Talk:Dandenong, Victoria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	Dandenong, Victoria is within the scope 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.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian places.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne.
Assessment comments The following comments were left by the assessors: (edit · history · watch · refresh) 00:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC) - good references and well researched, but not well-written or organised enough to be considered for a Good Article. With a bit of tidying, a few more pictures, and some rewriting it would easily be a GA. B-Class.

[edit] Drum Theatre

This is the newest big thing in Dandy and it should be talked about and would I have approval to replace the tax office with a picture of it?Domsta333 13:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redevelopment section

I've gone and found a fair bit of info on current projects, but if anyone wants to flesh the section out a bit more, this booklet is a great source of info with details on what's proposed. invincible 15:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Propose move page to Dandenong

I see no reason why this page shouldn't simply called Dandenong, since there's no apparent danger of problems of ambiguity. This is a courtesy advice before I do the deed. Any objection? Grimhim (talk) 09:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Something about it needs to be a state capital to be without the state in the article name - look at Talk:Geelong, Victoria or the archives for it for more. Who knows why... Wongm (talk) 09:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I have also somewhere heard a different story about how it got its name, that like some other Melbourne suburbs it was named after a ship. Of course that's nothing like enough backing to put that story in the article, but suppose one day it turned out to be true? The place and the ship might need to be disambiguated if "Victoria" was left off. P.M.Lawrence.203.194.55.66 (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand the first response and we'll cross the issue of a ship if it arises. In the meantime, we should stick by Wikipedia's article naming conventions at WP:D, which doesn't require such qualifiers as "Victoria" when there is no other place called Dandenong. Grimhim (talk) 10:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I mentioned it on your talk page a bit - the naming conventions are one thing, but it somewhat easier to link to articles if they all have the same naming convention (already disambiguated) so you don't need to think as much. People like bitching about little things, and you end up bogged down in circular arguments - you just need to be in first rather than try to change what others 'say' is an agreement. Wongm (talk) 10:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Wongm has pointed out the naming convention at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements)#Australia, a guideline that would keep this page's title as it is. I'll leave it as is then. Grimhim (talk) 12:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

There was a proposal about 2 months ago now to change the convention, but it failed. As it stands every place name in Australia is disambiguated by state, which is useful in a broad sense and especially from a maintenance point of view. Orderinchaos 12:41, 9 March 2008 (UTC)