User talk:AussieLegend/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
← Archive 1 |
Archive 2
| Archive 3 →


Archive 1 August 2007 to 12 September 2007

Contents

Image:Williamtown Fighter World.jpg

Thank you for uploading images/media such as Image:Williamtown Fighter World.jpg to Wikipedia! There is however another Wikimedia foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading media there instead. That way, all the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons. Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

Sfan00 IMG 16:08, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Photo

The photo is not an appropriate one for a major photo of an article - take a look at every other city in Australia - they have a more encompassing photo of the CBD area. The one you deleted is more appropriate, and mine is good as well. The best one would be one taken across the river from Stockton. JRG 11:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

But thanks for the editing on NC. Good to see work on the article - thanks for the NC Airport pics too. JRG 11:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Newcastle article

The article is NOT about the Newcastle LGA only - it is about the whole metropolitan area, just as in the same way an article about "Sydney, New South Wales" would not just be about the Sydney LGA, but the whole metropolitan area. Please see the demographics section in the article, among other places, for discussion in the article showing that I am correct. I have removed the misleading LGA reference in the infobox, but that was about it that would show otherwise. Feel free to update the correct population statistic to 493,465, but the article is about the entire metro area, not just the Newcastle LGA. JRG 10:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the question - broadly agree with JRG here (although, after taking a quick look at the article histories, agree more on content than on action). 493,466 appears to be the correct figure according to 2006 ABS - 512,000 is, from what I can gather, an earlier estimate by the ABS before the figures were known. The way I see it is that Newcastle, New South Wales should be about Newcastle the way an outsider would see it - just a city with a general extension in various directions, its culture, social characteristics, attractions etc - which would apply to the whole area which Newcastle services. This argument comes up for larger cities - especially Melbourne and Perth - occasionally, as the ABS definitions include some areas that are very rural, while excluding connected urban areas - most weirdly, in Melbourne the definition includes the Mornington Peninsula while in Perth it excludes Mandurah and its urban area, in every way a very similar area to MP. The article on the council then should be an article about local government and the area from a local governance point of view - I wrote hundreds of them for WA a few months ago (see for example City of Bunbury which has a similar problem in that a large part of the metro area of Bunbury is in three other shires - Capel, Harvey and Dardanup). Re the C/M thing this morning - no worries, I'd guessed that was the situation :) Not quite sure why Greta didn't turn up initially in my postcode checks though - I did a sanity check in a street directory which revealed the omission. There's two others for Cessnock - Carrabare and Olney - which were in postcodes which weren't in the list but I don't know enough about the area to know if they should be there or not. Orderinchaos 10:32, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
If there's information that means the article is not inclusive, then you're welcome to fix it up and I will support you in that - I appreciate your help and I'm sure you'll do an excllent job fixing the article. I and others have always thought this article is on the metro area, and an outsider would expect it to as well. JRG 10:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah it wouldn't make any sense for Kotara to be included but Kotara South to be excluded, or the two Adamstowns to be separated. Port Stephens does appear to be a bit of a strange one - only one contiguous suburb (Fern Bay) - as does Cessnock. The other area of confusion is Beresfield/Tarro/Woodberry/Thornton where part of the Maitland LGA is closely connected to Newcastle. Interestingly enough, if you look on the 2001 census stats, where Urban Centres/Localities are defined, "Newcastle" is taken to be all of the Newcastle LGA plus a shade over half of Lake Macquarie, taking in everything to Swansea on the east side of the lake and about as far as Toronto on the west. Orderinchaos 11:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Cool - my main bone of contention was with the exclusion of Lake Macquarie, so it seems we agree on that, and I agree that you actually do have a point with regards to the other three. (I intend to come to the region in late November, so I'll see it all for myself I guess - though with the limitations of public transport :P) So two possible definitions here - an area of 826.1 km² with a population of 313,598 (2001) / 324,891 (2006) (the two councils together), or an area of 259.8 km² with a population of 278,773 (2001) (not yet measured for 2006) per ABS Urban Centre/Locality, either of which would seem to work for any evaluative purposes. Orderinchaos 13:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is where it's going to get confusing - the entire east side of Lake Macquarie, including Swansea (but not beyond it) are deemed to be within Newcastle by the 2001 UCL (see map above). Orderinchaos 15:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
The problem, however, is this. We can't just make arbitrary definitions to suit one city, when the ABS definition has been adopted for the Australian project and is essentially the only verifiable source for this information. If we don't accept their definition, we have to accept somebody else's, and there's noone else around with that kind of authority. It would also require redefining all other Australian cities, for which consensus was reached years ago. I agree with you about the suburbs (had the same problem myself with the ones I was working on), although most of the areas in question are very sparsely populated areas. When in doubt you can always use the CCDs within the GNB boundary, such as I had to do with 2001 stats prior to the 2006 release for WA. As for what people say - within 20km of a city centre (in the case of Belmont) and clearly part of the same contiguous urban area, served by a bus company called Newcastle Buses, etc, strikes me as local parochialism. Orderinchaos 16:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and re the organisations - I live about 15km from Perth's CBD in the City of Stirling, to whom I pay rates. I do not pay rates to the City of Perth. But if I claimed I was therefore not part of Perth, I'd be laughed out of a shop. I am also within the Division of Stirling (not Perth) and the Electoral district of Balcatta, and I have a postcode quite different to Perth's (for the record, the entire Hunter area is treated as one entity - "17 Hunter" - by Australia Post according to their online postcode spreadsheet, while the entire Central Coast right up to Wyee is under "21 Pymble"). Orderinchaos 17:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
It started getting a bit long, so I created a subpage on my user talk page at User talk:Orderinchaos/Newcastle. Orderinchaos 11:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
A long term request - can you take a picture of Williamtown Airport and perhaps Belmont Airport (now closed I believe - hopefully before it's torn up and turned into housing) as well? JRG 06:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Image Newcastle_CBD_from_Stockton_001

Funnily enough I have a photo that looks exactly the same, but I thought it lacked detail and didn't upload it. I was working a photomerge of a greater detail image, but the important centre photo is too much of a difference in colour, so I am unsure if I can pull it off and make it work. -- Macr237 22:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the photo. Is there any chance you can get one that is of better quality? I'm not going to change the photo back because yours is a more representative photo, but a better quality one would be much more appreciated. Thanks. JRG 01:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Trying to get a good photo is really hard, due to the scale of the place and the distance. I have a series of shots that I wanted to join and have joined but one image is quiet a bit of difference in colour, so the photomerge looks crap. I will try a 3 part merge and see if I can avoid the bad photo. -- Macr237 04:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok out of the 10 shots in the series, this is the only two that really match. What do you think? -- Macr237 04:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Central Newcastle
Central Newcastle