Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 16

< Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board

Wikipedia Australian chapter discussion

Local Chapter

I have begun investigating the possibility of creating an Australian Wikimedia chapter. I think this could be a great way to promote Wikimedia projects and recruit others in Australia. Check out m:Wikimedia Australia - Cartman02au 23:51, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Related: An idea was floated between me and Jnothman (talk · contribs) about a club at the University of Sydney about Wikipedia. See User_talk:Jnothman#Usyd_wikiclub for details. If there are any current Usyd students interested in this, could you please drop one of us a line? Thanks. enochlau (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The University of Sydney club would be a great idea, even though I'm not part of that august institution. I put my name and e-mail on the 'interested' list for the chapter in general, so count me in as part of the Melbourne/Victorian contingent. Thank you very much, Cartman02au - and everyone interested. EuropracBHIT
Will uni clubs survive beyond July next year... :/ pfctdayelise 03:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
They'll survive (or at least the ones that don't need funding simply to survive will), although there probably won't be any funding, and definitely won't be any after the end of first semester. That shouldn't be too much of a problem for a Wiki club though - the money would probably be only spent on food anyway. Ambi 03:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
What if a Wiki-club wanted to have extra paper and photocopying? And wireless so that people could bring their own computers (or PDAs), to save money? --EuropracBHIT 04:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC).
The University of Sydney Union, for the moment, has no intention of cutting funding to clubs once VSU kicks in - at the very least, it will provide funding for its members, as opposed to those students who are not. At Sydney, the Union provides for photocopying for clubs and there's free uni wireless, so those are thankfully not problems :) enochlau (talk) 04:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
The USYD club could be affiliated with a local chapter (a branch maybe?) but the chapter would be broader than the club. The idea would be for a group of people across Australia to work towards the goals of the chapter - Cartman02au 11:04, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
What are the goals of the chapter? There are four general goals, of course, but what are some things we can do now to help the chapter? Probably an example of each goal. Probably get more of us, to fill in for example, the ABN form. That form asks for at least six director-type people. I know we're canvassing 'people interested' at the moment, and there are a few of us who might, while interested, might not be capable or willing to carry out that type of role. User:EuropracBHIT
What form does a chapter take? A charity, a business...? enochlau (talk) 22:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • A chapter would take the form of an non-profit organisation. Unfortunately from what I have done with non-profits before fundraising for a non-religious organisation is quite difficult (many government issues to be aware of). At the moment the chapter needs supporters. The six director-type people would probably be elected by chapter members. I am envisioning that either the chapter would be set up as an incorporated association (much like a small club) or a non-profit company. The first is registered in a single state, so I am not 100% on how this works nationally. The second is expensive so that in itself is an obstacle - Cartman02au 04:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
    • It would be a good idea to have Wikimedia Australia incorporated (and have a presence in all the states and Canberra and Darwin). This site, OurCommunity, explains the procedure to have it done in Victoria. It needs five people only, for a start, and is under the 1981 Incorporation Act, and there's a Public Officer. Here it is: Community: how to make an incorporated association in Victoria.

--EuropracBHIT 06:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC).

  • Thankyou so much for that. Does incorporation in one state give the organisation legal status in other states? Do members have to reside in the state it is registered in (I know in NSW it works that way, or used to) - Cartman02au 09:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I've tried to read the Act, but I can't find anything so far which proscribes where people have to live, or especially the five people. It only has to have an address in Victoria. Here is the relevant Act, everyone: Association Incorporation Act 1981, reviewed April 2005.
  • I'll look much more carefully, of course!
  • --211.28.229.184 10:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC).
Incorporating would give legal status throughout Australia. Interstaters should be allowed to join, as the Australian Constitution prohibits discrimination against residents of other states (s117). Xtra 10:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a non-profit organisation (I am going off the US foundation), which is not quite the same as a charity, except for all practical purposes it is. I suppose in some ways it will have to run as a business. The main thing is: whether we are having to pay tax and whether anybody gets paid. --EuropracBHIT 23:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC).
  • You are correct. Unfortunately income tax exemption and deductible gift recipient status is difficult to gain in Australia unless you are a religious organisation. Gaining a fundraising licence in NSW is also difficult for the same reasons - Cartman02au 04:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't really think of myself as an anarchist, but I'd question whether the existance of any body corporate is needed (though a uni club seems the least beaurocratic option). I can't see it being worthwhile unless more than roughly $1000 is going to be spent by the organisation, or a legal entity needs to exist (for example, a bushwalking group may need public liability insurance). And if we spend more than $1000, we might be spending too much... Andjam 11:24, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

But isn't the point of opening a local chapter so that donations for Aussies will be tax-deductable? So I think we need the bureaucracy unfortunately. pfctdayelise 13:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
You're right, Andjam, that we who look after the Wikimedia Australia need to be as fiscally responsible/conservative as we can be. One expense for the chapter might be running Australian servers for the Wikipedia to go on, in case the Florida ones fizzle - just to make things run faster and more conveniently (that would be a lot more than $1000, I presume, unless we use Computerbank or something of that kind). I also agree that a university club (or a dozen) would be the one with the minimal bureaucracy. However, the 1981 Association Incorporation Act is meant to be easy and inexpensive with all the legal/moral/ethical protections required.
And Pfctdayelise (and everyone interested), there is more to Wikimedia Australia than tax-deductible donations. A lot, lot more. Like one umbrella to have Wiki activities, for social and educational purposes, as well as economic ones. Also so we can have a point of contact if there was ever an interview which required an Australian point of view. We are a vast continent full of enthusiastic Wiki users. We could be there to give guidance.
May I say that I usually feel uncomfortable with "devils' advocate" type arguments as I feel I am being baited and I would not make the decisions as clearly as I would otherwise. What do others think about the purposes of Wikimedia Australia? If we are going to be an incorporated association/company, we'd better have our purposes clear. If we're not prepared to take that step, then I completely respect that, but only if it's backed by consensus.
Regards --EuropracBHIT 04:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC).

Local chapter: Tax Deductible donations

The comment "Unfortunately income tax exemption and deductible gift recipient status is difficult to gain in Australia unless you are a religious organisation. Gaining a fundraising licence in NSW is also difficult for the same reasons" was made above. I disagree. There are numerous tests for religious organisations derived from numerous court cases. It probably is easier to get deductibility status for educational purposes. Obviously the purpose needs to be stated clearly. Most schools have a library fund associated with them, which has dectibility status. Some have a building fund. The entities running the funds need to be incorporated - the money needs to be associated with an entity other than individuals. Incorporation requires an AGM, lodging a return, audited accounts, office bearers. Incorporation is done at the state level. From my ACT P&C experience, P&Cs are not charge the exorbitant fees normal entities are charged for lodging their annual returns. The funds have separate bank accounts and their accounts are maintained, audited and lodged separately. I am not sure whether enough donations would be attracted to make the set up and maintenance effort worthwhile.--A Y Arktos 18:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

While it does seem it would be a lot of work, we only need to look at Wikimedia Deutschland as an example of what can be achieved by having a national chapter - they're received quite a lot of donations. Ambi 20:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately my experience (in NSW) has not been as pleasant. The Department of Gaming and Racing states religious entities can fundraise without a licence, others must gain one which is a pain. The tax office also haven't been that pleasant.
As much as I'd like to keep it simple, incorporation is better to be done at an early stage, rather than when the organisation outgrows the system - Cartman02au 02:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. Perhaps we should look at each jurisdiction to see which jurisdiction has the most user-friendly regulations. Capitalistroadster 04:46, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Local chapter: base

Just to let you guys know, we are voting for the base of Wikimedia Australia. Where would you like us to be registered? Say yay or nay on this page: [1]

--EuropracBHIT 11:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC).

Bit of a silly place to put this message, halfway in the middle of the page? Dysprosia 11:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Not really, it's like a "pinned" discussion - so it doesn't get archived? enochlau (talk) 23:35, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

reorganising queensland categories - will I upset the natural order of things?

I want to reorganise Category:Far North Queensland by creating sub categories eg: Category:Schools in Far north Queensland; Category:Towns in Far North Qld; National Parks in FNQ, and Geography of FNQ). This will mean creating Far North Queensland subcategories under Category:Schools in Queensland, Category:National parks of Queensland, Category:Towns in Queensland etc. i'm a bit worried that this will upset the natural order of things and create a regional subcategory in categories that don't currently have regional subcategories. I thought I'd best seek advice before diving in, so any advice would be appreciated. Thanks. -- Adz 02:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

  • First are there actaully enough articles in the parent cat to warrant making a whole bunch of new categories? Second, I think that you will really need to come up with subdivisions for the whole of Queensland so that other areas can also get subdivided as necessary.--nixie 02:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I've always found the Category:Far North Queensland category a bit quirky actually and I've got to ask. I'm aware it's a known geographical area referred to as such, but where's the "far north" begin? Brisbane? Townsville? Or will that be a point of dispute at some time? We don't have Category:Far North Western Australia or Category:Deep South Tasmania, or anything like it for any other geographical part of Australia? Why Queensland? -- Longhair 02:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems to be in the -also undefined- parent cat Category:Regions of Queensland which has all sorts of articles in it.--nixie 03:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
All those articles (except Buderim) happen to be regions within Queensland. -- Adz 03:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Queensland is a very large state with a disparate population (60% of which live outside of Brisbane), and the Queensland Government tends to divide things up into regions for administrative purposes. I’m not ‘’exactly’’ sure where FNQ starts but it is either just north or just south of Cardwell. It does include Innisfail, but does not include Ingham, which is closer to Cairns than Townsville.
There are nearly 100 articles in the Far North Queensland category, which indicates that there is a significant amount of information in wikipedia on the area. When I created the category some time ago I felt that it would be useful to readers and editors to have all the articles linked by way of a category. Other people have since also been placing articles in that category.
I don’t see why significant regions shouldn’t have sub-categories if there were enough articles to warrant them. Category:Gold Coast is another regional sub-categories that currently exists. The difference between Queensland and most other states is that the other states are more centralised and in some cases have smaller populations, so there is less to write about outside the capital cities. That said other regional sub categories might include the Hunter Valley region, Gippsland (lots of wikilinks there!), and the Pilbara/Kimberley region of Western Australia might be another. There are also city sub-categories in NSW such as Category:Newcastle, New South Wales. (none of which have as many articles as Category:Far North Queensland. Category:Suburbs of the Blue Mountains and Category:Regions of Sydney already exist as regional subcategories. There is also a subcategory for Category:Newcastle, NSW sports teams for example – so I think where there are enough articles, there is no reason not to have regional sub categories, its just a matter of working out how to fit the articles into the bigger picture.
In the case of Tasmania you wouldn't have "Deep South Tasmania" unless it was a recognised region. You'd more likely have Huon Valley, North West etc. ... if there were enough articles to warrant it. -- Adz 03:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
An article which defines the regions would be extremely useful, you might want to think about writing Regions of Queensland.--nixie 09:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Regions of Queensland article

Astrokey44 got the ball rolling and I've done quite a bit of work on it. I really need to go to bed, so I'm going to leave it as is for the moment - its a bit patchy but I think it is a good start. I would appreciate some feedback if people wouldn't mind casting an eye over it. I don't know if I have included too much info, or not enough, or whether I have been too narrow in focusing on statistical regions and not other less formal regions. Also, if anybody has some time on their hands and feels like creating some maps, I've left some links on the talk page. A map for Far North Queensland would also be appreciated (maps listed under reference 4 in the article). Thanks in advance. -- Adz 14:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism has started again

It looks like the vandalism has started again. User:Curps is blocking the vandal for now, but am sure help would be appreciated. In the meantime, the rest of us should keep an eye out for vandalism and do what we can. Unlike last night, the vandal doesn't seem to be using obviously Australian usernames tonight. -- Adz 06:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Let's hear it for goold ole curps - a legend in his own right! SatuSuro 07:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess he finally figured we could see he coming.--cj | talk 07:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
They're back. It's disappointing though. The vandalism isn't even hi-tech, and I suspect it's nothing more than some pimply faced geek (or a room full, somebody this stupid doesn't normally hold the imagination to be so creative with usernames) using Mozilla Firefox to perform a tabbed run of edit vandalism before being blocked. I pity the parents, but then again, they're probably to blame. -- Longhair 11:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Try to resist protection also please. It only moves the goose onto other articles. -- Longhair 11:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Australian unis template.

Hi again, I have put this template on all the university articles. - Randwicked Alex B 08:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

{{Australian universities}} -- What links here

Article on FAC

Cynna Neele is now up for nomination as a featured article. If you get a chance, please drop by and vote. Thanks, Ambi 02:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on it becoming a featured article! [2] Andjam 12:26, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

UnAustralian

I think an article on the word UnAustralian/Un-Australian would be worthwhile, covering the use of the word, its connection to social issues of the 90's and 00's, and also mentioning its use by some people to describe themselves. I found this article - http://www.tasa.org.au/SmithandPhillips2001.pdf - and there are many newspaper articles. I'd make a start on it myself, but I have some surfing to do (actually I'm focused on other Wikipedia articles). -- an arguably unAustralian Singkong2005 04:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that this article would have the potential to turn into a bunfight over what is and isn't unAustralian rather than discussing the origins and use of the term etc. It also has the potential to tie up the time of people who could be working more productively on other articles. I think its rsiky. What do others think? -- Adz 05:01, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
It could be listed at Australian words. It's also mentioned in Glittering generality. Or maybe create Nationalism in Australia (cf. Nationalism in the United States) and created a RDR to that. I just wouldn't put the article at UnAustralian, because I think what's interesting about it is not actually the word itself. pfctdayelise 05:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Adz that any such article would be very difficult to the extent that it could potentially degenerate into un-referenced POV wars. Whether or not anyone goes ahead with it, I really must insist it be spelt with a hyphen, that is un-Australian. There is stub on the term un-American, but then, that's a term far more common -- it's listed in OED -- and has more history (not that its article delves into it).--cj | talk 07:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I also think this could be become a battlefield. This was minor , but I wouldn't be asking for an extra helping of it. Also, if the article came into being, would notable left of centre politicians using the word be noteworthy, or only right of centre ones? Andjam 11:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

High Court Judges and their schools

I created a list of high court judges and their high schools at User:Enochlau/High Court Judges, prompted by a suggestion at Talk:Fort Street High School that the claims on Fort Street High School and Sydney Grammar School that the schools have 11 and 12 high court judges attend respectively are false. That does seem to be the case, but since I can't find the schools for 4 of them, a definitive number isn't possible to obtain as yet. Any ideas on where Taylor, McHugh, Heydon and Crennan went? Thanks. enochlau (talk) 04:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Susan Crennan went to Our Lady of Mercy Convent in Heidelberg. John Dyson Heydon finished his schooling at Shore (Sydney Church of England Grammar School) but was born in Canada and went to various schools around the world. Sarah Ewart 05:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! If I may ask, where did you find that info? enochlau (talk) 08:28, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
dyson heydon's biography is on HC website.--Sumple 10:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
No worries. If you go here: [3] and search for their names, you'll find a transcript of the speeches welcoming them as Justices of the High Court. Crennan's is here: [4] and Heydon's is here [5]. The welcome speeches usually include an outline of the person's education. Unfortunately, I think the other two are too old to have their records online. You would probably have to look them up in your law library. Sarah Ewart 10:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Meet Up in Sydney

Not sure if this is the right place for this [6]. novacatz 07:19, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Continue discussion here perhaps. The thing is, the meetup with User:Angela was only quite recent, so I don't know how enthusiastic the Sydney crowd is for another meeting. I for one didn't go to that, but perhaps this could be something informal that only has a little bit related to Wikipedia. Comments? enochlau (talk) 23:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Several people did two meetups in two days, so I think some people like meetups. :) Andjam 10:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Universities

Most Australian University pages don't have much detial on notable alumni and staff. Although they can be prone to non-notable additions, they do tend to make a mess on the University page. I have made a few lists from the exisitng pages, if anyone wants to make one for their uni I have named them (like the US articles) List of X university people, and put them in the cat Category:Lists of people by university affiliation - Australia. If anyone is super keen the best organised of these lists I've seen is List of Columbia University people.

Should chancellor and VC lists also be merged into these lists, I don't really see much need to separate lists for these and very few Australian Unis have these lists so far?--nixie 23:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

For the University of Sydney, the chancellor and vc are currently in separate articles, but that's because we don't have a proper staff list. I don't quite know where we'll get such a thing - if I compile one myself, it'll be biased towards my own faculties. enochlau (talk) 23:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Most unis have a press officer- they might be able to provide a list a significant alumni and staff.--nixie 23:20, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I've got no objection to merging Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor articles into lists of university people, but for chrissakes don't move them into the university article itself. Enochlau, try the whatlinkshere function from the University of Sydney article. It's how I found basically all the staff and alumni for this article. Ambi 23:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, good idea. enochlau (talk) 00:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
On a slight tangent, are VCs considered notable? If, for example, I was to write full articles for every VC of the University of New England, would they survive? - Kiwifruitboi 11:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I would be very surprised if any article on a VC was deleted. They're very often notable academics or otherwise important people anyway (ANU's is a former Cabinet minister at present), and even if they were just university administrators, I suspect a lot of people would vote keep based on the prominence of the position. Ambi 11:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight

Convictism in Australia is now the Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight. -- Ghostieguide 11:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Yagan on WP:FAC

Yagan is now up for nomination as a featured article. You can comment and/or vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yagan. Thanks, Drew (Snottygobble | Talk) 12:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


Something Exciting: Wikis in the TAFE Classroom

On my blogging travels, I saw an example of something Wikimedia Australia ought to support:

[Wikis in the TAFE classroom].

It is mainly for teachers. Go have a look!

--EuropracBHIT 03:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC).

Soccer / Football

I'm sure I've seen, somewhere, a discussion on the appropriate usage of 'soccer' and 'football'. This is in relation to the Special Broadcasting Service article. Going back into the history, I see it's been changed before [7]. I'm not really fussed either way, but I wanted to some clarification. Cnwb 05:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe this was also discussed on Wikipedia:village pump (policy) sometime in the last few months. Dmharvey 05:39, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
That sounds odd; I can't imagine why such an issue would be raised there. There has been a debate about the term in Australia at Talk:Australia national soccer team (now archived), during which consensus was formed (if very fragile) to raplace "football" with "soccer" in its title.--cj | talk 05:50, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I can tell you though that SBS most certainty uses the term "football" and the word "soccer" is hardly ever uttered. For example during the 2002 World Cup, the great Les Murray referred to the tornament as the "17th World Cup of Football" whilst over at Channel 9 they referred to it as the "Soccer World Cup". But we all know that the only real football is of course the great game of Rugby League :) -- Ianblair23 (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
The Australian Soccer Association became the Football Federation Australia in January last year. Football (word)#Australia has a fairly good explanation of the situation. Natgoo 07:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I found the discussion that took place on village pump (policy). I think this was the last post: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29&oldid=29340307#Football_.28soccer.29 Dmharvey 12:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
That'd only apply to articles where "wikipedia English" (ie no country in particular) applies. An article about ****** / ******** in Australia would be in Australian English, and therefore there'd be the opportunity for a whole new language stoush. Andjam 13:45, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It is true that "football" is starting to gain currency in Australia as the correct term for football. I couldn't care less what they want to call their code - I object to the fact that they try to make themselves out to be the original football code - and anyone who has even the slightest idea of Australian Rules Football would know that it is a no contest - the history of our game can stand tall alongside any other modern code you wish to mention. So it is this idea of exclusion (we are the one and only code that can use the term football) that I object strongly to. The other thing is that "soccer" is known throughout the english speaking world, so this rush to use "football" exclusively smacks of POV. Lastly, an interesting side point, in one of the Wiggles tapes, I notice that Anthony is speaking to a Mexican boy who explains in Spanish that soccer es uno di mis favoridos jogos or something similiar - I think we get the picture of what he is saying! But the point is that people will try to say that word soccer is not known outside of the english speaking word, to which I say 1. irrelevant, this is the english wikipedia, and 2. in any event, you're wrong!   ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 01:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
The name in Australia is and always will be, whether you like it or not, soccer and there is nothing the ASA AKA the FFA or SBS can do about it. AFL and NRL are far more popular and will never relinquish the title of football in Australia. Xtra 02:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
That may be, but if you say 'football' to 95% of the world they're going to think you're talking about soccer, not Aussie Rules or Rugby League. This isn't an Australian encyclopaedia, and the rest of the world (apart from the US) calls it football. In relation to the SBS article, they use football as standard [8]. Natgoo 02:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Think about it - if Australia, New Zealand, the US and Candada know the game as soccer - you've got most of the English speaking world covered - and this is the english language wikipedia! If that wasn't enough, soccer comes to us from the Brits anyway, being an abbreviation of Association Football. So take your pick, Soccer or Association Football, but not plain old Football. --  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 08:02, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
but if you say 'football' to 95% of the world they're going to think you're talking about soccer - source? :) Cnwb 04:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Getting nerdy for a moment. Let's accept the above proposition that
1. "football" would be understood to mean soccer by 95% of non-Australian readers.
And a few conservative assumptions:
2. "soccer" would be understood to mean soccer by 70% of non-Australians (i.e. 30% of non-Australian readers have never heard the term "soccer", knowing the sport only as "football");
3. "football" would be understood to mean soccer by 20% of Australian readers (i.e. the other 80% would understand the term to mean Aussie Rules or league or union); and
4. "soccer" would be understood to mean soccer by 100% of Australian readers.
A quick fiddle on my calculator tells me that using the term "soccer" would cause less confusion than the term "football" on article Special Broadcasting Service so long as at least 23.8% of the readers of the article are Australian. Considering it is an Australian broadcaster, I think it's a no-brainer. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 05:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think making assumptions about the reader (or abusing statistics, for that matter :)) is ever a good idea. Half the fun of the internet is random links and that applies especially on wikipedia. Honestly... how hard is it to just pick one and put a disambig-style notice at the top of the article? pfctdayelise 06:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

It matters more than anything else in the World. It is the single most important wiki issue doing the rounds. Everything else is just play time. --  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 08:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
can't we just use the international standard "football"? I know its a bit artificial, but it's like clinging to "horseless cart" when everyone else calls it a "car".--Sumple 11:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it's more important to establish the correct term for the specific article, not changing our language for the sake of universalising it. My feeling is that if the article is about an Australian topic, then it should use Australian terminology (despite what SBS chooses to do). As far as I understand, this is standard Wikipedia practice. And if Australian's happen to call cars "horseless carts", then our article should reflect that too. Of course, back in my day, suitcases were known as "Swedish lunchboxes", but nobody knew that except me. Cnwb 13:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Heh. My learning for today is that posting after getting home from a work xmas party (in January!) at 2am is not such a good idea :) I agree with Cnwb (now that I'm a bit more lucid and less grumpy). Natgoo 13:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Abe: Three wars back we called sauerkraut, "liberty cabbage", and we called liberty cabbage, "super slaw". And back then, a suitcase was known as a, "Swedish Lunchbox". Of course, nobody knew that but me.
Homer: [writes, "Then what happened?" on his chalkboard]
Abe: Anyway, "long story short," is a phrase whose origins are complicated and rambling.
From the Season Thirteen episode "Jaws Wired Shut" (DABF05) and one of my favourite quotes :)
I 100% agree with you Cnwb. Cheers -- Ianblair23 (talk) 14:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I also agree with Cnwb on this one. Agnte 15:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English says Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the spelling of that country Andjam 23:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyright law in Australia as mentioned in wikipedia

I was trying to look up copyright law for Germany (I was trying to see if copyright for the 1936 Winter Olympics still applies, and one user page apparently says "it depends").

While doing so, I came across a couple of wikipedia pages about copyright which are either incomplete about Australian copyright, or doesn't link to copyright expiration in Australia: Wikipedia:Copyright situations by country, Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Public domain. Is it because we're not certain that the information on this noticeboard is correct, or just that no-one's got around to updating those other pages talking about copyright? Andjam 13:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Any pointers on starting a Wiki

I am really interested in Wikis and I am trying to set one of my own up. Slight problem is that I have no programming experience.

I have downloaded MediaWiki, Apache and MySQL.

The instructions all look really simple but I just can't seem to get it to work. The problem is that I am just following instructions and don't really understand what I'm doing.

Does anyone have any hints?

--CharlieP 22:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

See Mediawiki. I've also replied on your talk page if you need any further assistance, I'm can be of some help with getting it up and running. -- Longhair 22:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
You should also be aware that there is plenty of other wiki software apart from MediaWiki, which might suit your needs better. MediaWiki is a big complicated piece of software, not always the best choice. Dmharvey 02:31, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
If you are interested in setting up a wiki community/site (bearing in mind that it may not be "your own" for long if it's popular) and not learning the programming, you could try Wikicities (a free hosting service for MediaWiki). Simply send a request stating the name of your Wiki and the topic to the lovely Angela Beesley and she'll set one up for you if it's approved. No need to learn MySQL, PHP or anything, just the usual wiki markup. Many popular TV shows have a wiki on the site, and it takes some of the load off the main Wikipedia site I guess. --Canley 05:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Depending on what you're looking for, Wikicities may be an option. However, if it's a personal wiki, setting up MediaWiki really isn't that hard. I'm not known for my computer literacy, and I was able to set it up on my laptop in a couple of hours, with the assistance of one of the manuals lying around on Meta. I did have a few problems, but if you have access to IRC, you may be able to (as I did) catch the developers in a good mood (irc.freenode.net at #mediawiki) and get them to explain things. Ambi 06:50, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I made some notes on some useful settings when I did a MediaWiki installation at work: [9]. enochlau (talk) 01:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Australian English and "take it outside"

Someone has created Wikipedia:Taking it outside. In Australian English, isn't "take it outside" an invitation to leave a pub to partake in a fight, which would be inconsistent with Wikipedia:Civility? Andjam 00:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't see a problem -- 'take it outside' is obviously slang - and on the page they explain pretty clearly what they mean by 'take it outside'. novacatz 05:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Are ya havin' a go, are ya Andjam? Do ya wanna 'ave a go, do ya? C'mon, I'll go ya. :) Cnwb 06:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Ay Cnwb when ya done mate, can I finish him of, Carn Mate or we can ave a go together. Enlil Ninlil 4:48, 16 january 2006 (UTC)

If you two are going together, it's no skin off my nose, but just take it outside, would ya? Ta mate. Ben Aveling 06:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Copyright on Australian Coats of arms, flags etc.

I am wondering if images like Image:Canberra coat of arms.jpg which should have had their copyright expire are able to be tagged {{PD-Australia}} or if some other unknown copyright provision still protects them? --Martyman-(talk) 22:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Possibly not copyright but their use in Australia can be regulated (see the flags act) (obviously dealing with the flag). Xtra 23:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm no expert on this, but Wikipedia:Image copyright tags suggests {{PD-Australia-CC}} - "for photographs held under Crown Copyright in Australia and published more than 50 years ago." I don't see why it should apply to just photographs and not a coat of arms, so maybe it is PD? enochlau (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Some Australian Coat of Arms are covered by odd copyrights for example the SA Coat of Arms is the Documents Act 1916 which specifies that no person can print, publish or manufacture the symbol without permission. Queensland is copvered by the Emblems of Queensland Act 2005. They probably all need to be checked. I think that there may also be some info on flags and Coat of Arms in the Copyright Act 1968. Any of the newer flags will most probably be copyrighted (NT, ACT, Aboriginal, Torres Strait).--nixie 02:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

John Warren (convict)

To my great surprise and disappointment, this article which I recently created has been nominated for deletion and appears likely to be deleted on non-notability grounds, despite referencing a reputable academic source. I would appreciate Australian input on this, whether you agree or disagree with me. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 06:23, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I've got to admit, I'm drawn to both sides of the debate here. Drew, I respect your view on the bias of biographical history, but I can see how others would view this as setting a precedence. You explain in the AfD discussion that about 100 of the 9000 transported to WA have been subject to biographical review. It seems that the only way this will pass through AfD will be if you can explain what makes John Warren notable - because at the moment it seems that being a convict and a teacher aren't cutting it. I had one of my own articles up there recently, so I know how it feels. Cnwb 06:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I've voted keep on the AfD vote. While I understand where the other side are coming from, it's a well-written article with an academic source, and Drew makes a good case on the AfD as to why it should be kept. Ambi 06:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Cnwb and Ambi. Permit me to repeat that I'm not looking for support here; I'm looking for considered input of any kind, but from a wider range of contributors than the regular AFD voters. The decision here will affect my future contributions to Wikipedia. I have a 144 page book Unbroken Spirit: The Life of William Boxhal: Convict 3744 sitting here on my desk in front of me. Boxhal was just another convict; he just happened to be one that someone decided to write a biography of. If John Warren (convict) is deleted, I certainly won't bother writing William Boxhal. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 06:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Down with systematic bias against non-notables! A proud member of [[Category:Non-notable wikipedians]] Andjam 07:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm probably on the delete side of the fence, sure he existed, but he didn't really contribute anything of note to Australian history.--nixie 07:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I have voted keep, but you probably have to justify it more nad quickly. You also need to have fewer 'red' links. Bduke 07:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

We should probably cease discussion here and put all further comments onto the AfD page, so that non-Australians are likely to see them and can comment. Sure, this page is open for all to see, but it's better if we don't huddle in a corner and chat about it here. Also, it will make discussion more centralised and easier to follow. enochlau (talk) 07:32, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

There's always the Genealogy Wikicity, which is useful for wikifying 'non-notable' people. I've been researching my family for almost a year, and have often thought it's be good to wikify it - so when I found the Wikicity, I was rapt. Mind you, it's a slow process wikifying my GEDCOM. Cnwb 11:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

These ppl are notable together as convicts. Why not summarise their biographies together on a separate article, called early convicts of [insert state]? --Sumple 05:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Photo identification help

Hi. After reading the Jindabyne article mentioning that it occassionally gets snow, I decided to see if Image:AndjamIDneededAAA030.jpg might be a relevant example. Would anyone be able to identify the location of the photo? Thanks, Andjam 08:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

It does remind me of Jindabyne (but it could just as easily be Guthega or half a dozen other spots, like arond Lake Eucumbene).   ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 09:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Likewise, reminds us of Jindabyne also, close to the turnoff up to Thredbo, but cannot positively identify it.--A Y Arktos 09:17, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Looks like Jindabyne. That looks like Lake Jindabyne with the small island. Could possibly be Lake Eucumbene. Will try to get confirmation from my Jindabyne family. Capitalistroadster 09:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Number of students at the University of Sydney

45,966 or 46,000? That is the question being debated at Talk:University_of_Sydney#45.2C966_students, over such changes as [10]. Please comment! enochlau (talk) 02:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

There's a possible edit conflict brewing at University of Sydney Students' Representative Council. Andjam 11:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC) (Statement withdrawn - Andjam 22:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC))

WA's acting premier

Just a heads-up that Eric Ripper currently doesn't have an article about him. I don't know anything about him, so I haven't started the stub. Slac speak up! 05:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Slac. It might also be an idea to work on some of the articles for some of the likely contenders for the Premiership. I can't remember the names but Carmen Lawrence said who they were on the 7.30 Report tonight. They will be in the transcript on the 7.30 report website when it is uploaded. --Adz|talk 10:15, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Carmen Lawrence suggests Jim McGinty and Alan Carpenter. Mark Ryan, our resident Western Australian, suggested Eric Ripper, Michelle Roberts, and McGinty. Methinks all four should probably get articles fairly quickly. Ambi 11:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Done (does this count as quickly? I'm a day late). Of course, the articles need a great deal of expansion, particularly Mr McGinty's. By the way, I note our coverage of Western Australian Legislative Assembly electorates is rather poor; none of these four have articles on their electorates. The template used for existing electorates appears to be "Electoral district of Foo". fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 02:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Bridges category by city, how about by state instead?

Currently Category:Bridges in Australia has cities (eg Brisbane, Hobart etc) as subcategories. I think this should be changed to have states/territories as subcategories (eg Queensland, Tasmania etc). This will avoid outliers like Batman Bridge being in the central category. Is this a good idea? If so I'll make the changes with my bot.--Commander Keane 11:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Seems like a very good idea. Bduke 11:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Seems like a good idea to me. Ambi 11:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable to me too. -- Adz|talk 11:45, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
A reasonable change for the better. Go for it. -- Longhair 11:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I descided to keep the Bridges by City categories, and just add the Bridges by State cats intermediately (to preserve cross categorisation, eg to cats like Category:Transport in Melbourne).--Commander Keane 13:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Just to note that the only article in the Bridges category left is Murray River crossings, because of course many of those bridges go from NSW to Victoria, though I think they are in fact all NSW bridges as the border is to the south of the Murray - must check and update the article ... I think the sub-categorisation is perhaps a bit over the top given the number of articles we have on bridges. Are you planning to add a significant number of new articles?
What we have now is
    • Bridges in Australia 1 article 6 sub categories
      • Bridges in New South Wales 1 article, 1 sub category
        • Bridges in Sydney 4 articles
      • Bridges in Queensland 1 article, 1 sub category
        • Bridges in Brisbane 12 articles
      • Bridges in South Australia 1 article
      • Bridges in Tasmania 2 articles 1 sub cat
        • Bridges in Hobart 3 articles
      • Bridges in Victoria no articles 1 sub cat
        • Bridges in Melbourne 3 articles
      • Bridges in Western Australia no articles 1 sub cat
        • Bridges in Perth 2 articles

We have a categorisation system of 12 sub cats for 32 articles. Even if the number of articles doubled this would seem over the top. I really think sharper categories were not warranted.--A Y Arktos 19:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I was of the assumption the city categories were going to be nominated for deletion. I agree, as it now stands it's a little overkill. -- Longhair 21:54, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand overkill. More infomration is now presented to the reader, how does less categorisation help? How much more expansion of the state bridges is required to warrant the new cat system?--Commander Keane 23:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think more information is presented to the reader. The location of the bridge is in the article text. Categories are useful for locating articles on similar topics, but is that what you are trying to do? Was a list of 32 too big? Editors interested in a particular topic can use the "Related Changes" function to find pages which are newly in a category and this can be useful to editors working on a particular theme. A category is not a list, and perhaps what you are trying to achive might be beter achieved by a list, I am not sure. Perhaps if you could articulate what is sought to be achieved by the creation of 11 sub categories for 32 articles.
Wikipedia:Category schemes and associated guideline at Wikipedia:Categorization gives no guidance as to small categories. Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes discusses the merits of the different navigation tools.--A Y Arktos 00:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
sorry, didn't fully address the question above "How much more expansion of the state bridges is required to warrant the new cat system?" I can't find any guidance on wikipedia pages. However, up to 200 pages will be listed on a single caegory page. I would say that until we have exceeded double the number of existing Australian bridge articles (ie > 64) sub categories may not be necessary. Just my opinion and could be altered by disproportionate number of articles for one river (the Murray for example) or one city, eg Brisbane is already at 12, straight State then city based might not be the most useful breakdown - eg the Murray might be a useful sub cat - at least 46 crossings.--A Y Arktos 00:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The Murray is of course why a state based system is less than useful. When the article is written on Bethanga Bridge near Bellbridge, Victoria, how would you categorise it? It will be pedantic, although accurate, to say it is NSW. Some of the bridges are maintained federally, most by both state governments.--A Y Arktos 00:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
    • But categories are not exclusive. Why can't we have the one bridge listed in both "Bridges in NSW" and "Bridges in VIC"? fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 00:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Because it is not "in" Victoria and nor is it a useful categorisation for a quite a large number of bridges. Why have sub categories been created for so few articles in a scheme that at the very least needs explanation.--A Y Arktos 08:29, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to re-organise categories relating to Australian Parliaments

In December 2005 there was a brief discussion at WP:AWNB regarding sorting out categories relating to the various Parliaments in Australia. (See Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 15#MHR Category). It was agreed that these categories are currently messy and need to be sorted out.

Since then Ambi, Snottygobble and I have discussed the problem at length and formulated a proposal to overhaul and clean up the current categories. The proposal is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics/Parliaments. If you're interested, could you please take a moment to look at the proposal and either provide comments or support on the talk page. Thanks. -- Adz|talk 01:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Fremantle prison peer review

I've taken the liberty of listing Fremantle Prison for peer review. Feedback or suggestions to assist us with improving this article are welcome. You may view the request for peer review here. TIA. -- Longhair 08:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Gun politics in Australia NPOV dispute

Hello, I'm hoping some experienced Australian Wikipedians can come and lend a hand at Talk:Gun politics in Australia. I reverted a series of edits by User:Yaf which more or less replaced all instances of the phrase "gun control" with "gun control over gun rights in the gun politics debate". Apart from being ridiculously unwieldy, it is completely unnecessary. He claims that the very term "gun control" is biased towards the gun-control POV... as if the term "abortion debate" is also inherently pro-abortion, or "republic debate" is pro-republic. The three most active editors of the page (myself included) agreed it should be removed, so I did so. Now User:Yaf has slapped a NPOV tag on the page, claiming it is biased against gun owners. I am unsure how to proceed. I think this is unjustified, since the page has arrived at its present balance by careful editing including response to previous NPOV disputes where bias was claimed to exist in the other direction. Moreover although we strive to present a NPOV, I and at least one other editor are strongly opposed to present levels of gun control so it's fairly ludicrous to suggest we're supporting bias in favour of gun control. It's my view that an article is acceptably NPOV if a majority of active, well-informed level-headed editors reach consensus, and this doesn't change due to one dissenting view from someone who hasn't edited the article before and doesn't even live in Australia (and therefore doesn't know what is "neutral" in that context). However I've not been involved in a dispute were negotion/capitulation has failed before so that's why I'm asking for more experienced opinions as to how things should proceed and whether I'm right or wrong in objecting to the NPOV tag. This article seems to have it slapped on so regularly, from both sides of the debate, that I fear it will spend more time with the tag than without, despite being (IMO) quite a good article. Thanks. --Russell E 23:51, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Note, responses moved to Talk:Gun_politics_in_Australia. Please continue the discussion there. --Russell E 05:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Feature candidate

Hi all. The Australia Portal has been nominated for featured portal status.--cj | talk 06:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

A holler to Sydney Wikipedians

We now have a date for a proposed meetup: Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney#5th_Feb_2006. Please drop a note there if you can make it. enochlau (talk) 23:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism - Tamworth, NSW

Heads Up - Tamworth, New South Wales has been getting vandalised reciently - I have fixed it twice, but I think it may happen again soon (given that its CMF time here) --bacco007 11:14, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Yet another FAC

Yet another one of those FAC things. Australia at the Winter Olympics is now listed as a featured article candidate. Feel free to add comments. Andjam 10:47, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, it failed (this time). It's getting better though. Andjam 12:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Patrick Alexander (cartoonist) listed for deletion

An article on the above cartoonist is listed for deletion. Although I have voted keep, I can't really comment on whether he is notable in Australia, being British, so it would be helpful if there were some Australian voices who could discuss his notability, or lack of it, there. Debate is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Alexander (cartoonist). Hiding talk 20:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


Cricket one day series

The article about the current one day series is here VB Series 2005-06. It might look good with photos if anyone is going to upcoming matches -- Astrokey44|talk 03:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

  • If anyone sees this, note that when writing about Michael Clarke, use Michael Clarke (cricketer) as there are a few Michael clarke's around the place - I am trying to disambig all the cricket Clarke references. Thanks, Blnguyen 01:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC).

Google Books

I just found Google Books. Could be a great resource for research on articles. Cnwb 01:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes, it's pretty good, but unfortunately it too suffers from the ubiquitous and offensive problem that it labels public domain material as copyrighted. David Carnegie's Spinifex and Sand, for example, is there but labelled as copyright material, and access is restricted to a few pages. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 02:19, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, alas it only provides a few pages from copyrighted works. One possible use could be to deflect AfDs where notability of Australian topics is questioned. I recently found myself defending an article on an important Melbourne experimental band from the '70s. There's little on the web to prove its importance, but I knew it was mentioned in a few books on the era. A resource like this could be useful in such a situation. Cnwb 03:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Google Scholar is also useful -- Astrokey44|talk 04:17, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Street food

I've taken street food in as my pet (the article, not the food itself); one of the gross omissions is Australia. I'm unqualified to say what they eat on the street in Australia (dingos? shrimp? crocodiles? frogs and rabbits out of spite?). Any contributions would be valued. Cheers! --Mgreenbe 23:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

An interesting article, but I don't feel we have street food vendors even to the same extent as the US. There are hamburger vans - eg Dolly's is an institution in Canberra. And I guess there is the infamous Pie floater from South Australia.--A Y Arktos 23:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
How about Mr Whippy vans? Cnwb 23:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
How about them indeed? I hate to be a schnorrer, but make a few additions and I'll give you a lollipop. Or an Israeli snack-food of your choice — seriously, I'll mail it (not responsible for tahini leakage if you ask for falafel). --Mgreenbe 00:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
"It was once more widely available in other parts of Australia but its popularity waned." lol. --bainer (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Pork rolls! or is that vietnamese street food? how about kebabs?
would you count school canteen food, i.e. shredded newspaper marketed as "chicken rolls" and "sausage rolls", as street food? --Sumple 03:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
That picture of the floater looks decidedly worse than university food. Anyway, I don't think I've seen anything like street food in Sydney before. enochlau (talk) 03:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
What about sausage sizzles. They pop up everywhere from fetes, outside your local hardware store and in the cities outside nightclubs at night. An example of street food? - Longhair 03:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we can probably resolve this problem if someone gave the street food article a definition of street food. Is it just food served alongside a street? Or something more specific? It's not very clear. enochlau (talk) 03:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Street food is food obtainable from a street corner vendor. There, fixed the page. So you have to be able to buy it without leaving the sidewalk. Sausage sizzles sounds like it; school-canteen food only counts if schools usually put their canteens on the street. I'd also only include things that are common; one Vietnamese street food stand in Porpoise Spit, Australia doesn't deserve a mention unless it's otherwise notable.
Whoever asked for pork rolls has another thing coming to them, but I could send some kebabs. --Mgreenbe 08:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I added sausage sizzle to the article. Not convinced pie floater still belongs as I don't think it is common street food, if it ever was. Garglebutt / (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Pie floaters were common in south Australia and also even longer ago in Sydney. Happy to have the mention qualified but I would like to see it stay as they were somewhat famous/infamous. This web reference mentions the Balfours cart in Adelaide still selling floaters. This SMH article talks about "the queue for a pie floater at iconic pie cart Harry's Cafe De Wheels. It's all about the pie, the mash volcano and the lake of gravy within. A cheap but tasty indulgence." If not common, at least notable.--A Y Arktos 00:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

AWNB overhaul

I've again had a fiddle and given this noticeboard an attempted overhaul. See my recent effort here. To summarise what I've done, I've used the Canadian notice board as a starting ground and localised their example for our needs and made a few further tweaks I felt improved the layout.

I think separating discussions that take place here onto their own page as per my example will help reduce much of the clutter and possibly not scare away a lot of new users not knowing how to navigate successfully.

The template on the right of my example wouldn't be too difficult to include into your user pages if that's what people wanted as well. Let me know what you think. After all the good work we do elsewhere at Wikipedia with articles and the like, I'd love to see this very page given an overhaul as well so we can get back to the real work at hand. If anything, a discussion on changes or improvements to this board would be become. I'm hoping for a design that allows at a glance anyone to navigate wherever they need. Currently, it's a nightmare for some. - Longhair 08:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


Good work! I think it is definitely an improvement on what we've got at the moment. Can I make a few suggestions?
  • Firstly, I'd suggest that we create a shortcut to the discussion page if we place it somewhere other than on the main noticeboard page (easilly done). - perhaps WP:AWNBD .
  • Secondly, It might just be my aversion to overt displays of nationalism on Wikipedia, and I realise that different people will have different views about this, but I think that the coat of arms is a bit 'in your face'. I don't mind there being a coat of arms and a flag, but don't see the need for it to be so big. If you want to use something large for formatting/layout, perhaps we could use a map. 'WikiNationalism'. Other national notice boards to compare with: WP:SWNB, WP:UKWNB, WP:NZWNB, WP:PWNB and the one you used as a template, WP:CWNB.
All in all thought, well done, definitely an improvement. -- Adz|talk 09:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the coat of arms. It's there as a short term filler. I was thinking more of featured Australian images on rotation perhaps. It might encourage more Aussie photographers to upload. - Longhair 09:22, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it might be good to list somewhere current Australian-related peer reviews and FACs, in addition to (not in place of) people mentioning them in discussion. Andjam 09:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Can I suggest that we instead run with Cyberjunkie's original idea? I agree that this does need to be overhauled, but I really don't like the idea of farming off the discussion to other places - since that was the reason this page was created in the first place. The best thing about this page is that it provides an easy and prompt way to contact most of the Australian Wikipedians, and putting the discussion on less-highly-read pages (especially to replace this with a near-static page) doesn't help things. Ambi 10:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Second that. The discussion is the most important stuff, it ought to be prominent. cj's version is at User:Cyberjunkie/AWNB, for people who don't know (cough). --bainer (talk) 10:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll fine-tune my versions and resubmit them for consideration. By the way, in place of the "References" sub-page from Longhair's design, I've starting setting up Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Tools.--cj | talk 10:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The designs at User:Cyberjunkie/AWNB and User:Cyberjunkie/Lab are both ready for use. What are your thoughts? I favour the former.--cj | talk 10:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I like User:Cyberjunkie/AWNB too, Longhair's design hides too many things on subpages, cj's is nice and centralised.--nixie 10:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I've implement the design as a trial to see what editors' reactions are to it.--cj | talk 13:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
  • The new design looks OK, but somehow I have lost the ability to edt individual bits of the discussion? Is it me, is it temporary, or is there some code?--A Y Arktos 20:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Fixed. See below. enochlau (talk) 23:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Australians of the Year

The 2006 winners have been announced, with short bios on each of them, at the website: [11]. None of these people have articles yet; if anyone has any sources on them, let me know. --bainer (talk) 08:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I've started an article on Ian Frazer, he's probably the only really notable one of the bunch.--nixie 09:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I added a quick line on Troy Broadbridge's article about Trisha as Young Aust. of the Year. Harro5 10:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Austrlia Day Userbox

I just wanted everyone know I have made an Australia Day userbox for those who want to use it. It is {{User Australia Day}}.

Happy Australia Day. - Blarneytherinosaur 02:06, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Advertising in Australia

Is there anything in wikipedia about advertising in Australia? The closest thing I could find was List of Australian and New Zealand advertising characters, but you couldn't list Leggo's use of major figures, VB ads, Kia's use of Damir Dokic, etc. there. Andjam 10:28, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

While we're on Australian advertising, see List of songs featured in television commercials. Rogerthat Talk 04:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
I've created Advertising by Westpac to describe their advertising at the 2000 Summer Olympics and 2002 Winter Olympics. Andjam 12:01, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

People of/people from categories

Hi folks,

Recently all the categories of the form [[Category:People of State]] were renamed to the form [[:Category:People from State]]. While the renaming was made for eminently sensible reasons, to my mind the change implies a profound change of category semantics. Whereas "People of" allowed the inclusion of any person important to the culture of a state or territory, "People from" implies birth in or at least substantial early development in a state or territory.

In the case of Western Australia, the effects are huge. W.A.'s three biggest historical figures? Stirling, Forrest, O'Connor; only one qualifies as "from" W.A. Our sportspeople? Adam Gilchrist is "from" New South Wales; Damien Martyn, Northern Territory; Chris Judd, Victoria; Peter F. Bell, South Korea. Our premiers? Daglish was from Ballarat. Our musicians? John Butler was born in California. Even our best known criminal was born elsewhere.

Because of this, there is hardly a subcategory of Western Australian people that can now be listed as a sub-category of Category:People from Western Australia. Category:West Coast Eagles players? No, plenty are "from" other states. Category:Convicts transported to Western Australia? No, they came from England. Category:Governors of Western Australia, no; Category:Premiers of Western Australia, no; Category:Explorers of Western Australia, no.

To my mind this change of a single word means that we no longer have a workable system for categorizing people of cultural importance to a state or territory. And I really don't think that's acceptable. While I do support the existence of "from" categories, I wonder what people think of the idea of establishing the two categorizations in parallel. There are precedents for this; for example Category:Australian explorers and Category:Explorers of Australia.

Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 00:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

That could lead to much duplication. How about [[Category:State people]]? That will cover both cases. enochlau (talk) 00:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
The problem isn't unique to Australia, most places have a "people from" category, which generally includes people that are born in a place, or spend a large portion of their life there - you tend to get a lot of these cateogries applied to "international" people, which I don't really think is a problem. Looking at the way these catgories are used in Wikipedia not being born in a place doens't seem to exclude a person as being "person from place".
I also don't think that there is an inherent incompatibility with having Category:Premiers of Western Australia or Category:Governors of Western Australia as a subcat of Category:People from Western Australia, most places seem to put their elected representatives within a general politican from place category, like Category:New York politicians as a subcat of Category:People from New York (even if the person wasn't born in New York). Unless the explorers of Western Australia are from WA, they shouldn't be a subcat of the People from WA category. I've discussed what I think should be done with convicts on Drew's talk page.
I requested the move so Australia's categories would follow a similar pattern to those being used by other countries, making dual of and from systems is a bad idea.--nixie 01:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Photo links

There has been an addition of photo links to a few town articles from the IP , User:144.137.15.187, for example Photos of Euroa to Euroa, Victoria. They are quite good photo links but I was feeling that perhaps it was getting to the point of spam linking or similar - more because it is an anon IP that is doing nothing else but adding these links. Other views?--A Y Arktos 01:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

  • They are links to non-commercial content and do add to photoless articles, so I don't see any harm in keeping them.--nixie 01:39, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I was also on the point of reverting from how it looked, but the page linked seems to be mostly photos, not overtly pushing the travel agent or similar, so I've let them stay. He/she was using User:144.137.49.8 and User:144.137.3.109 last week. They all appear to be portable IP numbers belonging to Telstra Internet. --Scott Davis Talk 04:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not sure that an Australian article will be without these links soon - more being added today from 144.137.53.195 - I have invited them to sign up etc--A Y Arktos 00:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Major Australian sporting events

Category:Major Australian sporting events has been deleted because "This category is point of view. I don't see similar categories for other countries". I'm not really sure thats a decent reason, and I don't see what's POV about it. Do you think its a case for deletion review or should it be recreated as Category:Australian sporting events? The category had articles for the boxing day test, sydney to hobart yacht race, AFL grand final, etc etc. Agnte 17:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I can't see what was wrong particularly with the former category given the articles included, but why not go with Category:Australian sporting events? --A Y Arktos 20:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Major is subjective, and thus violates NPOV; hence the deletion of the major sporting events category.--nixie 23:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Is "notable" also subjective? Andjam 23:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Would 'prominent' be a better word? The articles/items Boxing Day Test, Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race, AFL Grand Final, Australian Open are 'Major Australian sporting events' (and there would be a few media mentions to back that up). I'd expect a Category:Major US sporting events to include the superbowl, the world series, daytona, kentucky derby, verious hosted olympics etc, and theres nothing POV about that either. If it's a major event, it usually garners a large amount of media coverage (and is probbably covered live), and could do with its own category. Wikipedia isn't lessened by this. Agnte 23:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
What happens to events that are notable enough for their own page, but aren't in the forefront of public coverage (eg Kangaroo Hoppet or Mount Buller World Aerials)? Would they be in or out of the category? Andjam 23:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the category should be Category:Australian sporting events. If and when someone writes an article on the Whim Creek Egg and Spoon Race Olympics, we can start worrying about how to create a more exclusive yet NPOV category. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 23:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
A general category is a good idea. By adding notable or major, you are making a judgment about the importance of an event, and categories shouldn't do that.--nixie 00:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Section editing with new design

There's a post above, but I'll bump this up. We seem to have lost the ability to edit individual sections, which is really problematic. I've checked this page and the transcluded subpages, but I can't see a __NOEDITSECTION__ or similar, so I'm baffled as to what's going on. enochlau (talk) 23:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, did an experiment: it's the Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Layout - but that transcludes further templates... enochlau (talk) 23:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Fixed. It was hiding in Portal:Australia/Opentask. I don't know if that'll break something somewhere else though. enochlau (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing, glad it wasn't just me :-)--A Y Arktos 23:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I think it was just a bit of un-necessary wikisyntax.--cj | talk 00:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board/Archive_16&oldid=1138375930"