Wikipedia

Talk:Perth/Archive 4

< Talk:Perth
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Steelkamp in topic Infobox images
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Kings Park: Largest in the World?

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

According to this article, Richmond Park in London is vastly bigger than Kings Park. By a factor of over 2.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richmond_Park — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.99.18 (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

  Fixed, thanks for pointing that out. Evad37 (talk) 01:22, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

page naming

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I know it's been there a too many times already but a new tool from google really puts a new light on the way we decide page names, draw your own conclusions Gnangarra 10:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Is that search comparing all references of Perth to references of Perth Western Australia? another search Hack (talk) 15:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Empty education subsections

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why were these added? Isn't that the point of the see also Education in Western Australia? They were added by a good editor, so I didn't want to just revert them, but they seem incredibly redundant to me... Metao (talk) 01:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, I want to get Perth back to being a GA, and I think there probably needs to be some discussion of these aspects of education, rather than just tertiary. The hatnote link is a part of Wikipedia:Summary style, but the other part is actually summarising the main points of the related article (which at the moment is actually severely lacking in references). It seems like collaboration on a single article is hard to come by nowdays - see the "Lets make Perth a GA again" thread at WT:WA - so I thought the empty section tags might invite some contributions. If you prefer, you can replace the empty sections with {{expand section|primary and secondary education}}. - Evad37 [talk] 01:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Lets make Perth a GA again

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

It would be nice to see this article improved to WP:GA quality... see WT:WA#Lets_make_Perth_a_GA_again - Evad37 (talk) 13:50, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I've unsuccessfully been looking for a citation for the length of Perth, which in the article is from Yanchep to Singleton. An ABC site says A population of 1.65 million residents live along a 125 kilometre coastal stretch from Two Rocks in the north to Singleton in the south. - [[3]] - Would that be OK or is Yanchep to Singleton considered to be the metro area? Hughesdarren (talk) 10:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

(Sorry for the really late reply) Two Rocks is actually the northern extent according to the map ref already in the article, so that site is good and can the info can be used the article. Thanks Hughesdarren! -- Evad37 [talk] 02:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
  Added to article [4] - Evad37 [talk] 02:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Dead url

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The reference 127 is not longer available on the website.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornado2610 (talk • contribs)

This has now been updated with an archived version now available. Hack (talk) 07:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Perth, Australia

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Shouldn't the name of the article be "Perth, Australia"? Simply "Perth" should be reserved for the original town in Scotland. Urs Etan (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

See Talk:Perth_(disambiguation)#Request_for_Comments.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.water-technology.net/projects/perth/
    Triggered by \bwater-technology\.net\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

See also - City of Perth

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm not convinced that City of Perth belongs in See also, even for the benefit of non-Aussies. WP:SEEALSO says "generally ... not" and the article includes the hatnote "... for other uses see Perth (disambiguation)", which includes City of Perth.

Perhaps a hatnote at the top of the Governance section would be better.

For the local government area within Perth metropolitan area, see City of Perth.

Mitch Ames (talk) 02:06, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Locations

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why is Jakarta included as a city located from Perth, yet Brisbane isn't? 121.208.70.104

Probably for the measure to nearby major cities. I don't know why Darwin and Adelaide would be mentioned though and not Brisbane.Smalltime0 (talk) 15:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

It's a list of the closest major cities - Jakarta is closer than Brisbane (by 600 km). John beta (talk) 08:26, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Material in lead section that is not mentioned elsewhere

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The lead section mentions that:

  • "During ... World War II, Fremantle served as a base for submarines ... , and a US Navy Catalina flying boat fleet was based at Matilda Bay."
  • "Perth became known worldwide as the "City of Light" ... John Glenn passed overhead while orbiting the earth ... in 1962. ... [and] in 1998."

These topics are not mentioned again in the article, which is probably contrary to MOS:LEAD's

Apart from trivial basic facts, significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article.

and thus could be grounds for the article failing to meet the criteria of the current proposed GA. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Perth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Perth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Perth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:15, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

add Flag, logo and coat of arms (crest)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

https://www.google.gr/search?q=perth+logo&client=tablet-android-lenovo&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjEtfmt46DMAhXEWiwKHXVQBWQQ_AUIBygB&biw=1024&bih=600#imgdii=3gjS9meESJMi6M%3A%3BIuq6bPGwYsoK_M%3A%3BIuq6bPGwYsoK_M%3A&imgrc=Iuq6bPGwYsoK_M%3A — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4100:8500:F94A:BDB8:BA43:8760 (talk) 22:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Made up demographic figures not supported by the the references cited.

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I had a quick look at the article and noticed some contradiction amongst figures in the demographics section and the religion section, particularly the Jewish figures being some 15,000 different between the two, so I looked up the cited ABS reference [71] and not any of the figures in the article are there at all. Either someone needs to alter all the figures to match the referenced site, or look for the site where they actually got their figures from and change the reference. Some of the migrant stuff is pure conjecture as to reasons and such like and does not have proper citations. For instance it says South Africans came here because of the climate. Can I have an actual citation please to prove this? It says Jews came from eastern europe, yet there are quite famous jews here before WW2 like Harold Solomon, and many historical synagogues from the 1800's built by Jewish migrants from Britain and Melbourne during the goldrush, and yet the article implies that there were none before WW2?? In fact the article implies that there was only Anglo Celtic migration prior to WW2 which is patently false if you have ever visted the Chung Wah Association and took a historical tour of the chinese presence in Northbridge. Those two areas of the article appears to be total POV and not related to any real factual information being cited. Petedavo talk contributions 07:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

ABS census numbers for 2011 are listed in sheet B 14 of the Excel file "Basic Community Profile" linked from [5] - Evad37 [talk] 07:52, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Perth

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article gives the pronunciation of Perth as /ˈpɜːrθ/. While this might be the Scottish or American pronunciation, Australians say /ˈpɜːθ/. I've amended the pronunciation accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.0.15.171 (talk) 06:34, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Definition of Mooro

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Perth § Indigenous history says 

The Noongar people know the area where Perth now stands as Boorloo. Boorloo formed part of Mooro, the tribal lands of Yellagonga's group ...

I've linked Mooro, but the Perth article describes Mooro as a place, whereas the Mooro article define it as a clan. It's probable that the same word is used for both, or possibly the Perth article should refer to Mooro Boodjar rather than Mooro. In any case one or both articles probably needs a minor update (by someone more familiar with the topic than I am) to resolve the discrepancy. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:59, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

"…known worldwide as the 'City of Light'"

Latest comment: 7 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Is this really still the case? I don't think the nickname is even particularly that well known in Perth anymore, let alone the wider world. If you asked your average Perthite "which city is known as the city of light'?", how many of them would know to answer Perth? It's a nice bit of trivia, and I don't object to it being mentioned further down in the article, but it seems weird to give it such prominence – two sentences in the lede, which is more than the foundation of the city gets! Would anyone object to it being move to the History section? ¡Bozzio! 15:47, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I definitely think that it should not be in the lead and I'd go so far as to say that it shouldn't even be in the article. The notability seems questionable. It was a nickname given 55 years ago. If it stays I think its modern notability should be established. I think WP:INDISCRIMINATE comes into play here. Air.light (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Support moving "City of Light" from lead however totally disagree with User:Air.light's statement that it should be deleted from the article altogether. It was a defining event in the City's history - one of the first times that Perth was highlighted in the international press globally. Dan arndt (talk) 01:49, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

A possible better image for use?

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
 
My proposal

This image is a good solution to the debate of what image to use currently. It is recent, shows Elizabeth Quay, while also having good lighting, and showing a fairly wide skyline. Thoughts? WikiWizz123123 (talk) 10:31, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Still prefer the original image, has better colour and composition. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:33, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
The current image is much better even on first glance, so no. If a proposal is featured picture-worthy and nails all criteria then I would probably support change. - HappyWaldo (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

People...let's debate (again)

Latest comment: 7 years ago8 comments7 people in discussion
 
My proposal: Jan 2016
 
Previous: May 2015

Debate and debate wisely. The image I'm proposing is a quite recent (earlier last year), high quality, high res, detailed photo of Perth's skyline showing the latest bridge development. The image Happy Waldo is proposing is older, although the panoramic view is a bonus, it is also clearly inferior quality when you examine it at a higher resolution. It lacks clarity and depth. It also has a slight blur effect. Perhaps it will be easier to let the images do the talking. I'd always favour quality over quality, and I do understand the advantages of the old photo, but I think they are outweighed by the beautiful night time shot. Yes, it's cropped, but it's also clearer. Furthermore, none of the cropped out buildings are even remotely significant to the skyline as far as height goes nor are they immediately recognisable landmarks. Ashton 29 (talk) 10:33, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware there has been no debate until now...and will revert back to the old image until the debate is settled. I prefer the older image as it shows more of the city and is a far better image in terms of colour and composition. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:53, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Agree with Hughesdarren. In the original the buildings sit starkly against the twilight sky with nice reflections on the river, whereas the proposed image is more a smear of dark blue. Also compositionally the original is far more satisfying. - HappyWaldo (talk) 11:21, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I support the May 2015 image as well. The Jan 2016 image is higher resolution, sharper and includes the bridge - all of which I can see when I view the image at my full screen size (1680 pixels wide) - but the image as it appears on the article is at most 300 pixels, so the higher resolution and sharpness are meaningless, and the new bridge is barely visible. The image certainly has its merits, both technical and artistic, but when shrunk to 300 pixels those merits are lost, and the May 2015 image looks better because of its colour and wider view. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:43, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
But it's basically comparable to a thumbnail anyway, and anyone seeking more detail can simply enlarge it. I don't believe that quantity should overrule quality in any case. Ashton 29 (talk) 02:40, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I prefer the older image too. It feels like a better fit to me compared to the newer one, again for the colour and composition. Air.light (talk) 01:47, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I prefer the older image. The new version has severe contrast problems at normal magnification - it only works at fullscreen. Don't sacrifice compositional quality for tech specs.John beta (talk)
I also prefer the older image. Dan arndt (talk) 03:35, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I've used the proposed image in Tourism in Perth as a more updated image of the skyline. Does that suffice? WikiWizz123123 (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Perth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Perth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Famous people

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Following on from these edits to Famous people: [6][7][8] ...
Perhaps we need some more specific guidelines than the current hidden comment only the **most notable**. Any suggestions? Mitch Ames (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

How about insisting on references to credible literature to back up the claim they are famous. There should be plenty of credible literature for famous entities. This should filter a lot. Betterkeks (talk) 13:33, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Twin towns, sister cities

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Having a section for twin towns/sister cities does not seem appropriate for this article. As I wrote in the edit summary when I previously removed the section, such agreements tend to be with an administrative body, i.e City of Perth. There is no such body for Perth as whole. Plus there's no references in the section currently, apart from a broken reference for Guadalajara (which is also broken on that article). - Evad37 [talk] 10:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Climate vandalism

Latest comment: 4 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

222.154.124.247 has been frequently vandalising the climate section. It hasn't gotten too out of hand so far, but if it continues, maybe semi-protecting the page could help? Anoldtreeok (talk) 02:04, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

IP vandal is now blocked. –Moondyne 02:47, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I am not the vandal mentioned, but I wonder how this source fits the current data? Anyone wants to comment? http://www.perth.climatemps.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.165.241.35 (talk) 12:24, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Ever since I was a kid I've noticed the annual rainfall of Perth is quoted in The West and on local TV as >800mm / year but if you look at data from like 2000 onwards it's clear the rainfall is much lower now. How long are we going to pretend that Perth isn't getting drier? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.249.236 (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Governance (again)

Latest comment: 4 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

This section still has nothing about the city's government, nine years after someone pointed this out. No wonder it's not a GA. Richard75 (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Richard75: There are thirty local governments within Perth, as mentioned in both the second and third paragraphs of this section. They each have their own article, and it is not reasonable to have a bunch of details on each of them in this article. - Evad37 [talk] 23:46, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
@Evad37: That's not what I meant. Doesn't Perth have one municipal government for the whole city? Plenty of cities have lots of local governments within them (New York has five boroughs, London has 32), but also one for the whole city. And if Perth doesn't, that would be worth mentioning too. Either way, this article is silent on the subject. Richard75 (talk) 11:35, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
@Richard75: No, there is no single municipal government. Since it seems weird to write about what something doesn't have (and it's a lot harder to find reliable sources for the endless possibilities of what doesn't exist than what does exist), I've added an introductory sentence to the section clarifying that there are just three levels of government. - Evad37 [talk] 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
See Perth (disambiguation)#Australia to see that Perth could refer to a suburb, a local government area, 2 voting districts and 2 statistical areas. Only the City of Perth has its own municipal government. And that's covered in that article. Australia just has federal, state and local governments, nothing more. And none solely apply to the area referred to in this article. The-Pope (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks both. Richard75 (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Longest city

Latest comment: 3 years ago19 comments5 people in discussion

This edit comment says that "The source said Perth is one of the longest cities in the world, the only two longer cities stated in the sources are both in the Northern Hemisphere", but:

  • "one of the longest" is not the same as "3rd longest"
  • So far as I can see, neither reference says that Perth is even "one of the longest" - [9] does not mention Perth at all, and [10] says only that it is 123 km, and less than Sochi.

Perhaps someone could quote the relevant part of the reference that supports even the claim that Perth is the 3rd longest, otherwise I'd be inclined to delete the entire clause "Perth is the longest city in the Southern Hemisphere and third-longest city in the world, trailing only Mexico City (200 km) and Sochi (145 km)". Mitch Ames (talk) 11:40, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

You're right, those sources do not say Perth is the third longest city in the world. I've had a search for reliable sources that say Perth is the third longest city, and couldn't find any. The best we can say in the article is that it is "one of the longest cities in the world." Also, if it is mentioned in the lead, it should be mentioned in the body of the article, which it is not currently. Steelkamp (talk) 13:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
any enterprising well read urban historian of perth might actually check their copy of Weller, Richard (2009), Boomtown 2050 : scenarios for a rapidly growing city (1 ed.), UWA Publishing, ISBN 978-1-921401-21-3 to see whether such a claim is correlated in the body of the earlier text of now over ten years ago... (which does not get mentioned in the 2015 watoday article, but nevertheless addresses the concerns related to the stretch). JarrahTree 12:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Even "one of the longest" is WP:OR or WP:SYN - the source only tells us how long it is, and that it is not the longest.
So I've removed the unsourced material. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
No need to remove. A simple rewording suffices. This is a significant characteristic of Perth and ought to be said. Betterkeks (talk) 04:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
It seems to me like overwhelmingly trivial content. Not important at all. HiLo48 (talk) 05:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
I disagree, which is OK. We don't all have to agree. Betterkeks (talk) 05:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
You need to explain how it's not trivial. HiLo48 (talk) 22:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Saying that it may become become the longest (or second-longest) is crystal-ball gazing. This version is also a bit misleading. The quote "may soon eclipse Sochi" is from an article that says (apparently incorrectly) that it will become the longest, not the second longest. Wikipedia's statement as worded - that Perth may eclipse Sochi as the second longest - is clearly synthesis - combining two references to say something that neither of them says. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
The reason "Perth may soon eclipse Sochi in Russia" is in quotes is because that exact string of words is drawn directly from the cited article by Holland. Yes, Sochi isn’t the longest as he carefully stated as being thought, but that is why Wikipedians have to use their brains and why contributing is an intellectual exercise rather than a purely mechanical one. Betterkeks (talk) 06:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
As for the crystal ball bit: urban sprawl has been a concern since both you and I were in High School, which is a long time ago, and is such a concern that government policies exist to try to slow it. Saying the sprawl will now stop would be crystal balling. Betterkeks (talk) 06:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
quite clear none of the above have read Boomtown or any of the related material. and we are the poorer for having discussions where there is not a sign of having read any of the material available. JarrahTree 12:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@JarrahTree: feel free to update the article with a reference, and/or quote the relevant bits here. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@JarrahTree: It sounds like you have a copy of Boomtown at hand. Does this publication from 2009 suggest Perth may soon grow to exceed 145 km or not? I get Holland is just a (readily available) news article, but is it really not related? Betterkeks (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Note that the assertion is that Perth will grow to exceed Sochi not 145km, and become the 2nd or 3rd (depending on who you believe) longest city in the world. Even if we all agreed that it may exceed 145km, the sentence in the Wikipedia article would still need rewording - we should not assume that Sochi will not also get longer. Mitch Ames (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@Mitch Ames: I get that Mitch. And Holland[1] says the first bit (exceeding Sochi) twice. Hence the quote of the second time he does. Him getting the second bit (the rank, note [2]) wrong, is a wonderful example of why contributing must be an intellectual exercise to be of utility. What is being said on Wikipedia currently IMO is "a meaningful reflection of the sources" (see WP:CALC), the sources being [1] and [2]. If [3] turns out to contradict them, that may change things, depending on how and on who said what when. Betterkeks (talk) 03:10, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
I still assert that "may eclipse Sochi" is speculation by a single source and should be removed per WP:CRYSTAL. However, if concensus is that the material should stay:
I accept your point re WP:CALC, that "may become the 2nd longest" is - in very general terms - "a meaningful reflection of the sources", but as worded "Perth may soon eclipse Sochi in Russia" as the second-longest city in the world it is misleading and misrepresenting the quoted source. The juxtaposition of the quote and the words that follow "Sochi ... as the second-longest city" imply that the quoted source is saying that Perth will become the 2nd longest, which is not the case. This edit should resolve that problem. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Another problem that has just occurred to me - our article says "Perth may soon eclipse Sochi", but is quoting a source from 2015 - six years ago. How soon is "soon"? How long do we wait for "soon" to elapse and the speculation is proven unfounded? Mitch Ames (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Any suggestions as to how to resolve the timeframe issue? (My preference is still to delete the sentence, for the reasons I've stated above.) Mitch Ames (talk) 23:38, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b Holland, Steve (2015-08-08). "Why Perth could soon be the world's longest city". WAtoday. Retrieved 2021-09-27.
  2. ^ a b "Sochi, Russia". Advantour. 2021. Retrieved 2021-09-27.
  3. ^ Weller, Richard (2009). Boomtown 2050: scenarios for a rapidly growing city (1st ed.). UWA Publishing. ISBN 978-1-921401-21-3.

Infobox images

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here are the images that I think should be in the infobox:

  • Perth's skyline – the one currently there is fine.
  • Perth Stadium – Largest stadium in Perth, football and cricket are a large part of Perth's culture. Ideally, we would have an image featuring both Matagarup Bridge and the stadium.
  • Parliament house – Given Perth is the capital of Western Australia, this makes sense to have in the infobox. The one there isn't the best as it does not show the full building, and does have some tree leaves in the foreground. When I took that photo, Parliament Place was closed due to nearby construction. A better photo can be taken that takes in the entire building from end to end.
  • Cottesloe Beach – Perth is known for its good beaches, and Cottesloe is the most notable of those. We could do with a better photo of it though. Currently absent.
  • Yagan Square – That Perth sign is a fitting image.
  • Kings Park – Of course.
  • Elizabeth Quay – Not sure what image in particular though. Currently absent.

We don't strictly need the image of the museum there. Same with the Matagarup Bridge one if that can be incorporated into the stadium image. This leaves us with 7 images, which is a good number. Steelkamp (talk) 14:38, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Perth/Archive_4&oldid=1258074984"