Talk:Speers Point, New South Wales

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Speers Point, New South Wales article.
Article policies
↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓
Good article Speers Point, New South Wales was a nominee for Geography and places good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Auroranorth
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Flag
Portal
 Speers Point, New South Wales 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 New South Wales.
Assessment comments
To-do list for Speers Point, New South Wales: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in New South Wales may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents

[edit] Out of Stub

Yay, it's out of stub form. I hope to take this article further into B-Class or until there aren't any more references on the internet. Auroranorth 12:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Information Please

Please inform contributor Auroranorth how to add a second 'Request' to TO-DO, above on his user talk page. Auroranorth 13:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Add the {{todo}} template at (or near) the top of the talk page and save (but that seems to have been done already) —Moondyne 16:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but it seems there's only one Request parameter. Are there two? Auroranorth 08:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] B-Class

What do I need to do to get this article to B-Class? Auroranorth 06:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cruft

I have removed a lot of redundant and unnecessary information from the article as it was becoming overloaded with WP:CRUFT. The suburb is a relatively minor one with the City of Lake Macquarie (apart from housing the council offices) and as such does not need to list all of the things (eg. newspapers, state and federal government seats info) which are currently in those separate articles. The suburb does not have air direct services so it makes no sense to list airline information related to nearby Newcastle, New South Wales. —Moondyne 16:42, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

But it's only 36km from the nearest operational airport! Auroranorth 00:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
The size of the suburb is 2.7km² - that's about 1.6km by 1.6km. The info would be far more useful at an article for a larger entity (eg City of Lake Macquarie or Newcastle, New South Wales). Orderinchaos 03:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what benefit timezone information and a map of Australia have on a suburb article, considering Lake Macquarie alone has 90 suburbs, about half of which are Newcastle suburbs, and the City of Newcastle has 56. That information belongs on the Newcastle article IMO. Orderinchaos 13:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree. —Moondyne 13:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, so what picture should I get (if it's already uploaded) to put there? Auroranorth 11:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated peer review 1

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Auroranorth 07:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Models

We can model this article on the following articles (feel free to add)

[edit] Hamersley, Western Australia

Sections used:

  • Geography
    • Area and measurements used
  • History
    • Early History/Development
  • Demographics
  • Facilities
    • For example recreational areas and stores
  • Local education
  • Transport
    • Include public transport
  • Politics
    • Include charts and graphs
  • Comprehensive reference section

Tools we can use:

Auroranorth 14:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some suburban features

This site contains information from this book which may be useful. About Us link on the site gives history for sailing club.

From my UBD Newcastle (1999):

Main Road

  • Council offices
  • Freewheels Theatre-In-Education Company (received Arts NSW funding 2003) also [1]
  • Speers Point Public School (primary) [2], also [3]
  • RSL (damaged by 29 Dec 89 Newcastle earthquake)

West of suburb - Lake Macquarie Park (history at site)

  • Contains Speers Point Park (on lake, includes picnic facilities), Tredinnick Oval and Walters Park
  • Sports - athletics, bowling, cricket, rugby union, soccer, swimming pool.
  • Speers Point Amateur Sailing Club and wharf at SE

planning doc

Orderinchaos 20:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

If it's possible, I would really appreciate an upload of the images to Wikipedia, so I could get some valuable information out of them. Auroranorth 13:01, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Check your email from about a month ago, I did send a copy to you (but keep in mind they are copyrighted so cannot be republished) Orderinchaos 17:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I did receive it, but it was slightly distorted - were the maps over a couple of pages? Auroranorth 11:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a scanner but I do have a digital camera - therein lies the problem. :) It looks clear to me at full size, I use ACDSee to view images (was put onto it about 10 years ago and am a proud owner of the latest version). Orderinchaos 14:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I did a bit of touching up; the point where the picture joins was... disjointed. So I moved them together. Auroranorth 00:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated peer review 2

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Auroranorth 09:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Efforts

[edit] Start vs. B-Class

I think that the article is deserving of a B-Class rating, it covers the topic broadly and has a very solid amount of referencing. Twenty Years 12:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That is what I think, also. Auroranorth 12:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
With some minor fixes and a bit of information added to the education section, this article is ready for GA. Twenty Years 09:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Good work. Whats it's screaming out for is some current photos and perhaps a map. Surely that's doable? —Moondyne 09:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Where could I get a map from? Auroranorth 09:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Good question. You could try drawing one yourself using Inkscape. —Moondyne 10:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Sending you something through email now. Auroranorth 10:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I tried Inkscape, but failed miserably. Auroranorth 10:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
If it can wait a bit, I'll have a look. I made the Hamersley map using that. (Right now am busy with historic opposition leaders and real-world priorities.) Also I will be over there in late November so will try and grab some shots - it seems most of the key things are in one part of the suburb so it shouldn't be too difficult. Orderinchaos 10:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Remember, WP:WIAGA says that they don't need images. Should we submit it now? Auroranorth 10:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll have a look at it tomorrow, just give it a general going-over for grammar etc and then get one of the reviewers to look at it, then once that's done, I'd say go for it. Orderinchaos 11:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I can do a grammar check tonight (if you're signing off), and you/I could also approach an assessor tonight. I can't wait... Auroranorth 11:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Since I am still unable to edit WP:GA (Wikipedia namespace articles), could you please do the honours? Thanks, Auroranorth 00:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Will do. Will be tonight though as I'm just about to go out and probably won't be home until quite late as I want to get some research in at SRO + Battye. I worked for three years as a professional copyeditor btw so that was the basis on which I approached it. Orderinchaos 01:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I wasn't doubting that, but I knew you were busy! The copyedit though, that's OK as it seems somebody's already done it. Auroranorth 11:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Issues

Might be worth removing the scheduled events, if nothing happens why mention it? seems odd. Twenty Years 09:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I'll get started! Auroranorth 09:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review

Might be worth starting a peer review on the article? Maybe a talk archive too? Twenty Years 12:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't start a peer review, but you are more than welcome to, in fact I would like you to, if you have the time. Auroranorth 12:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I re-added some 'cruft' previously deleted on the grounds that the peer review for this article (here) says it should be reinstated. Any problems, feel free to remove/discuss here. Auroranorth 13:56, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated peer review 3

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Auroranorth 14:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article nomination

Hello all, this article is on the brink of being nominated for GA status, so I thought I'd compare the article with the criteria.

  1. The article is well written. The prose is clear and freeflowing and no grammar mistakes are present.
    1. It is in line with WP:LEAD - the title is bolded, the lead section does not have a heading (e.g. 'Introduction'), context is established (i.e. 'Speers Point is a suburb...'), a quick and concise overview is given, 'relative emphasis' occurs (i.e. stating that Speers Point is a suburb doesn't occur elsewhere in the article), it is of suitable length and there is a citation.
    2. It is in line with Wikipedia:Guide to layout - section order is correct, headings are correct, etc.
    3. It is in line with WP:WTA - none of those words are used.
    4. WP:WAF does not apply.
    5. WP:EMBED does not really apply.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    1. Everything is referenced.
    2. There is no original research.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    1. Nothing to this, really. It has a lot of necessary information.
  4. It is neutral - no bias!
    1. This article fulfills this requirement nicely (see WP:NPOV)
  5. It is stable.
    1. No edit wars yet!
  6. It is illustrated.
    1. This is well shown. There is a NASA Worldwind picture showing Speers Point's relativity to Newcastle, a historical image, a panoramic view, a local school's logo, another historical image, an election results chart and plenty of non-image charts.

That's all for now! Auroranorth 11:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GAC

I have nominated this article at Good article candidates. Orderinchaos 22:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

First, I noticed that the article was nominated for GA at the same time as peer review, which is not recommended. It is preferred to seek either FAC, GAN, or PR, separately, so as to avoid confusion among reviewers and editors alike.

My comments here are specifically directed at comparing the article against the Good Article criteria. I did not look specifically at the comments provided on the PR page, though most of them should be taken into account in improving the article.

The article in its present form does not meet the current Good Article criteria, and will not be listed. It fails primarily on account of completeness, as there are significant sections of the article that are missing, and several sections are very short. The lead/intro section is also too short; this section should provide a good summary of the article. See WP:LEAD for information on improving the lead section.

The history section is actually pretty well written, and appears reasonably complete. Although it stops with the closing of the post office in 1976. Did the city just evaporate after that and there's nothing to talk about in the 80s and 90s?

Geography section is too short. It would help to include information on the climate here, and you might want to use the {{coor dms}} template to provide the latitude & longitude of the city as well. What about a description of the geological features as well? Is the city coastal, or inland? What is the street layout? Where's the center of town?

Industry section is too short. It might be recommended to change the title of this section to 'economy', and discuss some other aspects of the local businesses instead of just the mining industry, which appears to be in decline.

The 'facilities' section seems to contain a lot of separate and unrelated information which should probably be divulged into separate sections. You might want to add a 'sports and recreation' section, or a 'parks and outdoor activities' section, as these would be better places to discuss that. The religion information would be better discussed in the 'demographics' section, since it is essentially demographics. There should also be a section covering the 'culture' of the population (separate from demographics, which is just figures, mainly). How do people interact? Are there any major cultural events and fairs in the town?

The education section might also include a description of some of the libraries or any museums that might be in the town. It is relatively short.

The transportation section is sufficient. Although I am not sure I would say that 74.96% is "significantly higher" than 71.87% ... they seem to both be very close together. Motorcycling and cycling are practically zero, so I am not sure if I'd consider them to be significant other modes of transportation, either. If there are any recreational bike paths in the town, it might be good to include them here.

The 'politics' section just contains some information on the national & regional politics, and no description on local politics. How is this town administered? Who is in charge? What does the local government do? This is not addressed at all in the article. Also, the federal and state election statistics tables really have no context to text in the article, and doesn't really say much about the politics. You could really sum up all those tables into once sentence by stating that, "the majority of the population of Speers Point has supported the Australian Labor Party in the past three elections." or something like that. Consider changing this section to 'government and politics', and add more details on the local government.

Drop the 'achievements' section. It's not an achievement of the city as a whole, and really just the Steel brothers themselves. Move the content here into the history section, possibly. But it does not need it's own main section.

Overall, the article is looking reasonably good. It is well written and I think the information meets the verifiability requirement, for the most part. It just mainly needs work on its organization and completeness before it can be awarded GA status. While the town is relatively "small" by city standards, it might nonetheless be worthwhile to take a look at WP:CITIES, and specifically some of the templates for city articles there, as well as some of the smaller towns that are also current GA & FA class articles.

Hope this helps! Cheers! Dr. Cash 19:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with some points in the review (re politics and geography in particular) as in the former case we've rather closely followed Australian article standards on this one (Hamersley, Waterfall Gully and Yarralumla contain a similar level of local information - Hamersley has a little more as it has a single persistent local issue with the tower), and on the geography there just isn't enough information available from the authorities to justify longer sections on this - I think the reviewer has assumed this is a discrete town rather than an outer suburb of a metropolis which happens to be the centre of power of a rather large local government area. The rest makes some good points though. Hopefully when I go over there in ~6 weeks, I can collect some information and photographs that can be used to improve the article (also sometimes just being on a ground in a place you see things that can be looked up in authoritative sources). Will also check SLNSW when I'm over. Orderinchaos 03:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't believe the reviewer has seen the current version. There is no 'achievements' section. Is there a possibility of a resubmission? As OIC said, the reviewer might be under the impression that Speers Point is a large suburb and 'the centre of power' - it doesn't really have many of the things the reviewer pointed out. Auroranorth 09:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)