Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 46

Archive 40

←

Archive 44

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

Archive 48

→

Archive 50

Anyone interested in a WikiProject Australia A-Class Review?

Whenever I come by this page, there's always seems to be at least a couple of featured article or list candidates in the Announcements sections at the top of the page (or at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Announcements). Thanks to Grahamec keeping it updated, its easy enough to find out that, apart from myself, some of the recent (2014+) FA nominators of Australia-related articles are Casliber, Melburnian, Hawkeye7, Freikorp, Ian Rose, Nick-D, Ohconfucius, Hamiltonstone, 99of9, Hurricanehink, Jason Rees, WonderBoy1998. Would any of you, or any other editors, be interested in participating in an A-Class Review (ACR) process for WikiProject Australia?

For those of you who aren't aware, A-class is an optional quality rating between GA and FA, assigned after review by multiple editors against the A-class criteria (which are pretty much the same as the FA criteria). ACR processes already exist for WikiProject Highways, WikiProject Military history, and WikiProject Tropical cyclones. A-class reviews help to prepare articles for FAC, and in the experience of the WP:HWY projects, makes it more likely an article will pass FAC (see WP:HWY/ACR#Statistics). Ian Rose recently commented at a village pump thread that: "wearing my other hat as as a FAC coordinator, I wish ACR was more prevalent in WP, not less."[1].

So what do editors here think? Anyone else interested in a WP:AUS ACR? (Like most things on Wikipedia, this would be optional - MilHist articles would probably still just go through that project's ACR, but even so there would probably still be a fair number of articles that could come through an Australian ACR) - Evad37 [talk] 07:24, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd be interested. I don't see a lot of GA/FA articles come through in the areas I specialise in but I'm always happy to review if they do. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:35, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd also be interested. The ACR process has worked really well for the military history project, and should also work well here. Nick-D (talk) 07:40, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Good for broader articles, which are by nature trickier to get through FAC. e.g. states, cities etc. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife, Nick-D, and Casliber:, and others: I've started a draft ACR page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment/A-Class Review (based on WP:HWY/ACR) – additional edits would be welcome. - Evad37 [talk] 09:13, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Tks Evad. Per my comment quoted above, my support in principle can be taken as read. I don't have time to read the draft page right now but a couple of general points come to mind (and perhaps these should be moved to the draft's talk page to avoid undue clutter here): 1) would any uninvolved editor be able to close an ACR, or should there be a group of coordinators (as in MilHist and FAC) who have that responsibility; 2) to make the best use of valuable reviewing resources, I'd suggest seeking consensus at this project for a reciprocal A-Class assessment relationship with MilHist and other projects that have mature ACR processes (I don't think that exists as yet, correct me if I'm wrong), IOW if an article like Stanley Bruce had passed a theoretical MilHist ACR before its successful FAC then it would have been accepted as A-Class on WP:Australia as well (WP:Ships and WP:Aviation have similar relationships with MilHist to avoid duplication of effort). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

What is the expected quality difference between an A-class article and an FA-class article? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC).

The short answer I like to quote is from Grandiose: "ACR is like FAC, but more forgiving"... ;-) For something more official, this project has a section detailing the differences between assessment levels here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:31, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Exactly. In practice, it incorporates all the key elements of FAC, so the difference is mainly about style and MOS. The other difference is that like GA you can nominate as many articles as you like, so it is more available. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd also recommend the Military History project's A-class criteria (available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/A-Class). They were deliberately written to be watered down FA criteria, and have worked really well. Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

• I've done some more editing of the draft ACR page, including adding criteria and FAQ from MilHist.
• I've also set up the neccessary code for the talk page banner – currently at Template:WikiProject Australia/sandbox, can be copied over to the live template when we're good to go.
• I wouldn't be opposed to ACR coordinators, but I'm not sure its necessary – having just uninvolved editors close ACRs works fine at HWY/ACR. Most closes, at least over there, are really just "finishing off the paperwork", and not really contentious or ambiguous. Perhaps we could just have a note that difficult closes should be left to experienced editors?
• Reciprocal A-Class assessment with other projects sounds like a good idea. - Evad37 [talk] 13:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I do have a couple of articles that can be nominated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Evad, re. who can close, that's fine by me, I wouldn't necessarily advocate creating a coord group just for the sake of ACR (at MilHist, closing ACRs is just one their responsibilities). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I got South Australian state election, 2006 to FA status in 2007 but it got delisted earlier this year, as FA standards had changed a lot since 2007, some editors had made some structural changes since then, and overall it wasn't up to where it needed to be. Could this be one for ACR? Timeshift (talk) 21:19, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Timeshift, just taking a quick look at that article, a solid A-Class Review would require everything to clearly be cited to reliable refs, that is all paragraphs to end in a citation, which isn't the case right now. Also from a structural perspective, the lead might be a bit small for an article of that size (less of an issue though). Upshot is that I'd suggest some more work before considering for A-Class myself. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I think what we've got now at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Assessment/A-Class Review is good enough to start off with – this is a wiki, so we can edit and refine further as we go along, if necessary. @Hawkeye7: (and others) you can start nominating now. - Evad37 [talk] 00:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

G'day, sorry I'm late to the discussion. I've been involved in quite a few Milhist ACRs over the past six years and I'd be happy to help out with reviews occasionally here, too. I've watchlisted the review page now. Thanks for setting this up. In regards to a reciprocal Milhist-Aus agreement, I think that would be a good idea, too, so as not to unnecessarily duplicate efforts. I had assumed that this already existed, as I vaguely recall someone mentioning it many years ago (when I just started on Wiki), but I can't see to find the links anymore. Perhaps we could formalise it now? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I have now seen that this has been included in the ACR page under "Reciprocal assessment". Great! Thanks all, AustralianRupert (talk) 20:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

RFC on Melbourne Image Montage

The infobox for Melbourne includes a montage of images. There is a dispute over which image to use of the skyline. You are invited to !vote at Talk: Melbourne. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Sport in Australia

Sport in Australia has received a bit of attention over the last couple of days. Some attention would be appreciated. Hack (talk) 11:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup

Hi there! Wikimedia Australia is organising a meetup on Saturday August 22 at 11am at the SLQ Café in South Brisbane, and we'd love for any Wikipedians living in or near Brisbane or just passing through to come along. A list of people interested in coming, and a discussion space has been created at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/8. Hope to see you there! Kerry (talk) 03:42, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

New South Wales Crime Commission

While updating this page about Mark Standen's appeal over his conviction for "conspiring to import and supply" etc, being dismissed, I looked at the edit history and noticed this series of edits by Publius65 (talk · contribs). They may be perfectly good updates, but a lot was changed and I was wondering if the page was being whitewashed a bit. For example:

"In February 2011, Bradley [Phillip Bradley NSWCC chairman] launched legal action against the Police Integrity Commission (PIC)"

was removed. The editor has edited little outside this page/topic. (13 of 16 edits). Any comments? 220 of ^Borg 06:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Sonny Bill Williams

Sonny Bill Williams was nominated in March by an IP for Good Article status and a reviewer has now left comments for action. Somebody might wish to address these before the nomination is failed.--Grahame (talk) 02:23, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

List of New South Wales railway station codes

Hi, would appreciate a fresh set of eyes on this page. It lacks references and any assertion of notability, and is patently inaccurate. It survived an afd nomination in 2007, with editors involved discussing a merger or finding references for it. Nothing has happened since then, but there's still a feeling among some users it should stay. I'm mystified. I'm still relatively new here: what am I missing? Mqst north (talk) 11:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• Needs to go through a fresh WP:AfD process. JCN217 (talk) 12:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

You keep adding unsourced content. I would be interested to know why. Mqst north (talk) 13:26, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Response at Talk:List of New South Wales railway station codes JCN217 (talk) 14:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Anyway, what I'm looking for here is some perspective from an editor who isn't involved in the public transport space. Clearly this has gotten under my skin, and I need a reality check from someone with some distance. Mqst north (talk) 14:27, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm strongly inclusionist and I don't see an argument for keeping this at all. To the extent these are encyclopedic at all they should be in the station articles. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not "into: public transport and am strongly inclusionist but I am not so bothered by the article. I have no objection to including the station codes in individual station articles (although in my observation of Qld railway station articles we have many that don't yet exist and this may also be true of NSW in which case there is no article to hold the information). But having a list where all the codes may be looked up in one place is very convenient for the reader -- much easier than searching Wikipedia code-by-code to find the individual railway station article. But this could be achieved by merging it into List of NSW TrainLink railway stations as suggested. If I have a problem with the article in question, it is the concern raised about inaccuracy (I have no basis for evaluating that) and the lack of citation (which I can see for myself). But those issues remain whether the information stays in the existing article, merged with another list article, or farmed out into individual artices. But my preference would be to maintain this info in some List article for convenience of lookup. Kerry (talk) 22:27, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Do similar lists exist elsewhere?  Hack (talk) 05:27, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Station code and/or Category:Railway station abbreviations -- saberwyn 11:39, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Good Article Reassessment

Wyangala, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Sydney Metro (2008 proposal)

Sydneysiders among you will remember the previous Sydney Metro proposal of 2008-10, which at the time spawned five separate Wikipedia articles referring to the various aspects of the project. There's an ongoing discussion regarding whether these should be merged into a single article called Sydney Metro (2008 proposal) at Talk:Sydney Metro (2008 proposal). Any thoughts? Mqst north (talk) 16:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission

See Draft:Template:Coastal Townships & Localities of Western Port, Victoria. Cheers, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:03, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks FoCuSandLeArN, I accepted it and put it in a couple of pages. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:09, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Cheers, mate. What about Draft:Harry McVey? FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 00:11, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Artist

Is this artist notable? I can't find extensive coverage about him...Draft:Tim Silver. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 21:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I am not familiar with his work (nor any other contemporary artist), but the article appears to make credible claims to satisfy WP:ARTIST to me - exhibits in several state Art Galleries as well as more specialised venues. I find the article harder to accept - it's dominated by lists copied from the references, not by information about the author and his work itself, which is only two short paragraphs. The "bibliography" looks like it has the potential to contain much more material to expand the article, but it isn't hyperlinked or easily findable online. I suspect this is an example of the areas that Wikipedia is weak in. --Scott Davis ^Talk 07:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Telstra, Australia IP vandalism

I am not sure who to contact here, but could some of you in Australia take look at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Telstra.2C_Australia_IP_vandalism, and possibly contact Telstra? I´m getting rather tired of being threatened with rape or murder, Thanks, Huldra (talk) 20:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

silver bream

Subject of requested move, see Talk:Silver_bream#Requested_move_30_August_2015 (especially for aussies) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Mr. Cruel and Murder of Kylie Maybury

Hi. Could people here add Murder of Kylie Maybury to their watchlist?

There's some uninformed speculation online that Mr. Cruel kidnapped, raped and killed Kylie and i don't want that to infect Kylie's article. I don't think that Mr Cruel did it - Mr Cruel was careful not to leave forensic evidence, and whoever raped and killed her left their sperm, pubic hair and DNA all over Kylie. Paul Austin (talk) 02:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Reg Hailstone

Not sure on the notability here, but I don't know enough about the divisions of Australian localities to figure out if he's just a local politician or not. He did have a road named after him, but that's all that comes up in search. MSJapan (talk) 03:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

G'day, I think Hailstone was only a local civic leader, who unsuccessfully stood for a seat in state parliament (one below Federal). Not sure what that means for notability, though. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

He was a mayor of an obscure rural council who unsuccessfully ran in one state election. I think it passes GNG - one consequence of the development of Trove and the digitisation of old regional newspapers is that many, many former local mayors pass GNG with half an hour's research. Nonetheless, for something that does pass GNG, I think its notability is very borderline. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

he looks notable, President of the Pastures Protect Board(?), involve in the creation of Wyangala NP on top of the politics is more than enough. Gnangarra 10:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

A-Class review for 12th Light Horse Regiment (Australia) needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for 12th Light Horse Regiment (Australia); please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 11:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Ovens and Murray

The Ovens and Murry talk page has been created. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 23:54, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Crime in Australia

The Crime in Australia article is a valid concept to have an article, but the current state of the article seems to suffer from Recentism - over half the article is about things since year 2000, most of that since 2010. It also seems to have a poor sequence of flow, but I can't work out what would be better, probably because of the undue weight. Unfortunately, I think that there would be a very serious amount of research required to create tables and charts to the level of detail since 2010 back to the beginning of white settlement or earlier. Does anyone have any suggestions how to fix or improve the article? --Scott Davis ^Talk 10:55, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Re-title it - Crime in Australia since 2000, giving the option of articles for earlier periods of time perhaps? Notability could be for centuries of crime - 20th and 19th JarrahTree 12:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Murderpedia could be useful! Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 00:08, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Carmichael coal mine

The controversial Carmichael coal mine article has recently been expanded six-fold. It could probably do with a few more eyes. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Workshop Wikipedia:Meetup/WikiD Writing Workshop Melbourne September 2015

Happening in Melbourne at the moment Wikipedia:Meetup/WikiD Writing Workshop Melbourne September 2015 Gnangarra 04:29, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Lolly water

Regarding this question asked on my talk page, Soft drink says that Aussies refer to soft drinks, which are typically carbonated, as "lolly water" or "soda", based on a definition by the Collins dictionary.[2] In my experience "lolly water" has always referred to non-carbonated drinks (Cottees cordials etc) and "soda" as an umbrella term is typically Amerikan. I was wondering what others think. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Anecdotally, I've heard alcoholic cider and "alcopops" referred to as lolly water. References to cordial or soft drinks generally may be geographically based. Hack (talk) 13:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I occasionally use "lolly water" to refer to carbonated soft drinks. I never use "soda" except occasionally in "baking soda", never a drink. I say "cordial" for the Cottee's product in both neat and diluted form. My dialect would be influenced by rural Australian from near Adelaide (south side). --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:41, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Soda is an Americanism that we don't use, except in terms of carbonated water or baking soda. Like, Hack, the only sense I've really heard "lolly water" used is for alcopops. In any case it's not a notable enough piece of slang to go on Wikipedia. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I've removed the suggestion that Australians use "soda" from the soft drink article, I would say pretty confidently that it's never used in that sense here. The article also gave the impression that we only use "lolly water" to refer to soft drinks, so I've re-worded it. In Perth, I would say "soft drink", "fizzy drink", and "cool drink" are pretty much used equally, although I think the last two are both imports (from the UK and South Africa respectively). IgnorantArmies (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

"Fizzy drink" has been in use in NSW for as long as I can remember, it just probably took a long time to reach WA. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

"Soft drink" is the term I'm most familiar with, followed with "fizzy drink", with "soda" a clear Americanism and "lolly water" an occasional derogative term for alcopops. Sydney suburbs bias. -- saberwyn 21:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

"Soft drink" is the standard here in Queensland, "fizzy drink" has a certain connotation of trying to make it sound more classy than it is, while "lolly water" is a common enough derisive nickname (which is also used for alcopops). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:18, 13 September 2015 (UTC).

Soft drinks is the common name here, lollywater is also referred to some low alcohol beers and beers imported from the US the only use of "soda" is in reference to a the specific drink/mixer called Soda Water Gnangarra 09:48, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Health-related articles – UNDA

About 90 Health science students at the University of Notre Dame Australia(UNDA) have been creating content related to Australian health in their sandboxs over the last few days many of the article have started to be moved to main space, please dont bite the editors... If see something new obviously add cats and project tags as appropriate. Most of the articles are significantly better than the average new comer articles example Immigrant Health in Australia so be on the lookout for potential DYK's it be nice to see a few make the main page... If you have any significant issues drop me a note Gnangarra 09:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I've been looking for a notice like this today. I've noticed all of the moves to mainspace of similarly named Australian articles and was wondering if there was a class. So far, things look good. -Niceguyedc ^{Go Huskies!} 09:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

a few more articles;

• Methamphetamine in Australia,
• Men's Health in Australia,
• Heart Disease in Australia,
• Deaf Culture in Australia,
• Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder Australia,
• Dental Care in Adolescent Australians
• Steroid use in Australia
• Cosmetic Surgery within Australia,
• Teenage Pregnancy in Australia
• Mental Health in the Australian Football League

still digging through the logs looking for more Gnangarra 11:51, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

These articles look good - great work to the students and everyone involved in this project. There's a bit of over-use of generic "stock" type images, and I've removed a few: I'd encourage the editors involved to replace these with images directly relevant to the topic (though in fairness the topics here can be tricky to illustrate!) Nick-D (talk) 12:21, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Nice find, it explains these two articles too:

• Depression in the Australian Football League
• Head injuries in the Australian Football League

I'm not convinced that they are all absolutely encyclopedic - just because it would make a good PHD topic or journal article, doesn't mean that it's a suitable encyclopedia article. The-Pope (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I have gone through some of these and tried to help with formatting, copy editing etc. Generally they seem ok, but I have some concerns in relation to BLP issues on the "Steroid use in Australia" article. I have removed the list and image that concerned me, but if anyone has any concerns/thinks that this was unwarranted, I am happy to discuss further. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 14:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Some interesting topics there. Should the Australian-related facts from Heart disease in Australia by merged into the more established Cardiovascular disease and diabetes in Australia? - Shiftchange (talk) 03:33, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

I think it's really good to see this kind of project coming out of universities: Wikipedia often gets a bit weak on these kinds of broad-brush topics, especially on health/science topics and at a national level, and I think these efforts are well-suited to making sure those areas get covered. Some of them need a bit more work to push them into an encyclopedic style but most of these are the kinds of area that are really complementary but gaps that we would really struggle to fill otherwise. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

See Talk:Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder Australia#in Australia? re the scope of this article. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello everyone, Lydia here from the University of Notre Dame. I'd like to thank the community for your input and edits on the students' work. It is absolutely fine to critique (or even delete) the articles - this is part of the student learning process and I am encouraging students to look at how their pages have been edited after submission. This process helps them to understand how publishing works, and gives them a chance to contribute to the world's knowledge, rather than just writing an essay for one person to read. Please share any comments or suggestions about this project with me on my Talk page. Thank you. Ldawe (talk) 03:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

A-class reviews request

Anyone interested in doing a review for our two A-Class candidates at WP:AUS/ACR? (Or another review if you have already done one? – thanks, btw, Anotherclown & User:AustralianRupert.) Pinging original discussion participants @The Drover's Wife, Nick-D, Casliber, Ian Rose, Lankiveil, Hawkeye7, and Timeshift9: - Evad37 [talk] 01:34, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Roads and sports aren't really my area I'm afraid. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Bit tied up. But will see what I can do. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I'll do the roads one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Gave my two cents worth on the Basketball article. Dan arndt (talk) 12:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Assuming no further political turmoil this evening, and nobody else getting to it first, I'll do the requested images review of the basketball article. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:07, 15 September 2015 (UTC).

• Now waiting for an uninvolved user to close the ACR for Australia women's national wheelchair basketball team at the 2012 Summer Paralympics (thanks to everyone who reviewed!). - Evad37 [talk] 03:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Duncan Armstrong

Dirtlawyer asks on my talkpage whether I have access to newspaper archives/bio sources on Australian swimmer Duncan Armstrong, but I don't. Does anyone have advice? Tony (talk) 12:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

If he's in Australia, he can get access to Factiva through the National Library if he joins up with them (is free and you don't need to be in Canberra). He also might have some luck with Wikipedia:Wikipedia Library, as there's a couple there that have some Aus news articles. There's also a bunch of hits for him in Trove - nothing jumps out as terribly easily but someone who cares more might find something there. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:19, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: I'm in the United States; is Factiva access limited to Australia residents? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Access through the National Library of Australia is, but it's a US-based service so hopefully you've got your own domestic libraries with access. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

In terms of free resources, Google Newspapers has The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald up to the late 80 and the Fairfax News Store covers from the late 80s on. Hack (talk) 03:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

"Paperboy" vs. "newsboy" or what else, besides in the U.S.

There's a requested move discussion at Talk:Paperboy#Requested move (September 2015) where other-than-U.S. perspective would be welcome. It seems important to determine whether "paperboy" always means a boy (or girl) who delivers newspapers to home subscribers (as currently asserted in Paperboy (newspaper delivery) article. And whether "newsboy" (also known as "newspaper hawker") always means a boy (or girl) who sells newspapers to non-subscribers at a street corner or on a train or the like. It seems there are no longer any newsboys in the United States (and maybe not in the U.K.). If you can bring a non-U.S. perspective, your participation at the requested move and/or your commenting here be greatly appreciated.

Do boys (or girls) sell newspapers on the street in Australia or any other countries that you know about? And what are or were they called? And what are newspaper delivery-persons called? (I have made a similar request at wt:WikiProject India.) --doncram 22:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Anyone know of Australian movie(s) featuring paperboy(s)? To add to Paperboy (newspaper delivery)#In media perhaps. There was some 1970s or 1980s quirky Australian (?) movie about an unaccomplished thirty-something(?) son, still living with his parents, that ends with delivery vehicles streaming out of a news-plant to deliver newspapers by means of a mechanical newspaper-thrower that he invented and which represents his coming of age, or something. I dimly recall it, and googled but can't find it. :) --doncram 23:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

@Doncram: There are people that sell newspapers on the streets, at least in Brisbane. I don't know that there is a local word for them at all, and they tend to be older gentlemen in my experience rather than kids barking "extra extra, read all about it!". There are also street vendors that sell The Big Issue, which is sort of the same thing. On the other hand, kids with paper runs are usually still known as "paperboys". There is a surprising amount of dialectical variation between various parts of Australia though, so the above might not be accurate outside of my experience in Southeast Queensland. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:08, 9 September 2015 (UTC).

In Perth, Western Australia - in the 1960s and probably the 1970s, there were paperboys who sold the afternoon daily news on street corners in the CBD, usually after school and for office workers on their way to trains and buses... never heard of newsboys in perth... for those who love numbers and hits the simple use of the two words paper and boys is the highest number I have ever managed on a trove search [3] JarrahTree 14:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Doncram, that sounds like Malcolm (film). Starring Colin Friels, robs a bank with a getaway car that breaks in half lengthwise to become 2 motorcycle like vehicles? 220 of ^Borg 06:50, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Australia Post

I have updated this page with recent financial information as the figures in the info-box were 2 years old. I also added content, like their recently announced (though expected) first loss in 30 years, to the previously single sentence lead. As 'I Am Not An Accountant' (WP:IANAA), it might be good for someone to check my figures, which I sourced from an ABC article, not Oz Posts' annual report.

• Second issue, on the talk page at Talk:Australia Post#Merge from Postal service in Australia, there is an ≈21 month old proposed merger to Oz Post of Postal service in Australia, which page is also unsourced. I think this merger should be done, or the page simply redirected. Any interested parties please comment there. 220 of ^Borg 10:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Hobart coastal defences

G'day all, I have opened a Good Article re-assessment of the Hobart coastal defences article as I am concerned about its referencing standards. The reassessment page can be found here: Talk:Hobart coastal defences/GA1. Unfortunately, I think its original editor is no longer active, so I am hoping that maybe someone here might have access to relevant sources. I am keen to see the article retain its status, so I will leave the review open until next weekend to see if anyone is in a position to address my concerns. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:29, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

ANZAC War Memorial

Someone has been changing "ANZAC" to "Anzac" and did a cut and paste move to "Anzac" (since reverted). See talk:ANZAC War Memorial and the request for text reversion to ANZAC -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 02:58, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Toodyaypedia

Toodyaypedia project is looking for some help of experienced editors. We were recently granted draft copies under a cc-by-sa license by Robyn Taylor of work she is collating for a future book. I have been copying these drafts in to project space where they can be copy editted and wikified into articles each article has both inline citations and references see Wikipedia:WikiTown/Toodyaypedia/stage II worksheet/Charles Soong Yocklunn as an example and Wikipedia:WikiTown/Toodyaypedia/stage II worksheet for the full list. Our aim is to get these into main space as soon as possible so we can produce QRcodes which will then be used to make plaques in Toodyay building on what already exists around the town and through its two museums. I'm currently working on Annie Stack as it overlaps with another WMAU project also happening in WA. Thanks Gnangarra 03:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Drinking fountains

Hi all. In my explorations around Wikimedia Commons I found the following photographs of cast iron drinking fountains. Despite their varying geographic locations, all three fountains look exactly the same.

• 
  Port Adelaide
• 
  Hay
• 
  Darlinghurst

Does anyone here have any idea as to their provenance? Do they commemorate something in particular? Many thanks in advance, Mattinbgn (talk) 06:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

There are two in Melbourne as well (in North Melbourne and Williamstown). I believe they were cast at the Saracen Foundry in Glasgow, Scotland and designed by Walter MacFarlane. --Canley (talk) 06:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Here is an article about these fountains from the City of Sydney Water Exhibition: Cast Iron Canopy Drinking Fountains. And a bit about one of the Melbourne ones. --Canley (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! That didn't take long at all. I would assume that Commons:Category:Queen Victoria Diamond Jubilee fountain, Launceston would have cast at the same foundry. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 07:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep - File:March-Cambridgeshire-9.jpg is the same basic design as File:LauncestonCityParkFountain.jpg. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 07:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Yep, one of these: The Glasgow Story: Macfarlane's Castings. Looks like the Number 8s would have been sold widely throughout the British Empire. I will take some photos of the Melbourne ones. Could probably do with it's own Commons category and some text for MacFarlane fountains given the number of them and now we know the origin of them? --Canley (talk) 07:59, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

The Walking Melbourne forum has some good information too. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:24, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Parramatta shooting

On the article 2015 Parramatta shooting two users insist on including an opinion piece self-published by the World Socialist Web Site - which I argue it should not be included:

• It is self published by a political advocacy group, the International Committee of the Fourth International.
• Editors on RSN are generally against the site being used as a news source
• Cherry picking only one opinion source, while other reactions from officials are picked up in reliable, secondary, mainstream, independent sources (eg Sydney Morning Herald) violates WP:DUE. It would be a bad idea to have self-published blog articles by Andrew Bolt referenced on every single Australian political article - similarly, self-published political blog articles by other political groups shouldn't be pushed by activist editors.

There's other issues in this particular article:

• The article falsely asserts that Jabar was shot by plain clothes detectives - he was shot by special constables tasked with protecting the NSW police - video of this is available. The opinion piece asserts that police should have used "non-lethal attempts" to stop a man who had just murdered a police officer and armed with a weapon and attempting to shoot at the special constables. I would argue that undue weight applies to this article in particular, due to its factual issues in the first paragraph.

If you had to have an opinion piece, perhaps Charles Waterstreet in the SMH or Mike Seccombe in the Saturday Paper would be acceptable non-self published opinion pieces. -- Callinus (talk) 22:00, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I recall 'fixing' that erroneous information myself, at the related entry on the Terrorism in Australia page I think. I even went to the WS website and pointed out the error. 220 of ^Borg 07:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@220 of Borg: can you make that point on the talk page? IP user is edit warring and asserting consensus based on them and one friend (possibly canvassed). Or revert the inclusion of that. -- Callinus (talk) 09:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done @Callinus:. My comment is still on the WSWS site, after being moderated (a little surprised at that) so apparently someone there has read it, but the text is still not corrected. 220 of ^Borg 10:32, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

In the news again

A fairly accurate, non-sensationalist article today on vanity articles. Might pay to keep an eye on Deidre Anderson and Draft:Deidre Anderson though. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/think-twice-before-you-go-after-encyclopaedic-stardom-like-these-wikipedia-rejects/story-fnkgbb3b-1227559357136 The-Pope (talk) 10:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I wrote a stub at Deidre Anderson. The response she got to the Draft wasn't very constructive, sadly. Fences&Windows 21:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Is an article worthwhile, and what to call it?

Does anyone else think Wikipedia should have an article about the deaths of Karlie Jade Pearce-Stevenson and Khandalyce Kiara Pearce? I have started to draft an article at user:ScottDavis/sandbox3, but I don't know what to call it. I also asked at WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography but no answers yet. --Scott Davis ^Talk 01:27, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Deaths of Karlie Pearce-Stevenson and Khandalyce Pearce or some variation thereof? Hack (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Moved there now - thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 03:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Article for Apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples

Hi all, I've proposed a split of the Stolen Generations article to create a new article solely for KRudd's speech of apology. Your thoughts and help are appreciated. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 03:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Gino and Mark Stocco

An editor who has made some good faith changes to the article has alerted me to the creation of Gino and Mark Stocco, which seems to violate WP:NOTNEWS. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Their crimes are, however notable. The article should stay. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 05:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

The general amnesia in the australian project seems to be acceptable over time, but we do need to be reminded that we have a crime sub project under the umbrells of the Australian.

The article does have the smell of current news - both in style and subject, if the crimes are notable, they need to have more refs to cover that, afd hounds will no doubt have their day anyway with this once they sense it exists.

even less than a minute of this post whatsmore. The crimes need to be better referenced to survive the afd issue...JarrahTree 05:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Catmando999: According to a NSW Police press release, the crimes are only alleged at this time,[4] and the article doesn't actually explain what the alleged offences are, so that's not justification for retention of an article that is really just about the present manhunt. Right now the article is just a news report. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:41, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@AussieLegend:There are plenty of sources. It's all over the news! But in some way, you are right. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Created new article on book - Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand

I've created a new article on the book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand.

Input and suggestions for additional secondary sources would be appreciated on the article's talk page, at Talk:Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 06:01, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission

See Draft:Private Timber Reserves. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 14:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Just in case you hadnt noticed

Wikipedia has now passed the 5 million articles mark.

As only the Australian project can show, it was australian editor User:Casliber who was the relevant editor in the right time and place for the 5 millionth article.

A consistent new article editor, Cas has been working hard at it for years now, and should be an inspiration to us all. Well done Cas!! JarrahTree 01:12, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

 Like Jenks24 (talk) 09:17, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Let's go Cas, let's go! (Clap, clap) Let's go Cas Let's go! (Repeat 5,000,000 times) Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 09:35, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thx guys :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:30, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Unsourced article

At the risk of sounding foolish, can anyone here actually verify that List of Australian states and territories by Human Development Index is actually based on true, genuine information? I've never heard of Australia ranking its states by HDI and a search online returns absolutely no results (except for mirror sites and sites citing the article itself). Additionally, the numbers themselves are also suspect: 0.981 and 0.970 are unrealistically high numbers (our HDI is actually 0.933) and it's also strange that Western Australia tops the list, ahead of states like New South Wales and Victoria.

It'll be great if someone could verify this, because at best it's unsourced information, but at worst a potential hoax... Satellizer (´ ･ ω ･ `) 07:58, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

clearly nonsense; popped a deletion request here Epistemos (talk) 10:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Assistance with evaluating the review outcome of new articles on Australian artists and creative after Art + Feminism editathon

Hi Wikiproject Australia - we held an official meet up 31st October of the global Art+ Feminism Wikipedia editing group in Melbourne intended to increase the presence of Australian women artists on Wikipedia

however some of the articles that were produced by first time writers have now been patrolled and received substantially negative reviews, from people not working in the arts and also not directly involved with Australian culture

the article on Ponch Hawkes a major Australian photographer is scheduled for deletion, we have now put in some references but even before that the subject had had shows at some of Australia's most prestigious galleries, had published books, her works are owned by major galleries, these are all measures of notability within the Australian artworld, that do not seem to have registered on the patroller. There are some references to 3rd party verifiable sources here as well

the article on Ilka White also has been patrolled and has also had some negative feedback - we can not understand the comments " The neutrality of this article is disputed. (October 2015) A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (October 2015)

there is no close connection between the writer (who is not myself) and the subject, or in fact between the subject and any of the participants in the edit a thon there are a number of 3rd party based measures of significance including the artist being included in the invitation-only Tamworth Textile Triennale which is at the top of the tree within recognition for textile artists, and an article from the Sydney Morning Herald. She is also member of Craft Victoria - a peak body for people working in the crafts

Anne Marsh (professor) is marked as being reliant upon one source but it actually reference's two sources and lists a couple of key publications, it is rightly identified as a stub, but does not have as many issues as inferred here - the subject has notability within a global art theory and feminism and photography context

Hope this is the right way to go about asking for other opinions beyond the reviewers

interested to hear your comments/suggestions here or on my talk page Bebe Jumeau (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry that you are having issues, and this page is one of the right ways to get opinions. However, any "official" meet up or editathon that allows unreferenced BLPs to be published is simply not acceptable. The first slide shown to participants of any of these "fill in the gaps and address the bias" events has to be that every subject must have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. That means not just from their employer/publisher/agent/curator. Not just a brief mention. Not just having published/displayed things. A list of exhibitions (none of which are linked to anything), don't prove to non-art people if they are prestigious selections, or artist-paid displays, or local community group galleries. Prove that she has "notability within a global art theory and feminism and photography context" by listing the documents/articles/books/awards that display that notability. We don't know these people or you or the author, and sorry, but we can't just take you at your word. They don't have to be online, just reliable sources.

Yes, the accusations of COI appear to be unfounded, but if a note was placed on the talk page that it was part of an editathon, with a "leader" to contact if there are any issues, it may explain why these borderline notable people are being writen about. That sort of "editathon product" informative note should be standard practice. The neutrality comment is in regards to unencylopedic phrases like "Direct engagement with the natural world (and the forces at work therein) is central to Ilka’s making process" and "Torn between choosing art or drama". This isn't a place for flowery language and commentary. It isn't a newspaper article, it isn't a PR blurb.

How many more of these editathons must end in a pile of PRODs and AFDs, until we start doing them correctly? I know you all mean well, but there isn't a single experienced editor listed at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne/ArtAndFeminism October 31, 2015. Where was WMAU? Where was an experienced content creator as a guide? The-Pope (talk) 14:40, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

We were registered with the Art+feminism group which is based out of the US which has had a number of meetings over the past 2 years with 2 others in Australia - one of our authors has attended Art+Feminism meet ups in Canada - the point is to get new and different people writing and also to up the female content and editors a 90/10 % gender imbalance does not sound like a healthy practice to me - and increase fine art - as opposed to popular culture, media and sport - the flowery words you spoke of came from Craft Victoria's online list of accredited craftworkers -this is a refereed list selected by the peak body for hand made and designed objects in Australia - also both of these women have exhibited at publicly curated galleries where again the program are subject to stringent reviews and quality assessment, these are not hired spaces - With Anne Marsh the ARC grants are the most prestigious awards in the Australian academic system and they are highly competitive in the humanities with only one in six being successful - so these people are only borderline notable to those who are not versed in the arts — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bebe Jumeau (talk • contribs) 15:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC) Bebe Jumeau (talk) 16:01, 1 November 2015 (UTC) 2 indents "::" added 220 of ^Borg 09:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

@Bebe Jumeau: I did this to Anne Marsh (professor). I added ISBNs to the references I 'created' for the books she has written. They are on Google Books, btw. 220 of ^Borg 09:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Most of us aren't "versed in the arts", so things do need to be explained, linked or preferably referenced. And just to clarify, I wasn't challenging any article's existence or the person's notability, just giving likely reasons why those who have challenged did so. This isn't the forum to justify them - that should be done in the article or the AFD if it comes to that. I am very much for people addressing the bias that exists here - but including suitable references that verify each subject's notability is just not a negotiable item. And notability and referencing here isn't the same as what lots of academics/artists think/know from elsewhere. Having fresh eyes and eager new brains is great, but there always should be an experienced content creator involved to guide, teach and help the newbies to avoid the pitfalls. The-Pope (talk) 12:57, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Janet Steinbeck vs. Janette Steinbeck

Hiya. I have run into conflicting sources for the correct spelling of Australian swimmer Janet Steinbeck's name. I would be grateful for any assistance anyone can provide, based on your Australian references, newspaper archives, and/or birth records, in order to get a WP:COMMONNAME determination for her. I'm pretty sure she also used the nickname "Jenny," but I've got conflicting sources regarding her nickname and her full name. Jenks24 and I have been discussing this over the last several days, and we have not been able to come to any definitive conclusions. For those interested, you can review the previous thread on Jenks' user talk page. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Are you sure the're the same person? Just use "Janet". Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 00:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

To add to the confusion, she also uses a married name: Jenny Murray (AOC). --Canley (talk) 00:58, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Australian Sports Medal citation says "Janet Murray". --Canley (talk) 01:01, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Catmando999: Part of the confusion arises from her Olympic athlete profile at Sports-Reference.com; SR lists her first name as "Janette". SR uses International Olympic Committee (IOC) athlete records as their primary source; the IOC's source would have been the Australian Olympic Committee. Obviously someone made a mistake, one way or the other, with the spelling of her first name.

@Canley: Murray was her married name, so that much is consistent. I assume the Australian honours list is usually pretty reliable as to the spelling of honours recipients' name, right? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:09, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

1968 Canberra Times article calls her "Janet Steinbeck". The AOC link above says "Jenny Murray (Steinbeck)" on the page, but the URL says "janet-murray". --Canley (talk) 01:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The "Janette" spelling is starting to smell like an outlier. If so, the question becomes whether we use her given name Janet or nickname Jenny for the article title per WP:COMMONNAME? I think it's pretty clear that she was better known under her maiden surname than her married surname, as she was widely known and competed under maiden name. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:05, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Based on the above, just use the name most used in the sources you have. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 03:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

On the honours list accuracy, "It's an Honour" is not always accurate. I've noticed a few discrepancies when compared to London Gazette entries. Hack (talk) 13:17, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

The IOC lists her as "Janet Steinbeck" in its medalist database: [5]. The AOC implicitly acknowledges "Janet" in the webpage URL, even as it uses her "Jenny" nickname on the page (see above). I see no strong preference for the nickname (Jenny) over her given name (Janet) in my searches of Google News Archive and Newspapers.com, so I'm going to leave the article title at "Janet Steinbeck" per WP:COMMONNAME, and include her nickname and married name in the article. Given that there are some conflicting sources for the spelling of her given name (Janet vs. Janette), I will also include an explanatory footnote on point, with appropriate redirects. Does that sound reasonable to everyone? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Jenks24 (talk) 00:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: Yes. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 19:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Logo

I see that the logo for this project on it's template is just an Australian flag. Ths US template logo is really cool. Ours should be more like that. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 21:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Americans do tend to go overboard though. Sometimes, less is more. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:42, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

That is true. But ours dose not convey a lot. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 05:47, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

The words WikiProject Australia in bold in the template, right next to the flag, convey just as much as those same words would if they were duplicated in a logo - more so in fact, because they are a clickable link that will convey you to the project page. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

If we change, I would like a kangaroo. Hack (talk) 02:19, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hack: Good idea! A green kangaroo on a yellow background. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 03:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I say if someone reckons they can do better than what we've got, they should present it here for appraisal. What we've got is effective, if a little dull. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:29, 21 October 2015 (UTC).

These two aren't perfect but there sort of what I was aiming for:

• File:Possible Australia WikiProject image.png
• File:Green Kangaroo on yellow background.png

Like I said, there not perfect and definitely not good enough to replace the current one. They are the sort of thing I would like. Though the coat of arms would also be good! Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 05:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

The Australian coat of arms is probably less recognisable to most of the world (and probably most of Australia) than the flag. Also it's way too detailed to fit into a small logo. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:49, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I was thinking something minimalist like this - . I'm okay either way. Hack (talk) 13:03, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@Hack: This is excellent. It's far better than mine! We should use that one. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 21:45, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Anyone got anymore suggestions and/or comments? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 03:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I suggest that the "logo" is fine and should stay as it is. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mitch Ames: Why? Anyone else got anymore suggestions and/or comments? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 01:17, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Any? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 05:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't really see what you're trying to achieve. The US logo is a map of the US with its flag overlaid and the words "WIKI PROJECT UNITED STATES". Of those three components, the wording is entirely redundant as it is clear from the text in the banner that the logo is for "WikiProject United States". Only the flag or the map is required for identification purposes. Of those two, the flag is probably the more recognisable so that's really all that is needed in a logo. As I said, less is more, and I don't see the need to change what we have. Time being wasted on this is really better spent fixing up articles that need improvement. For a start, there are still 26 articles in Category:Australian place articles using missing parameters that need state codes added to their infoboxes and another 200 that need cleanup and removal of deprecated parameters. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Let us quickly move on from this to other more pressing matters. No change is needed. The current image is best. - Shiftchange (talk) 06:58, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that we need to be so dismissive of Catmando999's comments. I for one agree that the logo for this project is relatively unispiring, whilst it doesn't have to be 'over the top' like the US, there are plenty of other examples such as:

• ENGLAND :
• CANADA :
• JAPAN :
• SOUTH AFRICA :
• SOUTH KOREA :
• RUSSIA :

For those editors who don't want to discuss the issue, that's fine but like the debate on the Australian flag don't expect it to go away. Dan arndt (talk) 08:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Dan arndt:He's right you know. Time for reform is now. First things first, we need to pick an image. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 08:23, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Wouldn't you need to achieve a consensus on whether a change is needed first? Its only a suggestion atm. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Taking a leaf out of the federal government's approach - its better to put up a range of alternative options and put it to a vote rather, including an option of no change. Otherwise this could get drawn out longer than necessary. Dan arndt (talk) 09:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

That is true. I was wondering, where should we put this vote to the masses, here or at RfC (or maybe something similar)? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 10:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

The logo doesn't need to be inspiring, it's just part of a banner used to identify the project. It's not there to convince other editors to move here so they can edit Australian articles, or to demonstrate how great the fansite is. This is an encyclopaedia, not a fansite. Do we really need to waste time on this when we could be doing something productive? --AussieLegend (✉) 13:58, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: I don't think you have seen the above. Why shouldn't we have an image like that? If I went and changed it right now would you care? Would you be upset? Of course, I wouldn't do that right now. I understand Wikipedia is not a fansite, it's just not fair that ours is a flag. Look at:

it doesn't even have Japan's flag in it! Well it does have the red sun in it. But does that mean we can just have the commonwealth star? No, of course not! and as for "It's not there to convince other editors to move here", that is not what I'm trying to accomplish. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I can see, so I haven't missed the above but, please, let me comment on the images presented so far for your benefit.

Image No.	Image	Comments
1		Text is redundant for reasons already explained. delta Cru, the rightmost star in the Southern Cross, is missing. The Southern Cross is an Australian icon, so it shouldn't be missing parts. Similarly, the bottom points on the Federation Star are missing. That Americans may leave bits off their flag is not justification for us to do the same. We're not America. Americans also represent their flag backwards - we don't.
2		I don't understand the light yellow triangle at the top of the image.
3		If you're going to use Skippy to represent Australia then you should at least use an Australian skippy, not a French one.
4		This is just the flag of England with redundant text added. (Well, just a cross is a bit boring but the Union Jack wouldn't be the same without it.)
5		This is essentially a cropped version of the Canadian flag with some redundant text. No extra flash, in fact they've taken some away. Personally, I'd have preferred the whole flag and no redundant text.
6		it doesn't even have Japan's flag in it! - Seriously? Have you ever looked at the flag of Japan? It's just the sun on a white background. The sun is right there in the logo for WikiProject Japar (look closely), rising behind Mt Fuji. And, of course, there is the redundant text. Oh, if you're wondering what the stars are, they're the Subaru logo.
7		I don't know why the South Africans chose to hack the crap out of their flag. Personally I've always found it to be one of the more visually appealing flags. If only they'd left off that redundant text.
8		Another hacked flag, but at least they left out the text.
9		When you've only got the colours of the Newcastle Knights to work with, I suppose you have to do something else but do we really need to be made that aware that it's RUSSIA.

File:Fostersbeer.jpg

Really, I don't find most of these creative, or even inspiring, at all. In fact they're pretty repetitive. The Japanese one is slightly better but even they couldn't fit in the whole country name. What's the Australian equivalent? If you're really keen on changing the image, my vote is for the image to the right. It's got the Southern Cross on it, the whole world thinks we all drink it, and we get to silently take the piss out of the rest of the planet for thinking that, which seems pretty Australian to me. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Wow. Witty and brutal. Very Australian. Well, apart from South Africa's, you've managed to "explain away" all of them. I won't be cowed, however. I keep working and looking for something better. And, I saw the sun on Japan's, I think I mentioned that. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 08:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I feel like conceding. I'm starting to see no reason to continue this campaign with no support. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 09:39, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Don't be discouraged - some people are just afraid of change, which is evident from the fact that Aussie Legend appears to be a Fosters fan. I believe that we should look at an alternative logo, just like we should look at an alternative national flag. Dan arndt (talk) 09:58, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

YES! WE CAN DO THIS. Put Dan, please can you design a logo this time, my creative genius has been hit by a train and is intensive care. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 10:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Aussie Legend appears to be a Fosters fan. - The Foster's bottle works. Clearly Dan arndt is one of those foreigners who believes that an Australian would like Foster's. We have a winner.

just like we should look at an alternative national flag. - Looking doesn't mean we have to change, especially when there is no need. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

It feels like this argument will grind to a standstill soon. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 10:32, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Seriously if this is the type of argument Clearly Dan arndt is one of those foreigners who believes that an Australian would like Foster's. We have a winner. that AussieLegend wants to use because there are individuals who have a different point of view to his own then it speaks volumes of his personality. I would prefer that all editors have the opportunity to freely express their opinion without being bullied and denigrated just because they might disagree with AussieLegend. Dan arndt (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Seriously, I thought you were joking when you said Aussie Legend appears to be a Fosters fan and was responding in kind. I didn't think anyone, even a foreigner, would actually believe that I liked Fosters or would actually want to use the Foster's image, especially after I made a point of saying It's got the Southern Cross on it, the whole world thinks we all drink it, and we get to silently take the piss out of the rest of the planet for thinking that. My mistake for I forgetting that the Australian sense of humour is lost on some people. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

And what makes you assume that I'm a foreigner? Even if I was why would that make a difference. Dan arndt (talk) 12:19, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Sigh... I said, the whole world thinks we all drink it, and we get to silently take the piss out of the rest of the planet for thinking that, to which you replied Aussie Legend appears to be a Fosters fan. Therefore, that you think that I, an Australian, am a Foster's fan, which only a foreigner would think of any Australian, is an indication that you must be a foreigner. It was a joke FFS. Catmando999 got it. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is true I got it, but isn't all this slightly off topic? And Dan, no one drinks Fosters. That's a known fact. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Hiw about we take this to RfC. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:46, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Issues such as this are best left to individual projects. An RfC is an invitation to any Wikipedian to comntribute. What would happen if the discussion was visited by members of the US project and they all said that we should use the US logo? (That's extreme, but I've seen stranger things happen) In any case, what would the RfC question be? --AussieLegend (✉) 08:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay then. We won't take this before RfC. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

• Change This is my "offical" vote for changing. (see my above comments). Anyone with me? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 04:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

• Leave the logo as it is. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

• Change time to at least look at the alternatives. Dan arndt (talk) 08:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

• Leave as is, we don't need to change anything. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Anyone else's? Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 21:50, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, it's 2-2. @Hack: or anyone who commented on this earlier should vote. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 19:42, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

If this is archived, I'll simply revive the conversation. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 07:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Fine. I do not think there is any need to change anything. Effort would be/could have been better spent on improving articlespace for the benefit of readers and editors, instead of weeks of drawn-out discussion on changing a picture that few would ever see anyway. -- saberwyn 12:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@Catmando999: If the discussion is archived, which is an automated process, it means that nobody is interested in continuing the discussion. Posting every few days in the hope that somebody will respond is pointless. It just serves to annoy people. Threatening to restore an archived discussion, apparently until more people get involved, seems a little petulant. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:00, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: Okay, fine. Evidently I am the last patriot and I give up trying to fix a non-issue like this. Can everyone stop posting here so this discussion may R.I.P at last. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 20:24, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Opinions sought on capitalisation of "deaf" in "deaf community"

Opinions sought at Talk:Auslan#Deaf or deaf? on whether "deaf" is a proper noun in the context of "deaf community". Mitch Ames (talk) 11:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Lowercase. It's an adjective describing the community based on the evidence. Anyway adjectives aren't usually bumped up to proper nouns. Catmando999 Check out his talk page! 21:17, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

There are deaf people who consider themselves to be a distinct community/culture; they self-identify as Deaf rather than deaf. I think if you want to respect them, you use Deaf in the same way as we would with Islamic, Rabbitohs, etc. Kerry (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

But of course not every deaf person thinks that way and therefore the precise context needs to determine whether deaf or Deaf is the correct form. But certainly I would understand there was a difference between saying "Fred is Deaf" vs"Fred is deaf".Kerry (talk) 22:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd interpret "Fred is Deaf" to mean that "Fred is involved with Deaf culture", and "Fred is deaf" to mean "Fred can't hear". But I suspect such distinctions may be lost on many casual readers. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 23:13, 12 November 2015 (UTC).

I agree that casual readers may not appreciate the difference (worth adding a link on first use to assist the casual reader) but that is true of many things on many topics! I presume some of the editors in this dispute do understand the difference and are probably feeling somewhat irritated/offended by the well-intended commentary by those who don't. Kerry (talk) 00:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I understand from a MOS point of view it should be lowercase, however I would ask editors to be considerate of the reason why deaf and Deaf exist. deaf refers to ability/inability, Deaf refers to acceptance of Deaf culture which includes their language and more. I never understood this until I worked with the Deaf community and the Deafblind community. Flat Out (talk) 01:48, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I hope this isn't a red herring, but I got into a lot of hot water over a similar with the US Blind community. It still feels wrong to me when I type that, but in the end their consensus was to capitalize anything related to the community of people who can't see, and only use lower case when describing one individual's impairment (and it's nothing to do with people who make window furnishings). Nevertheless, it seems sensible to adopt consistent approaches for "deaf" and "blind".--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:57, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Ironically, if I saw "US Blind" I would have thought that it did refer to a company making venetians. Just because a group decides to capitalise something, or make up words, doesn't mean that Wikipedia does. The military exclusively capitalises ANZAC, but there has been a lot of discussion over the use of ANZAC vs Anzac and we have decided to use both depending on context. Even if an organisation decided to call itself "DeafBlind Auztralia" doesn't mean that we would do in an article about the organisation. That is covered in WP:OFFICIAL. In Australia people still use "mts." and "lts." as abbreviations for metres and litres but that is clearly incorrect and we don't use them. Similarly, just because some people decide to capitalise "deaf" doesn't mean they're correct in doing so. People with a vested interest in something often want that something to stand out, and capitalising a word is a simple way of doing that. We can't base the way we do things on the actions of a group with clearly non-NPOV opinions. What we can do is take guidance from authoritative sites like http://www.auslan.org.au/ which does not capitalise deaf. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think the question is (or should be) whether "Deaf" is a proper noun in that context, not whether "other people capitalise it". It's an important distinction; Wikipedia capitalise words because they are proper nouns, not because other people capitalise them. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

By the way, I appreciate all the comments, but I wish editors has responded at Talk:Auslan#Deaf or deaf? as I had requested, so the the discussion was all in one place instead of three (here, Talk:Auslan#Deaf or deaf?, and WT:Manual of Style/Capital letters#"Deaf" or "deaf"? Mitch Ames (talk) 11:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Before I create it: Murray Town, South Australia or Murraytown, South Australia?

Sorry this is a bit of a trivial matter but I have a penchant for wanting to populate articles on the smaller less loved localities of South Australia. Before I create Murray Town, South Australia or Murraytown, South Australia can I have a quick show of hands from your quick research on the matter as to which should be the article and which should be the redirect? The former appears to be the gazetted name (and is used in at least one ABC article) and the latter appears to be the spelling used by locals. Thank you so much. Donama (talk) 00:02, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I would definitely use the gazetted name "Murray Town" as the article title, but set up a redirect. If you have a source that it is spelt as one word locally include that as well. --Canley (talk) 00:06, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I see the local school is gazetted as "Murraytown Rural School". --Canley (talk) 00:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Bounded localities have one name only, and Australia Post get them right, so no show of hands needed [[6]]. Sometimes a bit of historical hangover, perhaps affecting the school. Epistemos (talk) 09:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay, no problems. Murray Town it is. Can someone program a bot to change all the existing links for Murraytown, South Australia to the correct one? Donama (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The resource I use for SA place names, which includes nearby ones, is the "Property Location Browser" which includes the SA Gazetteer. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be a RESTful interface, so the references have to include the ID and leave anyone seeking to verify info having to redo the search. The IDs are the same as the Australian gazetteer, but the SA one often has more info in the comments. It supports Canley's commments above (probably because of using the same source). --Scott Davis ^Talk 23:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

"Painted Desert"

The usage and primary topic of Painted Desert is under discussion, see talk:Painted Desert (Arizona) -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 10:12, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

sigh

I honestly believe I will wake up one morning and find vegemite or sydney harbour bridge marked for deletion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Up_Australia, is close enough. JarrahTree 22:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Also of interest is the short of the full dollar processes available on wp en - the delete nominator dutifully notifies the article creator, who hasnt edited for over 4 years, duty done, and leaves as is. Pointless and inneffective.

Where an editor hasnt edited for even a year, let alone 4, there should be a default to the nearest project to the subject noticeboard, such as this one. Considering how untouched some processes are despite their shortcomings (such as the CFD process and its lack of notification processes), Australian editors could well provide a lead on this and actually initiate a small item - where an editor hasnt edited for a year or more, the nominator is required to post to the nearest project for discussion. JarrahTree 23:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

I've closed it as keep. I can understand the frustration and I think some of your suggestions here are good. But can we please not bash the nominator any further (not so much your comments here as some at the AfD)? He's a good editor who's made a mistake, something that we all do. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 06:01, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Still, it was a confusing nomination: This is part of Clean Up the World, which might be notable. At the AfD for Clean Up the World, which ended 9 days ago, the nom wrote Pure promotionalism, and nnot notable enough to be worth a rewrite. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Jenks24, the nominator is indeed a good editor, but the problem I have identified above is a common one with careless afds - notifying long absent editors, suggests that a process is required, regardless of how confident the nominators might be, surely to at least check edit history of creator wouldnt take that much effort JarrahTree 10:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Putting aside this specific article, I would like to discuss the general issue. Is there a process whereby nominating and article for deletion could also place a notice on the projects associated with that article? Or perhaps what I mean is: could such a process be implemented? That would go part of the way to working around the problem of inactive authors.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hard to do unless Twinkle can determine which projects to notify off the page tags. I'm a lot less bothered about only notifying the author automatically (because we hear about it sooner or later anyway), just annoyed at the sheer carelessness of the nomination. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

For those who are interested, I have asked the Twinkle folks about the feasibility of this change here--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a note, I personally have seen CFD over almost 8 years exist in its own dark corner, and believe any sense of opening up a responsibility of wider dispersal of some of its conversations can be only a good thing, and to its credit AFD does have a number of processes which are more open and transparent JarrahTree 11:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Isn't this problem more or less dealt with by the deletion sorting page? This could perhaps be made more visible, though, maybe by a link in the top section of this noticeboard. Frickeg (talk) 13:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

I had not seen that sorting page before: it looks great, but it still depends on the nominator knowing about this page and manually adding the link there. If somebody nominates a page for deletion, there is nothing that prompts them to come to this sorting page at the moment.--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:05, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

There are (wonderful) people who patrol AfDs to ensure they're all added; they're pretty good about not missing things. There's also article alerts, which does it automatically. Frickeg (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I learned something - thanks, Frickeg. There is a bot (AAlertBot) which automatically populates that article alerts list. Which makes my Twinkle question kinda redundant; I will post this there so they don't waste their time. Thanks again.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Can someone help with Talk:Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute

Self-declared CoI editor proposing new content. I would do it myself but I am overseas with only a tablet and lousy wifiKerry (talk) 04:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Student creation of Australia-centric health pages: your opinions requested

Hello,

My name is Lydia and I've been assisting with the delivery of a first-year communications unit in the School of Health Sciences at the University of Notre Dame Australia. First year students in our School often have difficulty with "information literacy" (assessing their own needs for information, searching, finding and using information ethically) as well as paraphrasing and referencing. As a librarian I work with the unit coordinator to find new ways of engaging students to improve their literacy levels so they are prepared for the rigors of university. Instead of the annotated bibliography assignment they normally do as a precursor to an essay, I designed a Wikipedia assignment with the help of the Wikimedia Education resources and local administrators. They were tasked to identify a gap in the Wikipedia coverage of Australian Health topics, design a page, and write an article at least 500 words long on a topic of their choice. They would later use the research they had found to develop a deeper essay question for another assignment. They were graded on the depth of content, page layout and number and quality of references used. Writing skill and style elements were not a focus of this topic as much as finding and using information well. It was also my hope that in contributing to Wikipedia the students would gain insight into a peer-review process and feel a sense of accomplishment in contributing to the world's knowledge.

This was an experiment for the School, and for me. We had no idea how the assignments would turn out. This particular student population is mostly straight out of high school and can struggle with motivation, time management and independent learning goals. Their biggest challenge in this assignment seemed to be picking a topic that wasn't already covered, and not procrastinating. However for those who picked a topic early, they seemed to do well with referencing and paraphrasing their information. While many of the pages have been necessarily deleted or modified now, I still think it was a good challenge for the students, and will hopefully make them think differently about Wikipedia. It also seems that the Wikipedia footnoting style is so easy to use that the reference lists were longer than expected, with more frequent footnotes. Some articles were much longer than expected as well.

I've attached a spreadsheet of student usernames and edit histories and would like to ask you the following:

What is your opinion of the quality of the articles (given the experience of the editors)- in terms of topic choice, sources, and writing? Would you encourage more assignments like this in the future? Any suggestions for how this assignment could be improved?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hihWycRuDN0yKtTRbYBrciwcpt0g4CnWbT4DXipPSJw/edit?usp=sharing

Many thanks, Ldawe (talk) 02:01, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Wow, there's a lot of great work by your students, @Ldawe:! They've all chosen very interesting topics. I hope that they found the world stage of Wikipedia engaging, and that the use of Wikipedia has enhanced the course outcomes. I haven't looked at all of the articles, but those that have survived at this point look really good, with well-chosen sources and decent writing.

Now for the critique: Several of your students haven't used full citations to help people verify where they get the information from. (some have used bare links, which could change in the future, and some have not completely filled out where to get them from - only giving an author and a chapter title, rather than the full citation for the book.) As accurately attributing information is an important academic skill, and verifiability is important in Wikipedia, perhaps this should be more emphasised next session. I'm not saying 'bludgeon them over the head with the Notre Dame citation style guide!', but the sooner your firsties get used to writing full citations, the easier the rest of their academic life will be - and it fits with the information literacy focus of your assessment in that it helps them avoid plagiarism.

Some of your students use persuasive language in their articles, too. Reiterating to them that this step is solely a literature survey, you only regurgitate what is already in the literature, might help with this. It sounds like they can argue their own ideas in part 2 of the assessment (off-Wikipedia), but not at this point.

A handful of students haven't included an introduction ('lead') section, either.

Your students can use the topics listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australia/To-do#Health for ideas of what Australian health topics have been requested by Wikipedians - the subjects may be covered under another name, so they will need to do a keyword search before getting their heart set on Dementia and Altzheimer's disease in Australia, but that might be somewhere to start for inspiration. A lot of the red links there will still be red next year.

It's a shame that the assignment is designed so that the topics have to be novel to Wikipedia - there are some existing articles like Rural health care in Australia or Cardiovascular disease and diabetes in Australia which could use 500 extra words and 10+ extra sources - let alone the care and attention some of your students have lavished on the drafts. Perhaps some further consultation could be made with the library liasons at Wikipedia to brainstorm how to use sandboxes to work on an expanded draft of an already-existing article, which otherwise would meet the guidelines of the assessment (over 500 words added by the student - not previous Wikipedians, and 10+ novel sources.) The page history could be used to provide documentation of the student's own work. At the close of the project, a merge could take place.

For further development, perhaps classmates could be assigned particular other classmates pages to comment on - with evaluation of sources chosen, presentation, and 'what I learned from my classmate's article'. That would enhance the peer review aspect - although perhaps it should be done before putting the article out of the sandbox, in case merging happens, and with a caution to use their 'handle' rather than their real name. Whether you want to get your students to improve their articles in response to their classmates' feedback or simply reflect on that might depend on the time available. Additionally, getting your students to attempt to deorphan their articles once they're out of the sandbox would be a good exercise - that way, people who are reading related articles can find the article by browsing, rather than searching directly for the topic. I have attempted to deorphan Diabetes in Aboriginal Australians and Closing the gap by adding a link to those articles in Indigenous health in Australia. (Indigenous health in Australia could also be a good brainstorming point for more detailled articles on aspects of Indigenous health - for those students who need inspiration.) I have also attempted to deorphan Vitamin D deficiency in Australia by adding a link to it in Slip-Slop-Slap. As other interested people find and read the articles, the more likely it is that they can build on and enhance your students' work to make something really useful for everyone - great things happen when Wikipedia articles are exposed to peer review. If they find that they can't deorphan the article, just writing a bit of text for you saying why they couldn't should be ok as well.

I style myself as a casual contributor to Wikipedia, but I think the assignment looks manageable (though you'd have to ask your Wikipedia liason for comments on manageability) and valuable to the project and the students. I think it has potential to be run again next year, and possibly even expanded to other subjects. Please feel free to ask for clarification on anything I've mentioned. Best wishes! --211.30.17.74 (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to echo the IP contributor above, I think that for a bunch of first attempts these articles are pretty darn good. I would also like you to consider the idea of improving existing articles that are in a poor state rather than creating new ones, and maybe looking at whether an article title or subject is redundant to an existing subject. For instance, Injuries in netball isn't a bad article taken in isolation, but a lot of the content may be redundant to Sports injury. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC).

The topic of "injuries in (sport name)" might be considered a subtopic of whatever particular sport that article is about, rather than being redundant to sports injury. There is, for example, an extensive category on dance and health. It might be unusual for an article on injuries in netball to be made before a section like "Netball#Injuries", but it's not a bad or unencyclopedic topic. Do you think the method I proposed for expanding existing articles in a sandbox is feasible, if part of the goal is for the student not to get distracted by working with other people on their draft? --211.30.17.74 (talk) 22:35, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback everyone (keep it coming!). I had done a mini-project about six months ago wherein the students edited stubs, for a lower mark. The only problem with doing that is that I'd have to find approximately 150 stubs for students to edit in Semester 1 - a lot of work for one person. As it was I found it very hard to find enough Health-related stubs on appropriate topics (very scientific or medical topics are not appropriate to this group). However, probably what I should have done is engaged the Wikipedia community to help me find the stubs to edit. Actually I'm quite happy with the way they have been referencing for a first attempt, in that they referenced at all, albeit in a rough way (bare links, etc). It's more important that they understand why and when to reference than to master a style at this stage. I think the peer review idea (students looking at each others' finished pages) is a good one. I'm thinking that I might modify this assessment and suggest it for the Foundation Year students. In that case, can anyone recommend lists of articles that need attention by subject? That would be a great help for next time. Ldawe (talk) 02:07, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Ldawe:. Stub articles are marked in Wikipedia in 2 ways. The first way is with a stub template on the page - you can browse a list of stub types here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Stub_types and then you can browse in those to find stubs that are listed that way.

The other way is by visiting a wikiproject's assessment page, and then choosing to view all their stub articles. You can do this on any Wikiproject's home page by viewing the table of assessments ("Subject articles by quality and importance") and then clicking on the word 'Stub' in that. Australia Wikiproject stubs, Medicine wikiproject stubs, Health and fitness Wikiproject stubs.

Most wikiprojects also manually keep a 'wishlist' of red links to be created and problematic articles to be worked on, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do. It might be worthwhile expanding the project's remit to working on start-class or stub-class articles, because both start and stub class are considered quite incomplete, and most would benefit significantly from sourced content being added. For example, Suicide in Australia is considered 'start-class', but it barely scratches the surface of the topic. There are a few other sources of wanted (red linked) or low-class stuff on the essay Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress.

How were the topics chosen for your most recent project? --211.30.17.74 (talk) 07:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look at these lists and try to bring together a list. Students will likely be working on this next semester but to a lesser extent. I think expanding stubs/editing incomplete articles would probably be an easier way. Ldawe (talk) 00:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ldawe:, you could also re-use some of this year's articles that are start-quality, such as Alzheimer's research in Australia or Closing the gap. Men's health in Australia could also stand to be more "thickly" researched in its body, although it hasn't had a rating applied yet. Lists of start-class articles that might be relevant can be seen here: Australia Wikiproject start-class articles, Medicine wikiproject start-class articles, Health and fitness Wikiproject start-class articles. Another measure of the students' reach that they might find motivating might be the Wikipedia web statistics tool, which measures daily page views of articles. You can't exclude the page views that are clocked from you yourself editing an article (or from people on the AWNB checking out the article), but after a month or two, you can get an idea of how often your work is seen by the world. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 22:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Aboriginal Flag 02.jpg

The image is nominated at Commons for deletion. I invite you to comment there. --George Ho (talk) 23:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Fine line

This am an Australian government authority employee started an account - [7]

I am very interested to see what this grab bag noticeboard makes of this in the face of WP:COI and all the other related issues of the last 5 to 10 years of not allowing such processes to happen. Fellow australians wikipedians interpretations are sought on this matter.

The precedent is that every damned Australian government department and authority at federal, state, and local could end up with such an officer who feels they have an inherent right to edit (some of it probably already happens under different user names). Great to have an inrush in one of the few growing professions in Australia, but a disaster for neutrality - WP:NOT ? JarrahTree 01:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I've got no great problem as long as they stick to uncontroversial edits. It's a very obviously declared interest, they'll be under a lot of scrutiny, and can be relatively easily held to account if they cross the line. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

An example of a welcome series of edits from there would be cited climate history for every Australian place that has such data, whether it is online or not. They would have access to paper records that are not currently online, and access to people who can interpret it correctly. I have no idea if that is an intended purpose, but it certainly isn't where they have started . --Scott Davis ^Talk 03:19, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I predict an encounter with WP:ISU in the near future. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 03:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

.

Lankiveil raises a good point, which I think needs addressing independently of any issues of COI. XYZ social media officer is a "role account" - not a specific person - and thus explicitly forbidden by WP:SHAREDACCOUNT and WP:ROLE. At the very least we should insisting that the social media officer create an account (or rename the existing one) that is explicitly one person, not a role. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I've just noticed this discussion. A Bureau of Meteorology employee contacted me by Wikipedia email some time ago about getting someone to update their article, because I often edit the BOM's Wikipedia page. I let her know about Wikipedia's conflict of interest and sourcing guidelines. A different person contacted me today to let me know she'd be creating an account and making edits ... and by the time I was able to log on, I noticed the edits had already been done and reverted (sensibly, I think). As I said in a subsequent email, the edits to the infobox would have been alright if they'd had accompanying references, but I'm not so much of a fan of her edits to the article's lead section. I also let her know about the problems with her username. I agree that well-sourced climate-related edits/clarifications from the BOM would be welcome. Graham87 04:13, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Should we try to hold a seminar and invite the publicity/media sections of the departments to attend and find out how to do this correctly? It is hard to contact people on Wikipedia before they register! There has been a Wikipedia:GLAM/Australia seminar in Canberra before, but it was more specifically targeted at the cultural organisations. If Wikimedia Australia is still around perhaps they know how to organise this kind of event. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I have found none of these answers wholly satisfying, the issue remains the same - if the precedent is allowed by no interest in drawing a line on this issue, then as I said - every LGA, State and Fed Dept in Australia is increasingly employing people as social media managers, and apart from the excellent satirical approach that the TV series Utopia had, there seems to be a take them seriously approach to their behaviours.

I do not think we should simply let this alone and wait and see - this project needs to think very carefully about how information is added by specific corporate named editors.

Some government department/authority based editors have created some of the worst articles in the project, so Graham Bartlett's suggestion has a lot of merit. JarrahTree 07:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I would hope that someone employed as a "social media officer" is aware that every platform has its own culture, rules and expectations. The BoM is a well-respected organisation in Australia, and appropriate engagement with Wikipedia could enhance this, but stomping in and making a mess of things would not. If I was a social media officer for an organisation, I would seek to understand what the users of a social media platform want from my organisation to enhance the reputation of my organisation in that community. There are slightly over 200 uses of {{BoM Aust stats}} for example. There are several thousand articles that could benefit from it. BoM could take a leaf from the National Library of Australia and make it as easy to include current Wikipedia-formatted material from BoM as it is to cite a reference from Trove. --Scott Davis ^Talk 09:02, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Great sentiments, having met some (social media managers) no comment The ideas about BOM and TROVE level adaptability require high level negotiation and is a classic example of an ideal WMAU exercise, if it was to eventuate JarrahTree 09:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Personally I feel that we should discourage "social media" managers on the grounds that Wikipedia is not a social networking service. I know that social media is defined as "... Internet-based applications ... that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content", but do we really want to be lumped in with Facebook, Twitter et al? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

From my time at WMAU and also answering OTRS tickets, I think it's more common than not for Wikipedia to be lumped in with Flickr and Twitter in the "social media" bucket. A lot of the more savvy "social media officers" realise that the title is a poor fit for us, but it's usually not them that's making the decision that "we have to get ourselves a Wikipedia!". Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC).

That's also been my experience. Provided the account isn't being shared (and I note that it says that this is a single officer's account on the user page), and they adhere to WP:COI I don't see any problems with this account. It's a shame that this edit by the account was reverted for no sensible reason. Nick-D (talk) 09:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit reinstated. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The reinstating edits replace statements cited to [www.bom.gov.au/inside/index.shtml The Bureau's own web site] and the APSC with uncited statements provided by someone who claims to work for the Bureau, but as far as I know, this has not been independently confirmed. The new information might be correct and more up-to-date, but if they can't be cited, doesn't that make them Original research that does not belong in the article? If the old page was out of date, it should be flagged as such until new sources can be found, not just changed without verifiable sources. --Scott Davis ^Talk 12:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

h

Well whatever we have thought or said about the subject a sysop from elsewhere has blocked the account. where this might go now is whether this project actually might reach out to new accounts like the one just blocked and seek to inform the processes that the project might want to support, but not with user names like that. JarrahTree 13:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

further

It is clearly an issue that will not go away - and despite the responses above, there really needs to be a more inclusive response to genuinely interested potential editors to be encouraged rather than simply blocked because of user names. JarrahTree 03:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

History of the Australian Capital Territory lead

Eight paragraphs for a lead is WAY too excessive for any article. I'm not sure what to condense, but I think a couple of you fellas should view this. The article itself is fine and I don't think another reassessment should be made, although the eighth paragraph in the "Early settlement" section lacks citations. Overall, the lead is too problematic for my liking and clearly violates the recommended amount of paragraphs that should be used in an article. Burklemore1 (talk) 07:58, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Suspicious edits to DOB and place of birth by 120.152.129.6 and other IPs

120.152.129.6 (talk · contribs) has today made a series of edits on several Australian articles, typically changing birth places and years. I'm not knowledgeable enough about any of the specific subjects to say definitely that the changes are wrong, but the pattern looks very suspicious. I don't have the time or inclination to check them, but if not for WP:AGF I'd revert the lot of them immediately. Anyone else care to check? Mitch Ames (talk) 06:51, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Ugh. I thought this was over, or I would have posted here myself. They were doing this a few days ago as well (through a different IP). It's all fake, vandalism of the worst kind because it isn't obvious. Revert on sight, and admins should consider blocking. Frickeg (talk) 07:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I checked the DOB for Peter Garrett and the change was bollocks so I assume the rest of it was too. I was in the process of reverting but got beaten to it. Definitely vandalism. Anotherclown (talk) 07:21, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

It continues with a new IP: 49.181.200.124 (talk · contribs). The IP has been warned at all three of its known addresses (the first that I know of was 49.195.4.230 (talk · contribs)). I'm not really familiar with the processes here, but is there a good way to make admins aware that this is someone they should block on sight? In a more general note, everyone should keep a lookout for this kind of vandalism for the next while at least. The next time I see them I'll report them straight to AIV with a link to this discussion. Frickeg (talk) 11:29, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

It's been happening for a couple of weeks, I have blocked at least 5 IPs in the past month – always the same pattern: fairly subtle edits to birth dates and places in Australian politician articles (of which I have many on my watchlist so I pick up most incidents). I just blanket revert if it matches that pattern and usually block on sight as well. Surprisingly persistent vandal – they usually get straight back to it when the block expires or use another IP address. --Canley (talk) 22:47, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I've noticed at least dozens of these on politician articles I watch. Usually someone else has fixed it before I could, but not always. How can we check for any recent changes like this on all Australian biographies in case some aren't being regularly patrolled? Donama (talk) 23:30, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I must say, i've had my user account on here for a few months short of a decade now, and never have I seen such unprecedented widespread persistent vandalism... i'm one notch below shocked. It seems like for the past month or so there's more than a dozen articles daily being systematically vandalised by IPs with subtle false changes like DOB etc. Apart from increased vigilance i'm not sure how we can combat this problem, let alone solve it. Timeshift (talk) 11:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Heavy use of semi-protection would stop them vandalising those articles at least, with no real downsides. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

A range block would be our only chance of a quick fix – they all seem to geolocate to the same area, so it might be possible. Pinging Diannaa who answered the last rangeblock query I had. In addition to the three IPs linked in this thread, there was 49.181.163.223 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 203.219.94.142 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 49.195.144.194 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), 49.195.136.204 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), possibly others. Jenks24 (talk) 12:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

But to me it seems the target is any present or past, federal or state MP. How could we semi-prot such a large number of articles? Click here to see a once-off customisation of your watchlist which displays only IP edits, hiding registered/own/bot edits, in article space only, for the past month. Timeshift (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Timeshift is shocked -- well nearly. Canley is impressed with the editor's persistence. I think we're surprised because we don't normally deal with attacks from bots. It looks to me like someone's written a script to make these edits to any candidate articles in a category (possibly Australian politicians) using random number generators. If the edits fail, start again using a new IP. Might be nothing more than an experiment to see how many innocent-looking malicious edits can get past the watchers by some pissed off researcher. No responses on the talk pages. To my shame, I once logged out and changed Adelaide to be the capital of South Africa just to see how long it would take to fix, so I kind of understand if it's a curious person who's forgotten to switch off their bots. Regardless is truly at odds with WP being useful and of high integrity, which we all want. I think, to combat this kind of automated behaviour, whether for academic curiosity or some less edifying purpose, an IP identified as participating in a known pattern of misbehaviour (especially if bot-like) should get only one strike before it gets blocked. Does WP have any established process or policy that works like this? Donama (talk) 02:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Rangeblock request. Jenks24 (talk) 13:52, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Maybe this kind of pattern could be added to the Wikipedia:Edit filter. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 02:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Participants here often create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Peking Duk

Heads up - it may be worth keeping an eye on Peking Duk - maybe semi-protect - due to this news article: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/03/peking-duk-fan-infiltrates-backstage-by-fooling-security-guard-with-wikipedia-edit -- Chuq (talk) 07:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

As there's been a string of vandalism, I've semi-protected the article for three days. It's a funny incident though. Nick-D (talk) 07:31, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

We might see some copycat behaviour on other articles too. Now let me think who do I really want to meet ... Kerry (talk) 20:17, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Christmas and winter

Australian editors are invited to comment at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 December 5#Category:Christmas and winter holiday parades. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:14, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

QR coding - toodyaypedia

Heads up the articles listed at Wikipedia:WikiTown/Toodyaypedia/stage II worksheet will be qr coded and the artwork created over the weekend, I'll then be submitting this to the projects partners and finalising formats for the printers. Last chance to speak up about any article issues, cross posting to Wa project talk as well Gnangarra 06:38, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

2005 Cronulla riots

I have added an {{infobox civil conflict}}[8] and copy-edited the lead of this page.[9]. I'd like some other editors to check it over for MOS etc, if possible.
For example, the text said:

"Racial tensions were already prevalent among the two racial groups due to an attack on two lifeguards"

without mentioning what the 'racial groups' were, so I have edited it to:

"Racial tensions were already prevalent between local [[Caucasian race|caucasian]] and [[middle-eastern]] Australians due to an attack on two [[Surf lifesaving|lifesavers]]",

among other changes. 220 of ^Borg 06:32, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to AussieLegend and Sanguis Sanies for improving the page. 220 of ^Borg 00:49, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Cattamarra Coal Measures - any geologists out there?

I stumbled on this article in Category:Queensland. As it had no citations, I went to find some. Unfortunately the only one I found [10] (which should be reliable) puts it in Western Australia, which then makes the likelihood that it is part of Precipice Sandstone (which is in Queensland/NSW) somewhat unlikely and does nothing to confirm the claims in relation to fossilised insects. I've stripped it down to just what I can confirm from the only citation I found, but I think it would benefit from a closer inspection by someone with some geology knowledge. Thanks if you can help Kerry (talk) 02:05, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Graeme Bartlett: The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:20, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look: ga.gov.au has a good database to see if the name exists. A result is at http://dbforms.ga.gov.au/pls/www/geodx.strat_units.sch_full?wher=stratno=3806. There are heaps of references here. You are right, it is in WA. The database is CC-0 — yay! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:29, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Royal commission into child sexual abuse

Hi all. Does this subject have an article? I can't seem to find one to link to. Seems notable and encyclopedic to me. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 03:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Never mind - Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Mattinbgn (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Suggest you turn some of your search phrases (if you can remember them) into redirects to help future readers get to the article easier. -- saberwyn 08:14, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposed article name change

Interested editors may want to contribute to a proposal to change the name of the article 2012 Sydney anti-Islam film protests. See here. WWGB (talk) 06:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Australian huts

In 2012, {{Infobox Australian Hut}} was nominated for deletion, with the outcome resulting in me creating {{Infobox hut}}, which replaced Infobox Australian Hut, {{Infobox mountain hut}} and {{Infobox Schutzhütte}}. Many of the articles using infobox hut are poorly referenced, or not referenced at all. I've just removed a significant copyvio from Daveys Hut that had existed since May 2006, leaving it an unreferenced stub. It and the other Australian hut articles seriously need attention to bring them up to an acceptable standard that will stop them being deleted at AfD. Most of these articles are in Category:Huts in Australia while some may not be, but are listed here. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

 Doing..., though sources are a bit thin for some. Worth considering if a details list-style article is more useful than the individual stubs. -- Euryalus (talk) 22:59, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Direct Action Plan article?

Is there an article that covers Tony Abbott's direct action plan? (ie. what he was replacing Carbon pricing in Australia with.) I've looked in Abbott Government, but it doesn't cover the subject in depth. --211.30.17.74 (talk) 01:09, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Articles for deletion: List of shopping centres in Australia by size

FYI, I have listed list of shopping centres in Australia by size at articles for deletion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping centres in Australia by size (2nd nomination)

OSX (talk • contributions) 22:45, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

A-Class review for 2/9th Battalion (Australia) needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for 2/9th Battalion (Australia); please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 04:20, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

COM:UNDEL#File:Aboriginal Flag 02.jpg

The discussion about the photo of the aboriginal flag is ongoing. You are invited to comment. --George Ho (talk) 10:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Port Arthur 1996 and the Terrorism in Australia article

A recent edit has included the Port Arthur massacre of 1996 as an element of the Terrorism In Australia article.

I disagree with such a connection, but am sure there are other Australian editors who have an opinion, and may wish to clarify one way or other with such an association. JarrahTree 09:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC).

Relevant diffs: [11][12]

I agree with JarrahTree. Port Arthur massacre (Australia) makes no mention of terrorism, so Terrorism in Australia ought not mention Port Arthur. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, Terrorism in Australia commences with the definition that the violence has "the intention of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause" so I can't see grounds for inclusion on that basis. Kerry (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

@JarrahTree and Kerry Raymond: This issue is at least mentioned on the talk page at Talk:Terrorism in Australia#I removed the Sydney Siege link, where a comparison is made between the two events. 220 of ^Borg 10:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Bringing Them Home better Category:Australian society not Category:Ethnic groups in Australia

I noticed a recent recat of Bringing Them Home from Category:Australian society to Category:Ethnic groups in Australia. I do not think this works well, there is a diversity of culture and language among Indigenous Australians., and Bringing Them Home addresses a aspect of the history of Australian culture. It seems similar to classifying European groups as one ethnicity. I think the inclusion of Category:Indigenous peoples of Australia‎ makes some sense. I reverted the recat. Paul foord (talk) 13:21, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Completely correct call on your part. The Drover's Wife (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Notable death - Stevie Wright

Stevie Wright, English born Australian musician and songwriter, lead singer of The Easybeats.
I have added this to Deaths in 2015, after cleaning up his BLP a bit. The source is not the best but having occurred less than 7 hours ago no major news outlet seem to have picked it up yet, though has been reported on talkback radio on 2GB in Sydney so appears legit. 220 of ^Borg 13:41, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

• Here is a more mainstream reference.

References

Logan City or City of Logan?

Prompted by this IP edit to List of cities in Australia by population I decide to see where the actual article was and found it to be at City of Logan but the article's history prompted me to investigate further. The article was moved from Logan City in August 2015 by a block evading sockpuppet.[13][14] Prior to that all mentions of "Logan City" in the article were changed to "City of Logan" by a now indef blocked editor in August 2014.[15] The article's talk page includes a requested move discussion that failed to achieve a move from Logan City to City of Logan. The proposed move was objected to by Dmol, who claimed to be a resident of Logan, and Frickeg, who pointed out that the Logan City Council website still refers to Logan City. This still seems the case,[16] and Google searches for both "Logan City" and "City of Logan" result in many more results for Logan City than City of Logan, so I'm wondering if perhaps the article changes and move should be reversed. However, I'm not from Qld so I'm not sure and would appreciate some comments from others. --AussieLegend (✉) 18:02, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

The link you posted to the council's website has a big banner photo of a band playing with a huge "CITY OF LOGAN" in lights, and in a logo behind them! I'm wondering if the Google searches for "Logan City" are picking up "Logan City Council" as well. Checking some official registers: Queensland Place Names Database lists the parish of Logan, with its local government area listed as "Logan City". The Australian Gazetteer only lists the parish as an administrative region. The ABN lookup is under "Logan City Council", so that's no help. --Canley (talk) 00:12, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

We had a similar issue a couple of years ago concerning the Somerset Region. Basically, unless things have changed, LGAs in Queensland are only known in legislation by the location name (ie: "Logan" or "Somerset"), then further defined as a type ("city", "region") that doesn't seem to officially be a part of the name. FWIW, us people in the area would just call the whole area "Logan" in everyday speech. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 01:47, 28 December 2015 (UTC).

Thanks for the responses. The council website does indeed include a banner saying "CITY OF LOGAN". This is explained by Logancc (now indef blocked) at the failed RM: Logan City Council has adopted the name of the 'City of Logan' which encompasses the entire local government area. We therefore request the page name to be changed to reflect this from 'Logan City' to the 'City of Logan'.[17] The Queensland Government's placenames search would seem to be authoritative. It says "Logan City" on both the parish and suburb entries,[18][19] as well as several others,[20] which supports Lankiveil's comments. A search For "City of Logan" reveals no responses.[21] Interestingly, I've found a similar issue with City of Gold Coast, which was recently moved from Gold Coast City.[22] Like Logan City, Gold Coast City appears in multiple entries, but City of Gold Coast appears in none of the "local government" fields. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

• In Victoria we use City Council to refer to the administrative body, and City of to refer to the municipality; ie Melbourne City Council is the administrative body that governs the City of Melbourne. I suspect the situation is the same in the case of Logan. Council minutes use the term City of Logan, as does the Annual Report 2014-15 which opens with "The City of Logan is a...", while also using Logan City Council to refer to the administrative body. In my mind an article about the LGA should be at City of Logan, while an article about the government should be at Logan City Council, however, nomenclature is likely different in Queensland and the article should probably sit at the common name. ColonialGrid (talk) 12:41, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

If you look at the first page of the council minutes (The condolence report) you'll see the opening statement is "Her Worship the Mayor advised that messages of sympathy has been forwarded to the following residents of Logan City". "City of Logan" is used in "THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOGAN". WP:NCAUST says Local government areas are at their official name. Since the QLD goverment's placename search says "Logan City", that seems to be the official name. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I'm dense, but when I put "Logan City" into the database it pulls a blank (City&types=0). Of course, "City of Logan" doesn't come up either. The only "city" that comes up for "Logan" is Logan Village, which is not the LGA. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 00:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC).

This seems to be an "anomaly" caused by QLD's rather poor search engine. If you do a search for "Logan City" with no filter, it results in the message "10 results found. No results could be found for your original query, instead the following results are returned from searching the comment field". If you then check the individual suburb results, "Logan City" is displayed next to "Local government". There doesn't seem to be a way to search for the actual city. --AussieLegend (✉) 01:51, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

You won't find it in the Queensland Place Names database because it does not include the LGAs. There's some fine print about "while the place name may not be an approved name under the Place Names Act 1994, the feature name may be an official name under another act, regulation or agreement" and LGAs fall into that caveat. Aside, it is also true that their search engine is somewhat broken (the old one worked much better so why did they replace it with this broken one?!). Kerry (talk) 04:02, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission

See Draft:James Chisholm (Senior). Cheers, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

• Moved to article space. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Photo requests in Sydney, Melbourne, and Perth: Japanese schools

Hello, Australian Wikipedians!

I would like for somebody to take photos of the Japanese schools in Sydney, Melbourne, and Perth. Is anybody interested?

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 07:55, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Japanese international schools in Australia includes these (and others). Mitch Ames (talk) 08:22, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Am I missing something? I can't find photos in the cat or in any of its member articles. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:21, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps Mitch means the schools in that category are the ones that need photos. - Evad37 [talk] 10:16, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, poor wording on my part. What I meant was:

Category:Japanese international schools in Australia includes articles about these schools (and others).

Those articles will give you to the location of each school, should you feel inclined to go and take a picture. (And obviously, having taken a picture, you'll know what article to add it to.) Mitch Ames (talk) 09:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

RfC on religion field in *all* infoboxes

Just FYI. There is an RfC seeking to restrict what can be put in the religion field of *any* infobox. Since it seems to be poorly advertised (despite being a big user of infoboxes, I was unaware of it, except by accident), I draw it to the attention of anyone interested: Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes Kerry (talk) 21:43, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

In the News

Can people please remember to update the In the News section at the top of this page as it currently dates back to January 2015 Gnangarra 07:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Sydney landmarks

I've been concerned about Template:Sydney landmarks for a while. I thought this would be the best forum for a discussion, given that the talk page for the template probably gets little or no traffic.

The question is: what is a landmark, for the purpose of this template? In most similar templates for other cities, "landmarks" covers major above-ground, natural and artificial features - buildings, churches, parks and gardens, bridges, etc, that are important or interesting in a geographical sense. Some streets which are well known in their own right are also covered, but this is not just a matter of whether something is an important artery. Some examples:

• Template:London landmarks
• Template:Monuments of Rome
• Template:Melbourne landmarks

Now, I understand that what is a landmark in one city might not be in another. So, for Sydney, I would think beaches are landmarks, whereas that would not be relevant to London.

Nevertheless, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that all of the suburban motorways, a transit authority (Sydney Buses) or a method of payment (Opal card) are "landmarks" in any geographical sense. I also have an issue with the listing of remote national parks which I would regard as being near Sydney, rather than in Sydney, and not really "landmarks" as such.

I'm interested in what everyone thinks. To get the ball rolling, I suggest the following on the transport front:

• Only major city streets and main, well known suburban roads which are noteworthy or interesting as locations (rather than just as transport conduits) should be included. So Parramatta Road would be in, but Westlink M7 would be out. The Harbour Tunnel, Cross City Tunnel, and City Circle, would be out - some tunnels in other cities are landmarks in their own right as a historic sight or feat of engineering, but these are not.
• Conversely, major bridges, viaducts, and other landmark structures would be in. So Cahill Expressway and possibly Bradfield Highway would be in.
• Types of services, such as Sydney Buses and Sydney Ferries, would be out. Only landmark locations or structures would be in - e.g. the Circular Quay ferry wharf, or any bus terminal that might be regarded as a landmark.
• Non-geographical topics, such as Opal Card, would be out.

What do you think? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 16:11, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd argue that the Harbour Tunnel would be in. Its construction was historic and, outside Sydney it's more well known thant the Cahill Expressway or Bradfield Highway. If either of those are in, the tunnel has to be. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:35, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, including the tunnel. Originally, a "landmark" was a notable feature that people would use for navigation - "keep going until you get to the bridge, then turn left" or for positioning "it is in between the bridge and the Opera House". Try substituting "Opal card" or "bus" in there and it just does not make sense. While those specific uses may not be so relevant any more, the concept is still relevant to peoples' experience of a place.--Gronk Oz (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I've always thought these kind of templates were intended for "these are the things visitors/tourists are likely to be interested in". And the term "landmark" implies some "visual prominence" and "not something you see everywhere" but something "special" to this city. Certainly the streets and transport items mentioned in Template:London landmarks seem to be chosen for the tourist interest in what's in the street rather than their significance in transport. E.g. the M25 motorway around London doesn't get included. On that basis, I am not sure about the Cahill Expressway or the Bradfield Highway being included because I think Circular Quay and the Sydney Harbour Bridge are the actual "landmarks" in both cases (and which link to the expressway and highway should people want more transport-oriented information). Generally I think highways/expressways are not landmarks because the articles tend to be all about the road and not about what's along the road (which is what makes Baker Street in London of tourist interest). My test would be "what would the average visitor to the city stop and photograph". While I personally think the Harbour Tunnel is interesting as an engineering challenge, I rather suspect that the bridge and ferries above the tunnel are the "landmarks" simply because we can see them, they look pretty and they are something "different" about Sydney compared to many other cities. Kerry (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't say I disagree with this at all. In fact I remember now making similar arguments several years ago at a committee meeting in our local Council chambers. --AussieLegend (✉) 22:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the key thing here is to establish the purpose of the template. I think "landmarks" for the locals is a different set of things (more likely to include major roads, hospitals, etc) used for wayfinding, compared to "landmarks" for the non-locals which tend to be the "stop and photograph" things. Once we have decided its purpose, we can add this and some criteria for inclusion on the Talk page. But either way, I think being "large and visible" is at least part of the criteria, but I think it could be either a natural feature (e.g. Sydney Heads) or the built environment (the Opera House). I don't think a landmark could be, say, an item inside a building, no matter how "must see" it might be. It's gotta be a "mark on the land" so to speak. Kerry (talk) 23:36, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

OK another point of view, landmark as such has been misused over time and over a range of categories and countries, if one was to have a closer look. I do not think size is the crunch, so in a sense visual prominence is not necessarily a component of what makes a landmark in the world outside queensland (sic - the location of the worlds biggest this and that etc). In most cases landmarks are fixed items, and moveable items cannot be such - see the Burra and Riga charters relative to heritage, and understand that movable items can hardly be landmark items, they can be significant items of course. Peoples interest in something versus marketing promotional power, I do not think that visitors or tourists are a component in making what constitutes landmarks either - as here in Perth, a very messy and relatively uninteresting hole in the ground by the river is being created by hype and publicity (both negative and positive) as being a 'landmark' (some would consider it more of a puddle and blot or even blight the landscape). It is all a very subjective and highly variant quality to 'things' that might otherwise not even be noticed, or even necessarily seen (I mean a tunnel being a landmark, huh?) - and absolutely nothing to do with whether a tourist can stop and photograph. Landmark has been misused as a term a lot, and we now have Wikivoyage so anything that ugh, pertains to tourism, can always be subsumed that way and we can think better back to wikipedia english no longer pandering to pseudo fixations with what will the tourist/visitor think, this is an online encyclopedia, not a tourist brochure. I would strongly support severe limitations on what constitutes a landmark, and support a raised awareness of why and how wikivoyage is there to rid wikipedia of the fixation over what will the tourists think, want, etc - and return to a more encyclopediac tone. Why maybe someone will grab the bold persona and get around to removing landmark from wikipedia en vocabulary, just like the campaign some years ago against in popular culture trivia JarrahTree 00:02, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything in the traditional (British English) definition of landmark - ie easily recognisable, used for navigation - that requires a landmark to be attractive. The uglier it is, the more recognisable it becomes. Being popular isn't a criteria either. The more controversy there is about a landmark, the more likely it is that more people know what and where it is - thus making it a better landmark! Most people in Perth probably know where Elizabeth Quay is by now - which makes it a good landmark! Mitch Ames (talk) 11:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you all, I think I have a much clearer idea of what should be a "landmark" (and what the template should and should not do) than when I started the thread. JarrahTree: I agree that Wikipedia is not Wikivoyage, but even without the tourist angle I see value in these "landmark" templates because they are a useful navigation tool for someone who wants to learn about the key geographical or physical features of a city, whether out of curiosity or more serious intellectual interest. We could call it something else, but I think "landmarks" is a pretty good term for "key geographical or physical features or points of interest".

If we can agree that as a starting point, we can try to find a set of criteria that would to some extent suit prospective tourists, armchair explorers and students of geography alike. This would seem more in tune with the "worldwide view" of Wikipedia and the original purpose of an encyclopaedia as a reference work. I think there is less need to cover the needs of locals - there is Google Maps for that.

From that perspective, as a matter of principle, we could say that what we want in this template is the key features of a city, i.e. those that are notable as features of the city, not just notable in general. They can be man-made or natural, but should be permanently placed (so a museum ship would qualify, for example, but not a famous street performer or smog) and tangible/physical/visible (a bridge would qualify, and possibly a tunnel/hole in the ground if it is notable as a geographical feature, but not a festival, or a method of payment or a mode of transport as such).

What do you think of that as a starting point? If that sounds reasonable, I will re-work a set of "rules" taking into account everything that has been said above. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 12:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

oops, wikipedia australia noticeboard not equal to wikipedia - best to look for a wikipedia english point for the whole family of landmark categories globally, perhaps ?? JarrahTree 12:15, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I thought about that, but not all cities have such templates (most don't), and what is regarded as a landmark will vary from country to country and city to city. This is more an exercise in gathering views for the improvement of that particular template (I know I started talking more generally). I don't have the appetite to find the right forum and then discuss such templates generally. It might be best if I take this (limited) discussion to the template talk page instead. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

• just a thought why not call it Highlights rather than landmarks or have no qualifier ie just Template:Sydney Gnangarra 12:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

For a city like Sydney a general topic template might get a bit unwieldy - you'd also want to cover cultural and demographic issues, so it would probably be even longer than it is now. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 13:33, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Request for comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics#Australian Labor Party (South Australian Branch)... should it be written as Labor or more obvious such as SA Labor et al?

Request for comments. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 02:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Moving to Queanbeyan

I know this isn't a 100% kosher request for a WP noticeboard, but in the near future I will be moving to Queanbeyan. If there are any Wikipedians living there now, could they please contact me? E-mail would be fine. Wikipedians in the ACT may also be of assistance. 220 of ^Borg 02:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

One way to find out is to see who edits the Queanbeyan article or its suburbs, and not much else. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:40, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Good idea Graeme Bartlett. You appear to be the only Queanbeyan editor (in the top 7) who has edited there in several years. You pop up on some of the 'burbs too. 220 of ^Borg 07:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Visited Queanbeyan a few times for Wikipedia/Commons photography, when ever I get a chance when in Canberra (been a little while since I've visited but have family there). Need to visit both again! Bidgee (talk) 10:30, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I meant people like User:Matthewdavid93 or Jeffpotato or User:Bodlington or user:Yellow373 who have not edited much else. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

A-Class review for 2/17th Battalion (Australia) needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for 2/17th Battalion (Australia); please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

A-Class review for 2/48th Battalion (Australia) needs attention

A few more editors are needed to complete the A-Class review for 2/48th Battalion (Australia); please stop by and help review the article! Thanks! AustralianRupert (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Waroona Fires

Looks like this fire will be in need of its own article current it has affected Waroona, Preston Beach, Harvey, Yarloop, Alcoa minesites including the Wagerup plant. Rumours as at 11pm wst is that the town of Yarloop has been substantially destoryed including the historical Yarloop Workshops. The Southbound festival has also been cancelled reason being the caused by the mean the only viable alternative is expected to be impacted. Also reports that of towns of Lake Clifton, Myalup and Binningup being placed on alert tonight. According to weather reports the fires intensity and the volume of smoke being generated has created its own weather system. Gnangarra 14:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Refs:

• http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-08/yarloop-destroyed-by-fire/7077232
• http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-08/perth-fire-creates-own-weather-system/7076884
• http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/wa-fires-lightning-hits-pinjarra-evacuation-centre-splits-tree-cuts-power-20160108-gm25ct.html

Yeah, I agree. Yarloop is no longer rumour - people have been in and taken photos of just how severe the damage is. I think the Otway fires in Victoria also warrant an article as well: each of them has damaged way more and posed way more of a threat than your average summer fire. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:06, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Waroona fires - considering the widespread disruption of communities and south west transport and potential loss of dairy industry infrastructure and stock, and all the factors that gnangarra lists, are easily sufficient for a stand alone article JarrahTree 11:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

• While yesterday it was being called the Waroona Fires... it now also being called the Yarloop fire... lets wait and see what it does to Harvey tonight before we settle on a name and write an article Gnangarra 12:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe 2016 Peel Region bushfires? 220 of ^Borg 02:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

• Apparently "Peel/South West" region is more accurate, so perhaps 2016 Peel/South West region bushfires? 220 of ^Borg 03:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

• Noting that the enquiry terms of reference[23] has "Waroona Fire". Another option would be Waroona–Yarloop fire as used in a recent ABC News story[24] - Evad37 [talk] 06:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd use Waroona-Yarloop fires or Waroona fires. Peel seems a bit odd since a) it doesn't cover half the area that burned, and b) is more associated with Mandurah which was north even of the evacuation point. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

It's a bit hard for me to say. I'm on the 'wrong' (east) coast so totally unfamiliar with the area. The maps for the relevant Peel and South West regions pages could be improved. They show WA with little bits, esp. 'Peel', coloured in down in the south/west corner. A more 'close-up' map view is also needed IMHO. 220 of ^Borg 19:03, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

• A redirect to 2015–16 Australian bushfire season#Fires of note has been created at 2015–16 Great Ocean Road bushfire. FYI. 220 of ^Borg 08:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

It's finally been extinguished - after burning for 17 days. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:40, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

its still smoldering in some places today, the mill at Yarloop where there was once pile of timber was one place, another was a paperbark swamp near Preston beach the all clear means that there isnt any likely hood these places could reignite and cause more damage... For those working on articles I will be uploading over night some picts to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Waroona_fire_2016 Gnangarra 15:19, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Presumably we should include in the article how long the fire burned for. I'm not very knowledgeable about these things so, for the purposes of the article (and my own curiosity):

• Is there some specific distinction between "extinguished" but still smouldering, and extinguished and no longer smouldering?
• Do we have a reference for "still smoldering in some places"? I'm not doubting your word, but WP:VERIFY, if the smouldering is worth mentioning in the article ...
• According to [25] (11 January), Murray Cowper said "There’ll be trees that’ll be smouldering for months on end and until we get that winter drizzling rain, this fire won’t be out and we’ll be living with the potential of further outbreaks."
  Perhaps he was exaggerating, or perhaps just pessimistic (the fire was still burning at the time), but is the smouldering still a significant risk?

Or is the risk a function of where the smouldering is? Mitch Ames (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

See also: Talk:2015–16 Australian bushfire season#Contained or extinguished. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Metric system height

Why do so many of WikiProject Australia's articles have the metric expression of people's heights in metres instead of in centimetres?--108.161.119.246 (talk) 02:49, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know the answer to that question, but it prompts one of my own: is there "standard" or convention anywhere that indicates whether one should express human height in metres or centimetres? Wikipedia MOS guideline? Australian convention? A quick search on the internet found somebody else who asked the same question in the UK, although that was "saying" it rather than writing it. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

It was one of the many government standards promulgated when Australia went metric many years ago. It is still the official way in which people's heights should be stated, eg. [26] In answer to the first question, my guess is that it is caused by the {{convert}} template, which by default converts feet into metres. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:14, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Whether to use cm or m is one of those issues that people like to battle over. {{height}} was often used in infoboxes and its talk shows some 2014 discussions on the issue, with a lot more in the archives, example. The infobox used sometimes has a recommendation; {{Infobox person}} says to see {{Infobox sportsperson}} which says to use "X cm", "X m" or "X ft Y in" in one place, and gives examples using convert and cm in another. This wikiproject could make recommendations for articles of interest. Any examples of articles that currently show m? Johnuniq (talk) 08:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

It has been a long time since the metric system was introduced, and I was young then, so I can't give references, but there was a lot of discussion about mm vs cm. At the time the decision was made not to use cm, which annoyed a lot of people. We also decided not to use decimetres, but that didn't seem to upset anyone. There were a lot of people who had issues with measuring distances like, say, 837mm, or worse, 4,837 mm instead of 83.7 cm or 483.7 cm. I did Industrial Arts in high school and we started seeing drawings with measurements like 10462 mm. My understanding is that it was to reduce errors. By sticking with mm (the smallest unit) there was no need to worry about decimal points. That would have worked if people hadn't started measuring distances in metres, with 1867 mm becoming 1.867 m (or "mts." for people who still can't handle the metric system after 45 years). I note there is even a Facebook group called Use mm not cm! You're an engineer not a f$#@!* seamstress. So, instead of using metres or centimetres for heights, we really should be using mm. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:20, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Ignoring the "offical" UOM and the argument over cm vs mm anecdotally people still use feet/inches when referring to a persons height. Gnangarra 11:42, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

And newborn babies' weights! A friend of mine recently became a grandmother, and proudly announced the newborn's weight in pounds and ounces. (The child must have been very precious ...) The grandmother hadn't even started primary school when the country went metric - how does she even know what a pound or ounce was?! I think doctors and nurses should be legally forbidden from giving out weights in anything but metric. 58.7.99.93 (talk) 14:02, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Altitudes are expressed in feet, depths in fathoms, the list goes on. MOS:CONVERSIONS says we should include conversions between the primary units. I don't really see an issue with heights in metres, it's not rocket science to convert from metres to centimetres. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Nor, AussieLegend, is it difficult to convert from color to colour, realize to realise, May 7, 2016 to 7 May 2016, or 2,5 litres to 2.5 liters. But that fact doesn't make the relative prevalence of each unworthy of our attention. Hawkeye7 I think has it right with the suggestion that it's largely just the work of conversion templates. Examples abound, Johnuniq, in biographical articles such as Miranda Kerr, Lleyton Hewitt, Andrew Gaze, Ian Thorpe, Layne Beachley, Steve Waugh, Karrie Webb and Johnathan Thurston.--108.161.119.246 (talk) 01:43, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

The standard international base unit for length is the metre/meter, abbreviated m. There is no reason whatsoever to use millimetres (unwarranted & misleading hyperaccuracy). It's a toss-up between m and cm, but I can't see any reason not to use the standard base unit, m. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

"I can't see any reason not to use the standard base unit, m" — One reason to use cm would be if they are "are conventional in reliable-source discussions of the article topic". Mitch Ames (talk) 02:34, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Another might be that use of the metre guarantees a needless decimal.--108.161.119.246 (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Mitch: So if LLeyton Hewitt's height is conventionally discussed in reliable sources in units of cm, and Ian Thorpe's in m, you recommend that their Wikipedia article follow those idiosyncrasies? Wikipedia's Manual of Style doesn't follow reliable sources, it's a house style, determined by consensus here. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

"[MOS] doesn't follow reliable sources, it's ... determined by consensus here" — and the consensus here allows for "as are conventional in reliable-source discussions of the article topic". If there were a common (not necessarily ubiquitous) Australian convention in use for describing people's heights, then generally Wikipedia articles for Australian people should follow it (consistent with WP:UNIT) - even when some particular Australian was usually described with different units (unless there was some specific relevant reason for individual). Mitch Ames (talk) 08:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Someone would need to examine each of the examples to see if there is a convention that applies to the profession. For example, it's likely that articles on basketball players use a particular style that may be more important than the style of the country of origin. Also, this wikiproject would need to decide whether these examples should be changed. In case it's of some assistance, I have extracted the following details from each article.

• Miranda Kerr {{Infobox model}} |height = {{convert|1.75|m|ftin|abbr=on}} → 1.75 m (5 ft 9 in)
• Lleyton Hewitt {{Infobox tennis biography}} |height = {{height|m=1.78|}} → 1.78 m (5 ft 10 in)
• Andrew Gaze {{Infobox basketball biography}} |height_ft = 6 |height_in = 7 → 6 ft 7 in (2.01 m)
• Ian Thorpe {{Infobox swimmer}} |height = {{convert|1.96|m|ftin|abbr=on}} → 1.96 m (6 ft 5 in)
• Layne Beachley {{Infobox surfer}} |height = {{convert|1.65|m|ftin|abbr=on}} → 1.65 m (5 ft 5 in)
• Steve Waugh {{Infobox cricketer}} |heightft = 5 |heightinch = 10 → 5 ft 10 in (1.78 m)
• Karrie Webb {{Infobox golfer}} |height = {{height|ft=5|in=6}} → 5 ft 6 in (1.68 m)
• Johnathan Thurston {{Infobox rugby league biography}} |height = {{convert|1.79|m|ftin|abbr=on}} → 1.79 m (5 ft 10 in)

Johnuniq (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Does it really matter if the metric height is expressed in metres or centimetres? I would suggest just retaining each article's existing choice, along the lines of MOS:RETAIN and MOS:DATERET, rather than spending a whole lot of time and effort (and potentially conflict) on a relatively trivial issue which most readers probably don't notice or care about. - Evad37 [talk] 04:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

My attempted examination of profession examples, Johnuniq:

• Rugby league players: nrl.com (cm), rlif.com (cm)
• Golfers: lpga.com (ft & in), pgatour.com (ft & in)
• Cricketers: cricket.com.au (cm)
• Surfers: worldsurfleague.com (ft & in), surfermag.com (cm)
• Swimmers: swimming.org.au (cm), fina.org (cm)
• Basketball players: basketball.net.au (cm), nbl.com.au (cm + ft & in), olympics.com.au (cm), fiba.com (cm + ft & in)
• Tennis players: atpworldtour.com (ft & in + cm), tennis.com.au (cm)
• Models: fashionmodeldirectory.com (ft & in), vogue.com (ft & in)

This absence of metres won't come as a surprise to readers at all, Evad37. The use of metres might. Perhaps it's best to follow the principle of least astonishment.--108.161.119.246 (talk) 04:12, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Republicanism in Australia

Howdy folks. I do believe that further input may be required at the article-in-question. GoodDay (talk) 17:20, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

another perennial issue for the project to consider

Victoria - the current version - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Victoria_Australia#Requested_move_30_January_2016 JarrahTree 06:33, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedian in Residence (paid editing)

From start of February to mid April, I will be a Wikipedian in Residence at the State Library of Queensland for 1 day per week. This is paid employment and the subject matter will be Queensland in World War I as part of the State Library's commemoration of the centenary of World War I. My role will be to:

1. advise and assist staff and volunteers at the State Library of Queensland and their affiliated GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums) and heritage organisations to contribute content to Wikipedia relating to Queensland in WW1 drawing on the material in their collections as sources
2. personally contribute content to Wikipedia in relation to Queensland in WW1 drawing on those same collections as sources

The role has been designed to align with the Wikimedia Foundation's strategic plan to "improve quality ... via partnerships with universities, cultural institutions and other groups who align with our mission".

The State Library of Queensland understand the concerns about paid editing and conflict of interest on Wikipedia. I will not be expected to edit content relating to the State Library of Queensland or any topic that I believe would constitute a conflict of interest. The State Library of Queensland has a long history of being a supporter of Wikipedia, having contributed tens of thousands of out-of-copyright images to Wikimedia Commons and collaborated with Wikimedia Australia on providing Wikipedia edit training throughout Queensland. I will be the first Wikipedian in Residence at the State Library of Queensland with others to follow later in 2016.

Note, outside of my role with the State Library of Queensland, I will be continuing to edit as a volunteer, pursuing my usual interests of the Queensland Heritage Register and the history, geography and biography of Queensland. Kerry (talk) 01:49, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Excellent, great to see! --99of9 (talk) 01:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

You may want to consider a separate (but linked/identified) role account, per the legitimate uses section of WP:SOCK, to make it easier for editors to see which edits you make in your WIR role, and which you consider to be in your volunteer capacity. And, BTW, well done - I'm sure you'll make a good WIR - Evad37 [talk] 05:18, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Long-running edit war at Carl Katter

There appears to be a long-running edit war between a number of parties and I am not sure what (if anything) should be done about it. The revision history shows additions and reverts running back over a number of months since the article was created. I'm somewhat doubtful about the notability. Carl Katter seems to be getting news coverage mostly because he's gay and related to generally-regarded as anti-gay Bob Katter. There's a claim that Carl is going to contest a federal election but it's unclear from the citations whether he is actually pre-selected by the ALP at this stage in any electorate or merely putting himself forward. While the article has a number of citations but a lot of them are mostly similar reports in different newspapers of the same statements of what Carl Katter has said he's gunna do. The citations are full of weasel words like "poised to begin his own political career"; it all seems to be "what Carl said" rather than "what Carl did". Any suggestions? Kerry (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

The article has been edited by multiple SPAs dating back a long time. I don't see any obvious links in their edits that would indicate sockpuppetry, but there is a peculiar history.

• Keepingthebastardshonest (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 11 edits between 7 January 2014 and 30 January 2016
• Marcus.lavage (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 1 edit on 24 November 2014
• DemocratAU (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 4 edits on 10 May 2015
• Simple-Simon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 22 edits between 12 May 2015 and 5 January 2016
• Autobahn180 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 4 edits on 15 October 2015
• TopNotchPoet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 1 edit on 22 November 2015
• ResourceCD (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - 6 edits on 20 and 22 January 2016

The url in the infobox leads to an ALP website indicating that he is a candidate. The article has changed a lot since Keepingthebastardshonest started editing so, at this point, I'd just go through the citations and check them against the claims made in the article. There are some issues with some and the article does include some unsourced claims. As for the notability, I'm not sure. I got a similar amount of coverage, nationally, in the leadup to a federal election a few years ago but I don't have an article (and don't think I should) so I'm a little bit "biased" in this regard. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I think it's well past time this was semi-protected at least. For context, the edit war was originally a dispute about him (supposedly) being selected and then dumped as a state candidate (in a winnable seat) for the Victorian state election, 2014; he has been preselected (in a completely unwinnable seat) for the Australian federal election, 2016. The latter is uncontroversial fact but there's a lot of guff over what did or did not happen in 2013-14 around his supposed state candidacy that should be trimmed back from rumour and then protected to end it once and for all. I do think he should have an article - he is nationally known and has continued to be so for some time, but the BLP issues need to be clarified and dealt with. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Canberra Wiki meetup

I will be in the city for the Canberra part of the Wikidata Tour Down Under, though it would be also a good opportunity for a meetup of fellow contributors or those interested in Wikipedia/Wikimedia. The meetup will be at King O'Malley's Irish Pub located on City Walk in Civic on 17 February 2016. Bidgee (talk) 12:32, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Missing topics - a useful tool!

I just stumbled on this tool Missing Topics which looks for the most redlinked articles within some category (or category tree). I was aware of Wikipedia:Most-wanted articles but that's computed over the whole of Wikipedia and rarely were any of the most wanted topics anything I knew anything about. However, if I plug in my favourite categories into this missing topics tool, I see a list of topics that I do something about or know the sources that could be used to at least get those articles started. Note, it is very slow (minutes) when you ask it to search a huge category tree, so do be patient. Enjoy! Kerry (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Can you give an example of how this works? The concept of redlinks as sorted by category tree confuses me? The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

OK, I ran it with the category Category:History of Queensland with a depth of 10. This means collect up all the articles in that category or any subcategory of it. This produces a list of 2669 actual articles (not redlinks). It then runs through those 2669 articles looking for redlinks. It then produces a list of the redlinks sorted by how many actual articles were redlinking them. The redlinks themselves of course are not in the category, but clearly are a topic of some relevance to the category. Here's the start of the output I got (just the first few of a total of 695):

Created Sat, 30 Jan 2016 04:40:03 +0000 by the MissingTopics tool (run again with these settings)

Wanted	Title
30	Jack Duggan (politician)
25	Ted Walsh (politician)
24	David Gledson
24	Adolf Muller (politician)
23	Thomas Dunstan
22	Thomas Plunkett, junior
21	James Clark (Australian politician)
21	David Low (politician)
20	John Herbert (Queensland politician)
20	Harry Walker (politician)

So, 30 articles in the Category:History of Queensland (directly or indirectly) have redlinked Jack Duggan (politician), suggesting that's a good article to write if you care about Queensland history. 29 articles want someone to write Ted Walsh (politician) and so on. Indeed, what the list showed me that biographies (particularly of Qld MLAs) are definitely the most needed articles. The first non-biography to appear on the list was Bank of North Queensland (wanted by 12 articles in the category), followed by Brisbane Gas Company (9 articles wanting it).

Note, I was ticking the option to exclude redlinks coming from templates and to exclude once-only redlinks (the output is even more volumnous if you don't tick them). One thing to watch is that the tool defaults to German Wikipedia so you have to remember to set the Project to be "en" instead of "de" (I didn't notice this initially and couldn't work out why I didn't get any results). Have fun with it! Kerry (talk) 04:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the explanation - that's hugely useful (especially for Queensland, I might go write those myself!) I just ran the equivalent search for South Australia though and the results were way more bizarre (because we have articles on every MP).

Excluding newspapers linked from Trove citations and an Adelaide street, the top hits are three people that I've never heard of and Google doesn't clue me in any (Rodney Forbes, Paul Romano and Cameron McLean), and some racing car driver. It's only then that I get a Lord Mayor of Adelaide with an interesting past who I should probably write an article on. But otherwise some very odd results! The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

• To find out who any of these people are from a Wikipedia point of view, just click on the "what links here" link on their redlinked page, and you'll find that [27] all 3 of those guys are race car drivers too. The-Pope (talk) 14:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

For any politics buffs, I had much better luck running this against Category:Australian politicians by state or territory, which has a huge array of interesting political subjects with articles. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

• Note that WA now has a list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia/Missing topics - Evad37 [talk] 13:02, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I just created Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics/Missing topics as well. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:16, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
• 2 things to note. Phantom links can be detected if a "#ifexist:" function in a template tests for the existence of a page, then that shows up in the "what links here" list and also in the missing topics lists. See Hopman Cup (tennis) for an example - no real redlinks exist, but 22 show up in the "what links here" list. Secondly, as the tool uses the category tree, any incorrect or inappropriate categorisation can also result in strange results. For some reason, I'm guessing due to a war-related cat has been placed somewhere in the Aust Politics category tree, a heap of French and US navy gun links show up in that Australian politics missing topics list! The-Pope (talk) 05:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

It certainly looks like South Australia could do with some historic motor racing biographies, and some articles on country newspapers. I tried it on Category:Geography of South Australia and got a few meaningful hits, and a lot of reported red links for tennis tournaments where the link name ends with "(tennis)" presumably to attempt to disambiguate from golf tournaments, however the articles appear to exist without disambiguation. In investigating these, I found that quite bizarre (to me) redirect at South Australian Open which has redirected to Brisbane International since 2009. I agree this looks like a useful tool. Thanks for finding it. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

• Nice find, thanks for sharing. I have wanted this tool for about a decade. - Shiftchange (talk) 13:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

This is a great tool. It gave me an unusual result though. The #1 in-demand article for Category:Tasmania is Moorilla Hobart International (tennis). But the link doesn't seem to appear in any of the articles which allegedly link to it. It doesn't appear to be a template either. In any case the topic already exists at Hobart International, and while I could just create a redirect I'd like to track down the issue at it's source. -- Chuq (talk) 11:31, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chuq: - that sounds like the bug The-Pope noted above? The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:38, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Oops.. I managed to read 2/3 of the way through this discussion and then skip that. Looks like I may have to delve into the template code to find it. :( -- Chuq (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

There isn't really much that can be done: either (a) ignore redlinks of this type, (b) create otherwise useless redirects, (c) remove {{#ifexist:}} from templates, causing massive disruption and unnecessary manual work (in most cases), (d) beg the developers to fix the What Links Here function (probably low priority compared to other tasks they're working on). - Evad37 [talk] 00:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Quickly add local images to Wikidata

I just became aware of a pair of tools that make it very easy to add images to wikidata items if Wikipedia already has one. Here they are: wikishootme (run this first), then click the check Wikipedia link, which will dump the missing list into WDFIST. Let's see if we can get Australian objects linked to images. I'm up to a 10km radius, but that's inside Sydney. --99of9 (talk) 04:25, 20 February 2016 (UTC)