Talk:Summer Hill, New South Wales

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	Summer Hill, New South Wales 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.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney.
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.

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Summer Hill, New South Wales (reviewed version) has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

Contents 1 FA Candidature Attempts 2 Map and pie chart 3 Good Article Nomination 4 Trinity Grammar & Heritage Buildings

[edit] FA Candidature Attempts

Currently unresolved feedback from first failed featured article candidate attempt:

1. I still think the history section needs work - there must be more to the history of the suburb than the story of a mansion!
   • Status: Assigned to Nickj.
2. The politics section could do with a copyedit
   • Status: Ambi plans to copyedit at a later date.
     • Message left for Ambi on talk page.

Currently unresolved feedback from second failed FAC attempt:

1. The transportation and politics sections have no good reason not to be rewritten as prose, rather than as a list.
   • Transportation is now back as prose thanks to Ta bu shi da yu, and the politics section is currently prose (I think!).
2. St Patrick's church note is still one sentence, and the Buddhist temple is two - best to include a bit more on each.
   • Buddist temple now has more info; St Pats could probably be expanded though.

[edit] Map and pie chart

Can you please advise me how you come up with the pie charts & sat photos available for publishing under GFDL? I am trying similar pages for futher west.... TIA Garrie 05:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

For the pie chart, I got the ABS data about place of birth, put it into an Excel 2000 spreadsheet, created a pie chart of the data, then did a "save as" for the spreadsheet in HTML format. This created a PNG or GIF of the pie chart. I then took just that pie chart and uploaded it as GFDL (since I was the author). For the satellite photo, that was done by getting a satellite photo of Sydney from NASA, and most or all NASA photography under US law has to be released into the public domain (the Americans were very smart in mandating this license for most or all government imagery that is made public). I then took that public domain image, and by hand/mouse traced on the borders of Summer Hill (which I knew from other sources such as street directories and Australian government sources). The resulting image was then uploaded as GFDL. Hope that helps! -- All the best, Nickj (t) 23:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Nomination

I've added this page for a possible good article nomination as it failed FA status but may still qualify for a Good Article status. Any comments should go below. (JROBBO 13:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Dropped by as a GA reviewer. It looks good except for the lack of inline citations. Please add some so that the reader knows where things came from and where they can go for more informatiom --CTSWyneken^(talk) 01:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've looked in again, and would like to a little attention to language. For example, the article says: "in the inner-west of Sydney." I found myself asking: inner-west what? Quarter, neighborhood, etc. a little less use of the passive voice would also make it easier to read. Article on hold. --CTSWyneken^(talk) 14:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The "Inner-West" is the name of an area in Sydney (usually between Strathfield and the city on the south side of the harbour). (JROBBO 04:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC))

Thanks for clarifying. Could you say something like this in the lead? It would be a mercy to a hopeless American like me. 8-) --CTSWyneken^(talk) 00:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've changed as much as I can that's passive and could be fixed. A lot of it can't be. I've done some rewriting where needed as well. (JROBBO 03:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC))

Fair dinkum! It is very well done. I've promoted the article. Congratulations and G'Day! --CTSWyneken^(talk) 20:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trinity Grammar & Heritage Buildings

I was drawn to this statement in the article: "Throughout 2006 and 2007, local residents have opposed the ongoing expansion of the school's buildings and attempted demolition of heritage buildings owned by it." Although Nickj cleaned up the work the editor in question did, I fail to see how this is true at all. Trinity doesn't own any heritage buildings apart from the chapel and the Headmaster's House- no other building in the school is listed on Ashfield Council's heritage listing at all (see here), nor are they on the State Heritage Listing for the suburb (here), nor is there any other listing for any houses on the block bounded by Prospect Road, Victoria Street and Seaview Street; a look through the School's newsletters for the past year (here) reveals no plans whatsoever about the demolition of the Headmaster's House or Chapel. This is quite obviously rubbish and will be left out until such time as someone can provide a source. JROBBO 09:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I've checked the council minutes for the last year - there is nothing there on any dispute with the school. Provide a source or the unreferenced POV statements stay out. JROBBO 04:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

TRINITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

The above editor, the esteemed railway timetables expert and pipe-cleaner, has a clear personal interest in protecting Trinity Grammar and in defending it at the expense of verifiable truth. This can be checked by reference to his continual attampts to delete mention of the Development Apllication still before Ashfield Council which has been noted in the article and deleted by him many times.

There is no doubt that the building owned by Trinity that line Seaview Ave and Prospect Road are heritage protected. Further, the current DA calls for the demolition of 11 houses on these streets in order to build a multi-purpose hall, expand the gymnasium, build a multi-level building, townhouses etc. these plans are available from Council - they are not available on the web (though that doesnt mean they dont exist, egg head!).

Redidents HAVE opposed this development - check with council re letters, petitions etc.

The editor (a possible Trinity staffer or ex-pupil or parent)needs censure for an ongoing personal campaign that involves removing all reference BOTH to the development and to his conflict of interest. he should return forthwith to train timetables and the history of the miner's lamp. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs).

Again, I would refer you to WP:CIVIL when making comments like this. You have also been warned about providing verifiable sources, and I have already shown Wikipedia policy that shows it is your onus to provide the verifiable sources. The DA Number is not enough and proves nothing - there would be nothing in that document to show that the buildings are "heritage" or that people are upset by the proposed works. I've already shown the heritage registers and there's nothing in there to back up your claims. If you want to put that information, that's fine, but I and anyone else who wants to read this needs to know that it is true, and it is done by the inclusion of a verifiable source. If there's no source, it can't be checked and it should be deleted. My interest is not with the school, it's with the article and keeping it as a Good Article. I'm keen to keep it that way. Calling other users vandals is not going to help. JROBBO 03:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I would refer JROBBO to the Civility Code of Wikipedia in reference to his ongoing description of edits he disagrees with as "rubbish" and those who put them in as "vandals". Do you think these remarks qualify under Wiki Civility protocols? These denigrations of other's work and integrity just leads to further disagreements and lowers the level of debate to a childish one. Perhaps you could apologize to Zimbo729 nad the two of you can make up.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs).

I never accused Zimbo729 of vandalism - I suggested that he should provide verifiable sources to the article regarding the POV statements contained therein. When he persisted in taking out the information, then it became vandalism. By the way, aren't you and Zimbo one and the same person? You appear to write in exactly the same way, and with the same sorts of insults. JROBBO 12:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

How rude. No I am not the same person as Zimbo whateverhis/her name is. How insulting to even draw the inference. I may have to report you to the Wiki manners committee or whatever its called (Im sure you've got the web-reference handy for me if I need it). To return to abuse, so to speak - so you are not denying repeatedly calling another editor's contributioins "rubbish" then - just because you cant find a web-based verification for it. I am intrigued what verification exists for some of the other (alleged) facts in this article - eg "the area has quite a friendly and community-focussed atmosphere" - is this attributable to some community sampling survey perhaps (pls provide the link) - or else some observer just dreampt it up and put it in, somehow evading the JRobbo Sword of Editing Damocles! Are we to suppose those refernces AREN'T ahem "rubbish" as you didnt snip them out and remark nastily you were excising "Rubbish"?? A casual observer may think the rules seem to change when Trinity is involved... You buddy Nickj also reverts to the "R" word whenever he doesn't like someone elses work. Its most "Uncivil" under the definition you point to. Please, err explain why you and nickyj are allowed such lenience when others get blasted with threats of removal etc... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs).

Folks, can we please keep the detailed Trinity stuff out of the Summer Hill article? Trinity is just mentioned in passing because it is located in Summer Hill, but there is a separate article all about Trinity itself, which is I think the best place for things that are mostly relevant to Trinity. Also it would help enormously to include references to anything that is added to the Trinity article (since sometimes that article is a bit of a battleground between pro-and-anti-Trinity positions, and verifiable references go a long way towards documenting any statements, thus making them much harder to dismiss). -- All the best, Nickj (t) 03:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)