Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tasmania
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This talk page is automatically archived by Shadowbot3. Any sections older than 28 days are automatically archived to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tasmania/Archive1. Sections without timestamps are not archived
 Archives |
| Archive 1 Sep 2005 - Sep 2007 |
Contents |
[edit] Climbing Guides or Encyclopediac entries
Considerable amounts of the mountain and walking track articles for Tasmania read more like ad hoc notes on walking and climbing than actually being what they should be - entries in an encyclopedia - lack of any refs of any sorts and very sloppy tone/writing - any help to clean em up would be appreciated SatuSuro 00:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dubious
Possibly copyvio art needs further attention - Levendale, Tasmania - apart from lack of tone it reads like a copy SatuSuro 06:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Page heading
I believe that the heading and page title 'Tasmania' although very acurate could be better described by adding Australia to the heading, and example is Victorias page. I think that this gives better understanding at a glance of where Tasmanaia is when looking at it in the wiki searc results. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rorymac (talk • contribs) 23:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hobart/Tasmania fire articles merge
Any project users around? - there is a merge that I feel needs to be discussed. Hobart 1967 Fires and Tasmania fire articles. SatuSuro 10:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Tasmania
Is it just me, or does anybody else feel the WikiProject Tasmania page needs a clean up, and perhaps some more leadership in terms of what needs to be done. The 'Tasmania-related articles - to create and expand' section for example doesn't seem to have been touched for some time. Most of the article requests have been done, at least as stubs - so perhaps these need to be reviewed, and either listed as stubs/starts that need upgrading, or articles to be refines for GA/FA status?
Some of the redlinks, such as Trafalgar Centre seem to have been redlinks forever... Is anybody going to write this? Is it still considered worthwhile?
Also, are all members still contributing to Tasmanian related articles? If not maybe we should have the member list in two sections, active, and inactive but interested in Tasmania - simply for the sack of collaboration?
Just ideas, alternative ideas, thoughts, discussions welcome. Just wanting to breath some new live in as Wikiproject Tasmania seems to have slowed down a bit recently. Robert Fleming (talk) 14:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Please go ahead - anything to breathe life back - the low level of the project activity doesnt mean that we need that many hands on deck - just a few should be enough to get things floating again so to speak SatuSuro 14:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Banner
Can anybody tell me why the contents list insists on sitting above my new flashy banner?? I have tried repositioning everything, and it will not go below... Robert Fleming (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] New Layout
Any feedback re my new layout? Any objections, or alternative ideas?? Did I miss something you would like to see included? Or remove something you think needs re-including??
I have chosen the colours based upon Tasmania's traditional sporting colours of red, yellow and green, but if Tasmanian wikiproject participants don't like the colour layout it can be changed?? Robert Fleming (talk) 15:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Afd Tasmania articles
Greetings oh slumbering project - The Brink and Ben Waterworth are up to questioning - arise - now is your chance to speak for the tas project! anyone? SatuSuro 02:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Request photo tags
Hi, whoever might read this a non project editor has tagged a large number of tasmanian articles requesting photos - please ignore as I do not believe that the editor has either AGF or any understnding of the low level of activity on this project SatuSuro 00:01, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think the photo tags are a big problem - I'm sure most will be ignored, but it doesn't hurt to have them there - there are bound to be people reading the talk pages who don't look at the proj page.. Speaking of which, I notice Melaleuca, Tasmania was one of the pages tagged - I assume very few people have been there, I don't suppose you have a suitable pic SatuSuro? -- Chuq (talk) 00:16, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Cripes - this is cause for celebration - possibly the first time in at least a year that two talk items have appeared in this page on the same day, cripes its hard to cope with - usually I wait for six months to get reply on some article pages. In response to your question - not yet in my own collection - but there might be some public domain shots elsewhere - and heaps of people have been there btw SatuSuro 01:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, it is a bit of a shock isn't it! My watchlist is so long I usually only look for changes in the last 1 day, and often I'll go more than a week without checking it. "Heaps" is relative, I'd say of all the Tassie locations we have it is the least visited and definitely the least permanently-populated :) -- Chuq (talk) 05:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough :) - viz=
In 2000, an estimated 4,000-5,000 people visited the Melaleuca – Port Davey area. Between 3,000 and 4,000 of these flew into Melaleuca, while 500 walked in. The remainder arrived by sea. Private records of plane landings at Melaleuca were kept prior to 1992 by Deny King. Since 1992, public data show total landings have varied between 700 and 1,100 annually, with 60-70% of the annual total during the months January- May. According to the OBP volunteers, 13 planes landed on the busiest day during summer 2001. Of the people arriving by plane on commercial tours (estimated at 2,000- 3,000), the majority are on half-day scenic flights that include a two-hour ground and boat tour of Melaleuca
I can think of parts of central higlands and we(s)t coast that dont get that number :) SatuSuro 05:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
