Talk:Waterfall Gully, South Australia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star Waterfall Gully, South Australia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 8, 2005.
Flag
Portal
 Waterfall Gully, South Australia 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.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been selected for the featured article queue of the Australia Portal.
This article is supported by WikiProject Adelaide.
Assessment comments
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles. To participate, visit the project page.
This article is considered to fall outside the scope of the Version 0.5 test release, which is of limited size. It is now being held ready for a later version.

Contents

[edit] Tomas Semire Artaniun Gatton

Who is "Tomas Semire Artaniun Gatton", and how is he notable? I was born in Adelaide and have lived here for about 34 of 36 years and never heard of the guy. Why is his living in Waterfall Gully significant and how is he notable? Sounds like a vanity entry.

[edit] Greenhill Spring Water

"Greenhill Spring Water is from these very springs, and can readily purchased throughout Adelaide." Deleted, because myself and a number of people I've asked have never heard of it. 203.61.6.131 09:38, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

It'll be added in again somewhat when I find some pictures of the business itself, and a photo of one of their water containers in a local business ;) G 08:17, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

This is exactly the kind of uninformed comment you can expect from wikipedia. It doesn't take much effort to look up the company in the phone book and give them a call, you can argue to the company directly that they dont exist as much as you like if you want to take that attitude.

[edit] Politics

I'd suggest a lot of what is presently in the politics section should be moved to the respective electorate articles instead - otherwise almost the same info would need to eventually be added to every suburb in the electorate, and updated for each election. --Scott Davis Talk 13:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The politics section is quite comprehensive, im well aware - but it does add to the article and is relevant. Maybe a politics template to be used in all the corresponding articles (Bragg Electorate Suburb Politics) so there is only one thing to update? - G 13:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

This read that "progressive parties such as the Australian Labor Party and Australian Democrats also poll well in the area." A primary vote of 10% may be a good showing for the Dems, but the usual 20-25% primary for the ALP makes this place one of the weakest from the ALP's perspective. I've modified this, because it is misleading to suggest the ALP "polls well" here; indeed, there are few places in the state where they would poll worse. seanie 09:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

After changing this, someone has changed it back, claiming NPOV. It's nothing to do with NPOV. To claim Labor polls well in this area is patently wrong and shows a amazing ignorance of Australian politics. Since I don't want get stuck in a reversion battle, I will leave this, but I am interested in what others think. Admittedly there is room (and perhaps a need) for some explanation here for non-Australians, showing why 10% is good for the Dems, but 20-25% bad for ALP. Still, sort of peeved someone thought my edit wasn't NPOV! seanie

[edit] Radical suggestion to make article better

Add the dreaded {{cleanup}} tag. This is on my watchlist now, so hopefully I'll be able to do some work on it in the future. One thing which really strikes me as bad: the second paragraph. At present it reads:

Waterfall Gully is rich in history, and has been a popular attraction since Adelaide's early colonists discovered the area in the 19th century. Recent developments around First Falls and the reopening of the Waterfall Gully Restaurant have contributed further to its reputation as a tourist attraction. The suburb's natural beauty attracts residents as well as tourists and could be categorised as upper-middle class.

We don't just want this to be a featured article, we want it to be a good article. Alphax τεχ 03:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, but I think since you only mentioned one specific paragraph that it wouldn't be necessary. That said, if there are any other paragraphs that you want to change go for it - or - if you want, let me know which ones need attention, I'll tackle them. - michaelg 05:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
The cleanup tag is generally not used for articles like this - it is used for devastatingly bad articles, which this is clearly not.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 05:49, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Native Vegetation Links

I've also got information on native vegetation here and here (Maybe another footnote or two to be added?). - michaelg 07:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article on main page

That was wierd to go to the main page (which I don't usually do) and find an adelaide suburb article that is not only a featured article but on the main page itself! I did some taxi driving a while back and have heard of most of Adelaide's suburbs, but wasn't familiar with this one. Looks like people from the Burnside council area are are fairly active wikipedia-wise. - Diceman 17:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 2006 State Elections

The article needs to be revised to include results from the 2006 State Elections.

Well aware. But I think I'll wait until the results are confirmed first. michael talk 15:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Broken Link

the reference City of Burnside Electoral Areas gives a not found error. Rimmeraj 22:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

I don't think you can use these population statistics here. The article is about the suburb Waterfall Gully. The statistics are from a much larger census area that includes the suburbs of Waterfall Gully, Glen Osmond, Mount Osmond, and a section of Leawood Gardens according to the City of Burnside homepage. So most of the 2,285 inhabitants would be from Glen Osmond then. -- Harro 13:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)