Talk:Chemical contamination in Australia

Bold merge

Draft:Williamtown chemical contamination was discussed at WP:AWNB in August 2017 and the archived discussion may be seen here. In that discussion it was pointed out that the issues discussed in this article, and supported by the article content itself, extend well beyond Williamtown so "Williamtown chemical contamination" is a misleading name. Content already existed at Firefighting foam#Environmental and health concerns so I have boldly merged the very small amount of content in this article to that one. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: The link to the discussion you supplied is dead. I am disappointed that neither I, as the good-faith creator, or other editors of this article were notified of the discussion. This has been a major health controversy attracting significant, in-depth coverage in reliable sources from several countries. Would not expanding the content and scope of this article be more suitable? It is a shame that noteworthy events from Australia receive such little coverage on Wikipedia in comparison with those in the Northern Hemisphere and that when steps are taken to address that systemic bias editors are actively discouraged. AusLondonder (talk) 06:10, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Having now taken the step to find the presumed discussion I see you were the only editor suggesting this is not suitable for an article. Other editors suggested expanding the scope, which I completely support. AusLondonder (talk) 06:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

The link wasn't dead, it was a very simple typo,[1] and you did know about the discussion, which wasn't just "presumed", because you started it.[2]

The article as it stands is mis-named. As was pointed out at the discussion by other editors, as well as myself, the issue extends well beyond Williamtown so it should have a name that reflects that. In fact, the problem isn't really evident in Williamtown at all, it mainly affects the suburb of Fullerton Cove. The big issue has been the effect on activities in the cove itself so "Williamtown" shouldn't be in the name at all.

you were the only editor suggesting this is not suitable for an article. - I did not say that at all. I said, based on your draft, In fact it's relevant to anywhere in the world that uses/used Aqueous Film Forming Foam. Perhaps it would be better to add this to Firefighting foam#Health concerns, where there is already content. That was a reasonable suggestion based on worldwide effects of PFAS contamination.

Other editors suggested expanding the scope, which I completely support. - Other editors suggested a few things but it appeared that you ignored them all and just moved the draft to article space. Since the discussion finished 8 weeks ago there have been no attempts to fix the article title or expand the article, which is why I merged it.

It is a shame that noteworthy events from Australia receive such little coverage on Wikipedia - To put this whole thing in perspective, the issue isn't as significant in the area as you might think from the media. I am a local resident. I live precisely 9.93km from Fire Section at RAAF Base Williamtown. The RAAF base has been the subject of many complaints over the years. First it was the noise from Salt Ash Air Weapons Range that was upsetting locals, who can be a bit rabid. I had one resident angrily say to me "I don't want the range to move, I want the base to move." He lived virtually right at the end of the runway, and had done so for less than 18 months. It was his choice to buy a home right on a roundabout 670m from the end of the runway of a busy airport but he expected the base, which has been there since 1941, to move. The noise issue eventually just faded away. After SAAWR it was aircraft noise, or rather aircraft noise projections, that got people going. I live 102m NE of the runway centreline so I am directly affected. Several community groups got on the bandwagon and there were certainly people who saw the "problem" as a way to get the RAAF to sound-proof their homes for free. In the end the issue was resolved by better using the existing software that projected noise levels. Another storm in a teacup. Now we have PFAS. Hunter Water, the local water authority, has said that it has locked off certain pumps in the Tomago sandbeds so that water from areas "possibly" affected by PFAS getting into water drawn from the sandbeds which act as a backup water source for the area. The RAAF Base sits right on top of the sandbeds but that is all Hunter Water has needed to do to prevent potential problems. The residents of the area around the RAAF base that are "most affected" by PFAS live on a section of Cabbage Tree Road in Williamtown and in Fullerton Cove. For the Williamtown residents, this means that they cant grow vegetables in their back yards, which most don't anyway. Despite this, one or two houses (it's at least one) have signs on their front fences. There was more of a response when the NSW government wanted to merge Port Stephens and Newcastle councils. The suburb of Fullerton Cove is essentially one road near the cove after which the suburb was named. The residents here suffer the same restrictions as the Williamtown residents. i.e. They can't grow veggies which most don't anyway. The real issue is with fisherman in the cove. They can't catch fish because PFAS levels were high enough to restrict fishing as a precautionary measure. In short, most of what appears in the media is a bit of a beat-up. I don't know how other areas are affected but the point remains, "Williamtown chemical contamination" is a bad name for this article. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)