Talk:Royal Exhibition Building

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	Royal Exhibition Building 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.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne.
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 within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a group related to the the study of World Heritage Sites. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

Was the Carlton Gardens actually proposed for World Heritage listing along with the RoyalEx Building? I doubt that it was. Hypernovean 12:12, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Not only was it nominated it has in fact now received world heritage status including the gardens.

All the Carlton Gardens are included. There are several very rare mature plant species in the gardens. Check out the listing at the Victorian Heritage Register and the statement of significance which reads in part:

All the mature trees and palms, including avenues, rows and individuals growing in the Carlton Gardens including the following species:.... All of the Crown Land Reserve Rs 9990 (Carlton Gardens) and Rs 37130 (Royal Exhibition Building and Museum of Victoria), crown allotment 19A, shown on Diagram 1501 held by the Executive Director, being the land bounded by Rathdowne Street, Carlton Street, Nicholson Street and Victoria Parade. --Takver 05:30, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Fork 2 Removed Zable article and commentary 2.1 The Dome 3 Australian flag 4 Self published source

[edit] Fork

The fact` is that the article by Arnold Zable's article represents a major part of the history of one of Melbourne's historic sites of significance. If you took the time to read the full context of the supplementary post (Which has now been removed from the Wikipedia site), You would have noticed that it details historical events related to the public campaign to try and prevent tht development of Melbourne's Museum o this site. The content presented the minutes of a public forum that was held in the Royal Exhibition Buildings. The content opf the minutes was and as relevant to Melbourne's history and in particular the Royal Exhibition Buildings, I want the link restored. It was as a result of this campaign that the Royal Exhibition Buildings along with the Carlton Gardens was eventually nominated for World Heritage. You may wish to rewrite history or prevent this story from being told but ask your self are you acting in the in the public's interest by seeking to prevent this information ad historical facts from being known.. NO,. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melbcity (talk • contribs)

The above relates to The Dome - Melbourne's Royal Exhibition Building which is an extended version of the Zable article (below) and which I have now submitted to AfD. -- RHaworth 09:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Zable article and commentary

This article is very interesting, but it's not suitable to appear verbatim in Wikipedia. Maybe in Wikisource? --Robert Merkel 22:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Dome

By Arnold Zable. Published 26 September 1996

First published in the Age September 26, 1996 permission granted by the author for its re-publication.

Post Editor: Anthony van der Craats, former Councillor, National Trust of Australia (Victoria)1996-1999

Author's Comment made in 1996 in relation to Jeff Kennett, Premier of Victoria 1992 - 1999

We have a state government that loves to congratulate itself on its great works, and on the way it is transforming the city. But the reality is, that it is intruding into our parks and gardens, making crucial decisions with little consultation, and without regard to overall strategic planning. And in the process it has left a lot of people feeling powerless, disenfranchised and unwilling to speak out.

THE article by Arnold Zable, printed in full above, records a significant turning point in the history of the Melbourne's Royal Exhibition Building and it's nomination for World Heritage, the development of Melbourne's Museum and the campaign to have the Museum of Victoria relocated.

It records part of the missing chapter in the history of the [Royal Exhibition Building] written by David Dunstan, historian prior to the relocation of Museum of Victoria.

IN 1996 a meeting between John Brumby, former leader of the Victorian State opposition, Trevor Huggard, former City of Melbourne Lord Mayor and member of the Exhibition Building Trustees, Sigmund Jorgensen, Montsalvat Arts Foundation and Anthony van der Craats, Carlton resident and community activist, took place in the Victorian State Parliament to discuss issues of concern and opposition to the then proposed development of Melbourne Museum adjacent to the Royal Exhibition Building.

It was at this meeting that John Brumby first proposed and supported the listing of the Royal Exhibition Building and the Carlton Gardens on the World Heritage List in hope that the nomination would cause Jeff Kennett, Premier of Victoria 1992-1996, to rethink the proposed development of Melbourne's Museum in the Carlton Gardens. At the time Jeff Kennett opposed the World Heritage Listing. The Royal Exhibition Building had previously been suggested for nomination but no firm action or policy had been made until this meeting.

In 1979 history has recorded that Jeff Kennett, as a Liberal State Minister, proposed the demolition of the Royal Exhibition Building. Whilst he managed to demolish the Royal Ball Room he was unsuccessful in his desire to see the Royal Exhibition Building demolished.

The National Trust's expert building committee opposed the design and development of Melbourne's Museum citing that the development was not in keeping with the scale, design and significance of the site. Dr Miles Lewis, Architectural Historian ICOMOS and member of the National Trust's historic building committee expressed serious concern at the failure of the Kennett State Government to subject the proposed development to a proper planning process and assessment.

The Board of the National Trust, who had an on going business relationship and close association with the Museum of Victoria, overturned, to the dismay of it's members, the recommendation of the Trust's expert committee.

In December 1996 Anthony van der Craats, was elected to the Board of Directors of the National Trust of Australia (Victoria) in opposition to the determination of the Board to overturn the recommendation of the expert committee. He served as a Councillor of the National Trust for three years until 1999. He was later joined by fellow activists Mary-lou Jellbart and Julianne Bell both who were elected to the Board of the National Trust in 1997 and 1999 respectively.

Whilst the community campaign to stop the Museum development in 1996 was unsuccessful, John Brumby, who later became Victoria's Treasure under the [Steve Bracks|Bracks] Government in late 1999, recommended for approval the nomination the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens for World Heritage Listing. Approval was subsequently granted by the Federal Government who, as signatory to the [UNESCO] [Treaty], formally applied for World Heritage classification of this truly unique building which continues to play a significant role in Melbourne's cultural development.

The Royal Exhibition building is Australia's first building to listed for World Heritage.

There continues to be ongoing concern and issues related to the Museum of Victoria which was built adjacent to the Royal Exhibition Building prior to the World Heritage Listing.

The following persons deserve recognition for their contributions for the preservation of this magnificent historical Melbourne Icon.

Trevor Huggard, former Lord Mayor of Melbourne and Exhibition Trustee Linton Lethlean, former Director Exhibition Trustees, who faithfully restored the Royal Exhibition Building to its original 2001 design Mark Duckworth, former Melbourne City Councillor and member of the Exhibition Trustees Miles Lewis, for his endless work and professionalism in supporting the nomination for World Heritage. David Dunstan, historian who wrote the history of the Royal Exhibition Buildings and the Carlton Community who have been its protector and neighbour without whom the Carlton Gardens and the Royal Exhibition Building would not exist today.

http://antiwikipedia.com/Melbourne_Royal_Exhibition_Building_-_Public_Forum_26_May_1999#Motions

http://antiwikipedia.com/Melbourne_Royal_Exhibition_Building_-_The_Dome

[edit] Australian flag

The article does not mention the REB was the place the Australian flag was flown for the first time.

58.170.7.61 05:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Self published source

Refernce 5, supporting the statement "The location of the State Museum close to the Exhibition Building site was strongly opposed by the Victorian State Labor Party, the Melbourne City Council and the local community" was inserted by user Melbcity (see diff 14:25, 7 November 2006) and is entitled "Minutes of public meeting organised by the City of Melbourne May 1996 and Article by Arnold Zable published in the Age newspaper 26 September 1996". It links to a selection of articles on a personal blogsite http://melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com/search/label/Royal%20Exhibition%20Building. The blogsite claims that its editor is Anthony van Der Craats but all the articles therein claim to have been posted by Melbcity, the same username as the user who posted the link in the wiki article. This appears to be a clear case of a self-published source (see WP:SPS), and I contend that WP:SELFPUB does not apply because the cited blogsite is self-serving in that it promotes the specific point of view of the blog editor (Anthony van Der Craats) who according to other (subsequently deleted) edits to the article by Melbcity had a strong personal interest.

Having removed the reference to the blogsite, which is at best a secondary source for both the minutes and the table article, an improvement would be to substitute links to the primary sources provided that the consensus is that they are relevant and appropriate (Zabel article is discussed elsewhere on this page).Timber frame (talk) 10:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The following unsigned text was added by user 193.243.157.214 who also vandalised my text above and is evading multiple blocks - see diffs and sockpuppet case Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/UkraineToday (4th). Timberframe (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Please note that Peter Cosby (Timberframe) from the UK is embarking on a campaign of a harassment of Mr van Der Craats following exposure of Mr Crosby activities in Ukraine and his unsupported allegations that the Ukraian Government was engaged in the mass murder and genocide of unwanted children and his unsupported assertion that Ukrainian Orphanages are [[Death Camps][ for Children. Mr Crosby clearly has no idea of the history of the Royal Exhibition Buildings and or Melbourne Museum project and the community protest in opposing the museum development on this site. His comments in relation to Wikipedia reference to blogs is also false and misleading ad does not reflect wikiepedia policy. The referenced article by Melbournian Historian and academic Zable (Who by coincidence is Ukrainian) is very much relevant to the community protest. Mr Crosby is now using wikipedia a platform of his ongoing harassment and political bias, in doing so he is bringing Wikipedia into disrepute.

You need to ask yourself why did Mr Crosby seek out this reference? The aser is clear. take a look at his contributions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Timberframe and you will see that he is engaged in a campign of harrsament and stalking Mr van der Craats.

None of which address or answers the reason I gave for removing Anthony van der Craats' personal blog as a secondary source and inviting those who know the affair better (even Mr Craats himself) to add links to primary sources. I hope you (Anthony van der Craats) feel better, having got that off your chest. You need to understand the difference between harassment and cleaning up after an abuser who is evading numerous blocks to impose his particular POV even when it flies in the face on peer consensus and wiki policies.Timberframe (talk) 01:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Mr Crosby you have and contiue to misrepresent wikipedia's policy o referces to blogs. this is not self prtomotuo however your posts are most defiately harrassmet as you are using Wikipedia as your own forum/tool for harrassment. The fact that you have signled out this publication and removed valid liks is evidence of this.

The above unsigned and bearly inetlligible comment was added by multiple-ban evader 193.243.157.214 - see the string of cases [1]. His addition of antiwikipedia.com as primary sources is the funniest thing I've seen this year. Why do this when reputable primary sources must surely exist? - see diff [2].Timberframe (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

In my previous edit I re-instated the name of Anthony van der Craats as the author of the above unsigned personal attacks originating from IP address 193.243.157.214 because it is highly relevant when considering the balance of this article to understand that much of it is written by Mr van der Craats without his declaring a personal interest. He draws attention to my contribution history as evidence of my "harrsament and stalking Mr van der Craats", yet what my contribution history shows is a series of upheld sockpuppet allegations concerning multiple identities including MelbCity and 193.243.157.214. Thus he has voluntarily identified his real-life identity and drawn attention to it. Furthermore, it should be noted that much of this article, in which the name of Anthony van der Craats appears several times, was written by MelbCity which is the name under which most if not all the articles in Mr van der Craats' blogsite http://melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com are written.Timberframe (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)