, Queensland. I understand that this new editor is eager to develop Miami but as far as I am concerned if you want to treat my photography like this then I'll stick to photographing my own suburb. --WikiCats 13:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Please calm down WikiCats. The request for a Peer review was made by Nathannoblet. I responded (on that page) with a few of the missing things to supplement Longhair's more general comments. I agree with your assessment of priority - Miami is not a significant topic overall, but I've already upset you in the past by saying that. If Nathan wants to make it Featured, then good on him. I responded to the peer review because I saw the notice above pop up on my watchlist. I watchlist any article I have edited, at least for a while, so I can see what reaction my edits get. If Miami settles down or gets a good body of active editors, I'll probably drop it from my list.
If you want to copyedit articles in Category:Towns in South Australia and identify on their talk pages some of the missing info in each one, you're welcome. Please do. But I won't be calling for a formal peer review on any of them until they're as good as I can make them without it. I'd love to put a photo on each page, and have gradually been adding them as I take decent, relevant photos in those towns, but my camera's not worth $500.
The reason I'm "even dreaming that this article is a FA" is because Nathan asked for advice on what more is required. I'd love to come and take my own photos, but at the moment I'm doing that in Tasmania, and then I have to go back to my day job. You'll see some of my Tasmania photos appearing as I get them sorted out, for example Mount Roland Conservation Area, Boag's Brewery and Sheffield, Tasmania from the first few days of my holiday.--Scott Davis Talk 14:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Fine. --WikiCats 06:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Magic Mountain

Magic Mountain info: The 5-acre Magic Mountain theme park at Nobby Beach was the most centrally located of the Gold Coast's major tourist attractions. In 1962, Page Newman built the Nobbys Beach chair-lift that later formed part of the Magic Mountain entertainment park. A cafeteria was built on top of the outcrop. It was a gamble that paid off. The chair-lift carried 40,000 people in its first year of operation. A Magic Castle was built, giving the park the "magic" theme. Intensive development commenced in 1983. $13.6M was spent to create the Magic Mountain theme park. Car parking was created onto and under the mountain. Attractions included a Parachute Tower, Wave Swinger rides and Magic Theatre. Magic Mountain closed in 1987 and the land was subdivided into two portions in 1993. The land was sold and is now the site of apartments, restaurants and shops. --WikiCats 11:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

$20 million Sale at Miami

News: [1] --WikiCats 13:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Mediation Case

A case has been filed with the Mediation Cabal regarding this article. If you are a neutral party and interested in mediating, please review Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal and Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Suggestions for mediators before starting mediation, then feel free to dive in! If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks! ~Kylu (u|t) 20:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/i/a/Talk%7EMiami%2C_Queensland_Archive1_6d09.html"