Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 40

Copyright status and appropriate labeling for Australian War Memorial images under discussion, again

Grandiose (talk · contribs) has raised concerns about the labeling which is being used for pre-1946 images taken from the Australian War Memorial's database and whether post-1946 photos are at all usable in this A-class review. Following on from this, he or she has started a general discussion of this issue on Commons here. Comments from editors knowledgeable about these issues would be highly appreciated. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 11:55, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Propose a new Category "New Zealanders in Australia"

I am a New Zealander in Australia. It seems to me that there is a shortage of knowledge available to New Zealanders in Australia.

Information like:

• how to lodge a request for an ATO TFN
• how to get access to medicare
• medicare lifetime eligibility
• how to transfer private medical funds
• purchasing property in Australia
• CGT - capital gains tax
• stamp duty
• GST differences
• rights for New Zealanders in Australia
• social welfare rights (Centrelink International Agreements)
• internal affairs (New Zealand Embassy)
• how to access New Zealand sports information (live for free)

The latter being the most important of course :-)

There are around 560,000 New Zealanders in Australia. New Zealanders (permanent immigrants), many more if you include tourists, which is a lot. The Australian government is confused generally about New Zealanders rights, and creates a lot of misinformation. It would be awesome if Wikipedia became an unbiased source of information for New Zealanders living in Australia.

Thoughts?
Joshannon (talk • contribs) 03:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

A worthy aim, but not really what Wikipedia is about. See WP:NOT. Doesn't the NZ HC website have this sort of info? Maias (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

This sort of thing would probably be better suited to a Wikia site (http://www.wikia.com), which uses the same MediaWiki software as Wikipedia, but is more suited to the sort of "how-to" or advice information targeting a particular community (such as New Zealanders in Australia) than Wikipedia is. --Canley (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

See also Category:New Zealand emigrants to Australia, Category:New_Zealand_expatriates_in_Australia and Category:Australian people of New Zealand descent. To be honest, I've always been a little unclear on the difference between the first two. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Joshannon, you might try asking at WP:RD/M. Some of your questions can probably be answered by a search at the websites of the Australian Taxation Office, Medicare, Centrelink, New Zealand High Commission Canberra, Australia (which "provides information for New Zealanders living in Australia"). Mitch Ames (talk) 12:07, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I will check out the links and references. --Joshannon (talk) 13:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Move request

Can an administrator please look after this move. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

done- didn't need admin. Crusoe8181 (talk) 01:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Building naming conventions

I stumbled across the article His Majesty's Theatre, Perth, and noticed that a lot of the buildings in Category:Landmarks in Perth, Western Australia are named Building, Perth or Building, Western Australia. Is that standard practice for Australian articles? Typically (I usually slum around Canadian articles) I see them in the format of Building (Perth, Western Australia) (the parentheses matching whatever the article name/categories are, in this case Perth, Western Australia), with the former format is usually reserved for cities, towns, and the like. There seems to be a combination of styles in the naming of these articles --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a mixture of disambiguation and there does not appear to be a consistent reason for it. I agree, the comma is reserved for cities, towns etc. (supplementary question - why not brackets here as well?) and brackets should be used everywhere else inlcuding the buildings. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Cities and towns may be labeled like that because that is how they are frequently referred, such as in the prose of an article, you would refer to somebody as being from Perth, Western Australia, or Sydney, New South Wales, etc. I am just going by what we use at WP:CANSTYLE, which we also adopted at WP:MINING (and shamelessly stole the name WP:MINESTYLE), which uses the modifier in parentheses.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 11:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Any objections to my moving the building/bridge/street articles to ArticleName (Perth, Western Australia)? Excluded would be something such as Central Park (skyscraper), as it is not identified as a skyscraper in the name of the article, it more to distinguish it from a park in New York.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Allegiance Accounting

Hello, I've userfied an article on an Australian company Allegiance Accounting, to User:Madnanbash/Allegiance Accounting. I can't find anything online to show notability for this company or the award for which it's been nominated, but Australian editors might be better able to help with this. Many thanks, Scopecreep (talk) 09:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Suburb area

What is the source for Melbourne suburb sizes in their respective articles? I can't find any sources for that info. Any help? BlackCab (talk) 05:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any examples? I had a look at a few Melbourne suburbs and they didn't have area information. It might be easier to confirm the source or find similar if the data that is in the article is known. That said, it's very likely to be from the Australian Bureau of Statistics geographic data—I haven't found it yet, but I'll keep looking. Another possibility is that some local councils release such data: City of Yarra has very detailed suburb profile books and City of Melbourne have "Melbourne by the numbers" statistical and geographic data on their website. Also, have you tried asking the editor(s) who added the area information? --Canley (talk) 00:58, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

You seem to be able to get population and area information from links at the list of local councils here. Maias (talk) 03:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The most reliable source is the ABS - go to the census data page, search for the State Suburb, and download the "Basic Community Profile" zipped Excel spreadsheet. Click on "B01" on the page you see (or in fact any other blue link) and the area is listed at the top. This is the area used by most researchers for formal purposes. Note that in outer rural areas these are sometimes not reliable because not every gazetted suburb has an SSC code; also, any suburbs which have been subdivided or altered since the 2006 census will obviously have changed. Orderinchaos 05:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Even when gazetted suburbs do have an SSC code there's no guarantee that the area is correct. In fact they can be vastly incorrect. This is more often the case outside the cities (not necessarily rural), but city suburbs are generally accurate to some degree of usability. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:09, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. The Victorian government has also just released a mass of census data in their Victoria in Future document which contains a list of Excel files containing suburb areas. I'm fine now. BlackCab (talk) 09:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting missing article: Australian Aboriginal League

Sharing this redlink in case anyone is interested in such topics and wants to try to get an article going: Australian Aboriginal League . Ran across it due to this interesting bit at Kristallnacht:

“ The only private protest against the Germans following Kristallnacht was held on December 6, 1938. William Cooper, an Aboriginal Australian, led a delegation of the Australian Aboriginal League on a march through Melbourne to the German Consulate to deliver a petition which condemned the “cruel persecution of the Jewish people by the Nazi government of Germany.” German officials refused to take the document. ”

Hope someone finds this interesting and article-worthy; there appear to be enough refs for a basic start on GoogleBooks. MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

It also seems to have been spelt "Australian Aborigines League" or "Australian Aborigines' League", formed in 1934 and later to become the Victorian branch of the Aborigines Advancement League. Maias (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

PS: See also William Cooper (Aboriginal Australian). Maias (talk) 02:11, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Missing also is .Bill (William T.) Onus and perhaps Eben. Lovett. The Aborigines Advancement League is still flourishing but little on its founders; the 1930s seem to be the Dark Ages in Australia, so contributors with a knowledge of that period would be welcome Crusoe8181 (talk) 04:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I've done quite a bit of work on some of the New Zealand Māori articles and would be happy to work on Aboriginal articles, but I predict that the hardest part is going to be finding sources. I this case Trove seems to find some things including this. Does the Australian WikiProject have a list of such wanted pages? Stuartyeates (talk) 04:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, new stub at Australian Aborigines' League, feel free to expand. Maias (talk) 05:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Article title question

John McCarthy QC was created today by a new editor for our new Ambassador to the Holy See. The use of QC in the title attracted me to the article and as I was about to move it to John McCarthy (Australian ambassador) I realised that we've already got one of them. So other than the clumsy John McCarthy (Australian ambassador born 1942) and John McCarthy (Australian ambassador born 1947) I thought I'd ask for other options. John McCarthy (QC) is an option, but WP:NCP states that Where such qualifiers are used, they are not abbreviated, so John McCarthy (Queen's Counsel) is an option, but maybe John McCarthy (lawyer) is more generic, but of course, the other guy was also a lawyer (and neither are notable as lawyers, they are notable as ambassadors). So opinions? (coincidentially, my usual area of editing, AFL, also has 2 John McCarthys... and we've defaulted to using year of birth to differentiate them.) The-Pope (talk) 15:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd probably go with John McCarthy (QC). Contrary to what NCP says, we have hundreds of Victoria Cross recipients who are disambiguated with just "(VC)" and I think this falls into a similar category, where the abbreviation is very well known. Personally, I really dislike using year of birth as disambiguation (how is someone searching going to know if the guy they're looking was born in '42 or '47?), so others may have a different opinion. Jenks24 (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The main place I see this issue is with footballers (of the association variety), and I usually see them disambiguated via the footballer born XXXX (see here). Another option is to use middle names (if they have them, or if they are known). My suggestion would be middle names, that way the article titles are not so messy. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that none of the cites in this article were formated properly (bare urls) and have now fixed this (note: I have not checked for factual accuracy, simply the formatting), while doing this I noticed that John McCarthy QC has a middle name; Anthony (see here). Would John Anthony McCarthy be a possibility for a new name for the article? Liamdavies (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Unlike the Americans, we rarely use John A. McCarthy or John Anthony McCarthy to refer to him, and similar to the year of birth, it is not something that most people who are looking for information on him, would already know. I had a quick look for a middle name, and overwhelming found that John McCarthy QC was the most common reference to him other than just John McCarthy. Interestingly I found that the other Ambassador was refer to as John McCarthy AO a few times! I think John McCarthy (QC) or the current title is the best option. The-Pope (talk) 16:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Craig Thomson affair

Looking at List_of_Australian_political_controversies, I think it's high time we added a fresh item to the list revolving around the scandal involving the HSU and Craig Thomson. Given that the thing has been front page news for years and we've finally gotten a really good and authoritative source here, not to mention the various executive summaries making the news today here and here, to pick two. I've made some comments here and here. --Pete (talk) 00:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Dai Le

In April I successfully prodded Dai Le because the individual's only claim to fame seems to be that of being a failed political candidate, which we've agreed is not sufficient notability for creation of an article. A WP:REFUND request was made at the deleting admin's talk page,[1] and the article has been restored. Consequently, it's now at AfD. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:11, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

{{Infobox Australian Hut}}

Was anyone aware of this TfD? --AussieLegend (talk) 04:25, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Request for comment, Australia

A request for comment has been made by myself on the talk page of the Australia article, regarding a discussion on the inclusion of the Australian royal anthem in the infobox. Please comment on the matter if you have an interest in the Australia article. Anjwalker ^Talk 07:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

considering the amount of energy gone into that discussion - one only hopes that some common sense comes out of it - it sure looks like an elongated discussion of tea leaves in a tea cup (i.e. surely there are better things to get on with than spend so much energy on such an issue) - surely someone can resolve it sooner than later.... SatuSuro 09:22, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Alinta

There is discussion about the update the Australian energy company Alinta article and its connection to Alinta Energy. Your input to clarify these issue and update these articles is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 09:12, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/TOC

Could somebody who is good at laying out pages update the TOC for this noticeboard so it uses standard templates, so there's no need to manually update it? Instead of the manual archive list and search box that didn't link to archive 40 until I edited it, we could use {{archive box|root=Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board|auto=yes|search=yes}}. Instead of the notice about automated archiving that linked to the wrong place until I got there, we could use {{auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot II|age=14}} (there's no need to link to the target page ... updating it is just busywork). The new section link is fine, but it's possible to use something like {{AddNewSection|tab=yes|page=Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board|text=Start New}} if that's appropriate. Graham87 02:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I've made the changes that I've suggested myself. Apologies in advance if I've messed up the formatting ... I can't see what I'm doing. Graham87 08:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I thought it still looked a little wonky (technical term), as the numbers were not evenly distributed, and it was above the TOC, rather than to the side of it. I "fixed" it, but there are still a couple issues that I have with the layout that I did.

1. Notification is pushed into the first section (not an issue as the table of contents grows)
2. Font in the Archive list is a little small (I think there is a variable to change it but I can't figure it out)  Fixed
3. No "Start A New Section" at the top of the archives. Personally I don't know if that is necessary, but it could be manually added, or there may be a template that looks a little jazzier. I don't care for it, but that's just me. Fixed

If you guys don't like it, feel free to revert my "improvements", after all, I'm just visiting. Cheers, --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I've removed the auto archiving notice template as it's now subsumed into the jazzier archive box. Graham87 10:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

WLAN and CSIRO

I've been informed by the National Museum of Australia that they're really interested in helping to make sure that the important Australian connection to the history of Wireless LAN and IEEE 802.11 is covered - because currently it's not mentioned at all. There's a little bit in Wifi#History and also a section at Commonwealth_Scientific_and_Industrial_Research_Organisation#802.11_patent but I'm not sure that's sufficient. Basically, I reckon that the WLAN and 802.11 articles seem to be overly US-centric.
Please advise if you'd like me to put you in touch with a relevant person at the NMA to help gather sources, but for a start here's their "collection highlight" record about CSIRO's contribution to the development of WLAN see: http://www.nma.gov.au/collections/highlights/csiro_wlan_collection. Sincerely, Wittylama 02:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Lists by state

Do we really need to have lists in Australia and then the same list by state? For example, we have List of hospitals in Australia as well as List of hospitals in Queensland, List of hospitals in Tasmania, etc. In this case the Australia-wide list is expanded and updated far more often than state lists. It is pure duplication. Is there any support for a merge of hospital lists and are there any other example of similar duplication? - Shiftchange (talk) 06:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• Support merging. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• Yeah, support. A bunch of them are already redirects. Frickeg (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Australian Bureau of Statistics data

I've started uploading a lot of charts of ABS data to Commons, but there are way too many for me to personally include in en-wiki. So if anyone is willing to help out, here are some things you could do (I'll add to this list as I upload). --99of9 (talk) 04:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

• Pick a country, any country.

• See if the economic relations section could do with an image of the import values from any country to Australia.
• See if the travel relations section could do with a graph of the inbound tourist numbers, or outbound tourist numbers.

Herveys Range

An IP editor working on Herveys Range wants to re-add unsourced, point of view and un-encyclopedic material based on personal knowledge. I know its a small matter but could a few people watch and revert it when necessary. - Shiftchange (talk) 06:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

A similar thing has occurred at St Johns Wood, Queensland. I made this edit to fix some obvious problems which were simply reverted the following day. Maybe a few more experienced editors can keep an eye on this as its being edited about twice on a day on average. - Shiftchange (talk) 03:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The editor is obviously inexperienced. I've just done some cleanup and tagging,[2] so we'll see what happens. --AussieLegend. (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

And is Herveys Range Heritage Tea Rooms notable, before one of us must remove apostrophe's from plural's and the Usual Famous Well-Known etc? Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hervey Bay Workshop draft pages

New user draft pages have been created at the Hervey Bay Workshop which is happening today. Please help improve them so they can make it to the main space. - Shiftchange (talk) 02:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Gympie Workshop draft pages

New user draft pages have been created at the Gympie Workshop which is happening today. Please help improve them so they can make it to the main space. The articles look very promising with nearly all of them notable imo. - Shiftchange (talk) 02:09, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress which proposes to rename the Wikipedia article about Perth (Australia). Please participate at Talk:Perth, Western Australia - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

St Johns Wood

Should St Johns Wood, Queensland (first mentioned above) really exist? It appears to be about a 0.487km² housing subdivision that is part of the larger, 5.9km² suburb of Ashgrove, Queensland. There's a lot of historical content in the article but I don't see real notability. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It's reasonably well known as a locality in the area, for whatever that's worth. It's used in news articles as a locator, for instance this one and this one, which don't describe the location further, as locals would already know the place being talked about. I think (but I'm not sure), that at one point it was an 'official' bounded suburb, which would throw another spanner in the works.

A lot of other Brisbane localities with rich histories are omitted from Wikipedia which I think is a shame. End the war on localities! ;-). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC).

Agreed about the "war" on localities. We sometimes get ourselves into the mindset that "localities" and other geographic areas are only worthy of coverage if officially listed by some government agency. This is not so. All we need is reliable independent sources covering the subject. It annoys me when I see perfectly valid articles on neighbourhoods, rural localities etc deleted or merged with the only justification being that it is not officially gazetted. Not everything that exists is necessarily on a government list! -- Mattinbgn (talk) 11:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I thought there was an attempt at the long dormant Australian Places sub project had established precedents and standards on this. For instance the railway station location issue was tied in as well - railway stations that no longer exist are still accepted no? SatuSuro 11:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It is a LOCU (unbounded neighbourhood) which often means an area of a suburb with a distinct history and nature, which does seem to be the case with this one (on the other side of the creek, and if you read far enough into the guff it may be apparent). Were it an abject stub I would probably have prodded by now, but it does have content, albeit a well-written article for a local history magazine. That it is full of WP:OR (interviews with locals), WP:UNDUE etc. is something we will encourage the main editor to address (or waste our time fixing when they vanish, as can happen!). It was a postal address before official bounding of suburbs. Not many of these bits of suburbs would seem to deserve articles, but a few such as this one and Westgarth, Victoria for example are useful additions. Can't see a war as the original editor has a good point which he should expect to be addressed. Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It was a comment in jest. Hence the smiley face. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC).

I don't have an issue with articles on notable localities, but I think we need to treat them as with any other article, ie we start off with one article about a subject and then split out to sub-articles when the article is big enough to split. As St Johns Wood is a subdivision of Ashgrove, it really should be in a sub-section of that article until Ashgrove, Queensland is large enough to split. Currently, even with all of the WP:OR and WP:UNDUE mentioned by Crusoe8181, the two articles contain only 20kB of readable prose, which is well below the 40kB that WP:SIZERULE says is not long enough to justify splitting the article. Once the WP:OR, WP:UNDUE and excessive number of images are removed the length is likely to be a lot less and would easily fit into Ashgrove, Queensland. --AussieLegend (talk) 16:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Ideally yes, containing locality information within a larger suburb is preferred. However some localities don't have a defined border or exist across multiple suburbs. Buranda is a case in point. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Midnight Oil disambiguation

Does this recent page move seem OK? Dl2000 (talk) 03:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

No. Fixed. Hesperian 03:42, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

No, I don't think it is. As you said in one of what looks to be multiple reverts, it's an inappropriate and unnecessary use of a disambiguation page to refer to a poorly-referenced dictionary definition, with no actual article. Also if there was an article on the "Burning the midnight oil" idiom I would call it that and disambiguate with a hat note from the band article as the primary topic. At the very least, I would have the dab page uncapitalised (which it should be anyway) and the capitalised version as the band article. --Canley (talk) 03:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

This is pretty much all of what I just did to fix the problem. Hesperian 03:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Perhaps a temporary move protect may be in order. Canley's suggestion for lowercase article disambig seems reasonable. Dl2000 (talk) 04:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Railway Resource Centre

I have tagged Railway Resource Centre (Australia) because of notability and referencing issues. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikinews for Australian Wikipedians

Hi. On 17 and 24 June 2012, we will be having a workshop for Wikipedians and Commons users from Australia with an idea of improving news coverage for Australia on the project. If you ever wanted to learn, this is your opportunity. Details can be found at Wikipedia:Meetup/Australia. :D --LauraHale (talk) 05:08, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Image copywrite again

Recently there have been a couple of AFDs at Commons that have resulted in the deletion of many Public Domain Australian images as they weren't PD in the US in 1996. See commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Various PD-Australia after 1945 and Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 May 18. Can someone confirm for me that a newspaper published photo from 1945 or earlier (ie this headshot of Steve Marsh, dated Sept 1945) can still be uploaded to Commons? Which copywrite template do you use - is PD-Australia the right one to use, even though it refers to 1955, not 1946? Does the NLA's digitisation change the copywrite status at all? Yours, Confused. (The-Pope (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2012 (UTC))

Yeah, we got rolled on Commons. The 1955 date is the copyright expired date under Australia law for non-government images. Because their term was extended from 50 to 70 years to please the Americans in 2005, the images from 1956 will not become expired until 2026. Fortunately, they did not back date it to those that had already expired by 2005 (ie before 1955). Nor was it extended for government images, so the relevant date for government ones is 1961. However the Americans have decided that they will only recognise the copyright status of Australian images that were in the public domain in 1996 ie those from 1946 or earlier. The bottom line is: no Australian images are permitted on commons from after 1946. So September 1945 is okay. For images after 1945, don't use Commons. Use PD-Australia or PD-AustraliaGov as appropriate on en-wikipedia. The NLA's digitisation does not change the copyright status. Also, use a creative commons tag for stuff of your own. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Have to say I feel fairly annoyed about this (I must be because there is no other reason for writing this). I have uploaded quite a few images from the early 1950s to Wikipedia, only to have other editors move them to Commons. They of course will now get deleted and all that effort wasted. No wonder people give up on the whole stupid enterprise (still I've added another editor to my List as a result so that might make me feel a little better). Anotherclown (talk) 04:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

TOC screwed up?

Is it just me (I assume not since it's happening to multiple computers on my network) or does the TOC look screwed up? I'm seeing "<table class="ombox ombox-notice mbox-small collapsible" style="text-align: center; width:<#px or #em>; font-size:1em">" above the archive box. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Just tried to find out why or when, couldn't work it out, but by setting box-width to 150 instead of the default <#px or #em> seemed to work. The-Pope (talk) 07:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

It's strange why it wasn't working. Nothing appears to have been changed at any of the related pages recently. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Requested move discussion

I've just discovered that Eastern Standard Time is a redirect to the US Eastern Time Zone article. I tried redirecting it to Eastern Standard Time (disambiguation) but it was reverted,[3] so I've started a move discussion, which may be found at Talk:Eastern Standard Time (disambiguation)#Requested move. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Junctions Table design - (Perth) Metro major roads

I have created a new table format for junctions on major roads, and was advised to place a link here to the WikiProject WA discussion to alert a wider group of editors. Evad37 (talk) 04:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Carbon tax in Australia

Such a sensitive topic as Carbon tax in Australia will need lots of editors to get it right. In a couple of weeks it's likely Google News will link it on their front page and Wikipedia's front page news section may list it, so please help out with this article. - Shiftchange (talk) 02:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Bob Brown

Someone (a newbie, I believe) has (clumsily) moved Bob Brown to Bob Brown (Australian Green politician). Discussion started on talk page. Frickeg (talk) 04:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

The issue has been resolved with the new title as a redirec, thanks to Nick D SatuSuro 13:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

2007–10 recession in Australia

As a note, I've just converted the 2007–10 recession in Australia article to a redirect to Economy of Australia. As is well known, Australia never entered into a recession in this period, so the article is on a dubious premise, and as can be seen from its pre-redirect state its content was outdated as it was dominated by 2009-era speculation that Australia was going to go into recession, and the updates since that time had been very limited. I'd have no problems if someone wanted to develop the article (thought it would need a new title), but the content which was there was so confused as to be worthless. Nick-D (talk) 10:07, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Would something like "Global Financial Crisis in Australia" work (with Great Depression in Australia as a precedent)? Hack (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

That looks like a good title. Nick-D (talk) 00:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Limited coverage of New Zealand on Wikicommons

I'm currently in the process of uploading photos from my recent holiday to New Zealand to Wikicommons, and have been amazed at how limited the coverage of the country is there. For instance, no one had uploaded any photos of the rather fancy, and award-winning, new Supreme Court building in Wellington, despite it being in the centre of the city and open for about 18 months now! Given the frequency of travel between Australia and NZ, I imagine that lots of Australian editors have holiday photos which would be of use in filling these gaps. Nick-D (talk) 05:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I threw around 500 or so photographs up in December last year (see Commons:Category:Kurow and Commons:Category:Reefton, New Zealand for examples) but mainly of small towns which are much more my interest. Coverage of Dunedin and surrounds is quite good - students at the University of Otago have been busy I suspect - and the Christchurch earthquake is well covered but coverage of the North Island is quite patchy in parts I agree. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 07:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

It's not just a lack of photos, please see articles such as New Zealand literature – hard to believe it's still a stub...--Aschmidt (talk) 11:40, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

It is the nature of the beast. We (New Zealand) are a country of only 4.2 million and therefore the photographer Wikipedians and the editors who literature specialists are thin on the ground. Hey! I just realised! This is another dig at NZ by you bloody Aussies! Stay on your own side of the bloody Tasman! -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 19:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

You'd probably have more literature specialists if you didn't keep sending Kiwis over here from Eastern NSW. ;) --AussieLegend (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I was going to post this at WT:NZ, but I figured that our Kiwi friends are already aware of this issue, and don't need hectoring Australians telling them what to do. That said, for whatever reason NZ is rather under-represented on Wikipedia, even allowing for the smaller population. Nick-D (talk) 23:45, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I already posted a courtesy note here. --99of9 (talk) 02:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Guidelines for intersection tables for WA's freeways/highways/main roads (WP:RJL-compliant)

Your comments are requested regarding the new WP:RJL-compliant intersection(junction) tables for Western Australia's freeways, highways, and main roads. Please leave feedback at WT:WA - Evad37 (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

2011 Census data

Hi all. For those that are not aware the 2011 census data will be progressively released from 21 June 2012. It may be worth developing a program to incorporate the changes into our articles for things such as town populations etc. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 02:32, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

How about dividing by state and territory, then by region. We could start with the cities, then towns and suburbs on a region by region basis. I'd suggest starting with the lowest populated state, Northern Territory. Do that article and then move to the region article, tackling each region alphabetically. Checking Category:Regions_of_the_Northern_Territory we would then continue with Arnhem Land and go through towns and suburbs in Category:Arnhem Land, before moving on to Barkly Tableland, then the rest of the NT regions before moving to ACT and Tasmania.

We could use a checklist for all abs data we ideally would like to include, or a smaller set of the most important abs statistics we typically include in these articles. Population for infobox, updates to demographics sections, etc. The only small problem is that this method relies on full categorisation of places into regions. However the region articles can be used in conjunction with categories as they sometimes have lists of towns and suburbs already on them. This method covers state, territory, region, city, town and suburb. Should this be the limit of scope? - Shiftchange (talk) 05:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Just a note that we'll probably need a {{Census 2011 AUS}} - Peripitus (Talk) 09:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The first census data is released today. Note that the ABS defintion of the capital cities has been significantly redefined. See this article for some idea of the effect on Melbourne. Note also that Australia's population has been revised down significantly. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

UC/L data has not been released and probably won't be until October. We should be careful about using SSC data in place of existing UC/L data when converting to 2011 census data.

Canberra photographer?

I need a photographer in Canberra tomorrow if anyone is around and or available. I've gotten access to media coverage for Gymnastics Australia related to the Olympians. If you are available tomorrow during the day, please send me an e-mail or give me a call today ASAP. --LauraHale (talk) 01:37, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Asylum seeker boat capsize

I suspect we may have a major tragedy happening regarding asylum seekers at the moment - see this article in the SMH. May be worth keeping an eye on relevant articles for additions, vandalism, POV etc. Once more is known, it may be an ITN candidate. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 08:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Bit more complicated than first thought - if the smh and abc stories http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-21/asylum-seeker-boat-capsizes-en-route-to-australia/4084894 are anywhere near the issue - possibly 2 boats in distress on top of the sunda/java trench - with inevitable loss of life - as well as being in a zone where the survivors might be returned to Indonesia or sent to Australia - whatever happens it is a tragedy SatuSuro 09:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Created 2012 Christmas Island boat disaster but needs expansion. Also nominated it at WP:ITN/C. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Have also renamed the 2010 Christmas Island boat disaster - and according to reports off the abc - the 2 boat story was what was being given to the Indonesians from Australian authorities... SatuSuro 01:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Fairfax paywall

Is there an easy way to mass-preserve our citations of existing Fairfax articles, given the oncoming paywall? I know we could archive individual links, but is there a bot that can do this on a wider scale? Anything else we need to do to prepare for the paywall? --99of9 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

If it is like News Ltd's paywall it will not apply to past articles. Since a date for its operation hasn't been set there a few details. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

The story (at the moment) is actually really good news, as the fairfax News Store is now free and has really good coveage back to the 90s. We should be grabbing as many refs/links as we can from there whilst it is free. The-Pope (talk) 02:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Does News Limited open up their articles after a certain time? Or does "past articles" only mean the ones before the paywall was put up? --99of9 (talk) 02:19, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Ones before the paywall was put in place. Bidgee (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

There's always TROVE, unless the federal government extends copyright again. Also, there's the State Library of NSW in physical space. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:23, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Not useful for any article after 1955, we are talking about online articles that currently exist. Bidgee (talk) 02:25, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

There's no way to duplicate them above and beyond personal licensed use; if the copyright holder goes batshit insane as this one has done then there's not much we can do but wait until they realise their paywall has failed. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Who takes the copyright responsibility for internet archives? --99of9 (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

National Library Australia has a copyright exemption allowing them to record important Australian cultural events, and their internet archive is invited opt-in. "Internet" based "archives" are generally risking facing a suit. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

We have to remember that there is no requirement to have a live url in a citation. The great thing about newsstore is that they have the full page number and date, so if they reverse the decision to have it freely accessible, then we still have enough info to verify it via a real life library or similar. I tried to use archive.org on it but it didn't seem to work. Haven't tried webcite yet. I would think that copyright remains with the publisher, regardless of delivery method unless explicitly labelled otherwise (IANAL/AFAIK/YMMV). The-Pope (talk) 03:40, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

One problem is Fairfax Online only media. Again, we don't have an obligation to link to it, we just need to cite that it exist[s/ed]. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I understand we don't have an obligation to link, but obviously it's much more useful to our readership if we can find a way. --99of9 (talk) 03:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Tim Storrier

We now have photograph of Tim Storrier but the article needs a bit of work to get it at a good standard. Bidgee (talk) 03:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Census data release

Well now its been over 24 hours since the data has been released publicly, I've noticed that the Urban Centre/Locality has been removed from the 2011 Census. For Wagga Wagga I was thinking of using Statistical Local Area (Pt A), problem is the UC/L was 46,735 and the SLA (Pt A) is 54,624, an increase of 7,889. Looking at the LGA it hasn't grown that much, since the population at the 2006 census was 57,015 and at the 2011 census it was 59,458, which only was a 2,443 increase. Bidgee (talk) 00:32, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

It hasn't been removed from this census, it just hasn't been released yet. Last time UC/L data was released as aprt of the second release in October and I suspect the UC/L data will be released then. In the meantime I would wait and not change the population fields where we do use UC/L data. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 00:38, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I see, pity it is held after the release of the main data. Bidgee (talk) 02:23, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I must say, the ABS' reasons for grouping data as it has done leaves me perplexed at times. For example, this year they decided to release data for Medowie separately, rather than including residents of adjacent Campvale, as they did last census, which would seem a good thing. However, all Campvale residents live to the north of the east-west road shown on the map, and west of the north-south road (immediately adjacent to Medowie), so why the ABS would choose to include Campvale residents in the Williamtown figures is confusing, as ALL Williamtown residents live south of (roughly) the RAAF Williamtown runway midpoint, which is about 3.4km between the two groups. On the other hand, in Ferodale they've only included 7 people living in 3 houses between Grahamstown Dam and Medowie, completely ignoring everyone in Ferodale who lives in the 46.2km² (56.3%) of the suburb that lies north of Grahamstown Dam and Medowie. They're included in the Swan Bay figures, which makes no sense as Swan Bay and Ferodale populations are more geographically distant than Campvale and Williamtown. At least this time they've expanded Raymond Terrace to cover much more of the suburb than they did in 2006.[4] Still, they've missed a large chunk of the suburb, or rather it's used to bolster the Eagleton figures. Given that the ABS has chosen to include "Gazetted Locality (GL)" as an option this year, I wonder why that haven't grouped data to match the gazetted locality oundaries, since they're a more accurate indication of a suburb's population. In an incredible twist though, they almost got Newcastle right this time. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:54, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

BLP improvement

With the successful cleanup of unreferenced articles now a couple of years past, would it be worth going through some of the older articles tagged with {{BLP sources}} or {{refimprove}}? I notice that there are articles such as Bevan Spencer von Einem and John Elliott (businessman) that have been tagged for improvement for over five years. Hack (talk) 03:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Perth move request (a new one)

Another requested-move survey has been started at Talk:Perth_(disambiguation)#Requested_move, this time by Brendandh (talk · contribs). Unlike the previous one, this one also proposes to rename Perth, Scotland to Perth, Perthshire. — P.T. Aufrette (talk) 02:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

New editor and Somerset Region

I don't like asking, because it means I can't resolve the issue myself, but could a few more editors watch Somerset Region? A new editor wants to change its name and remove a cited alternative name, even after I have explained it to them on their talk page. User:Mattinbgn has also tried to correct it but was ignored. - Shiftchange (talk) 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

You know that while the Brisbane Valley is in that region, it isn't the same as the region and a fair chunk of it is outside the Brisbane Valley? You've just stepped on a hornets nest of local politics ;-). Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC).

Did you have a reliable source for that? Because if it is technically true mentioning the exact difference may be appropriate. I'm not sure exactly to what extent Brisbane Valley refers to. However I thought the whole of Somerset Region was within the Brisbane River catchment. So do you know which parts aren't in the Brisbane Valley catchment? - Shiftchange (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Bummer of a time for my PC to die :-). Problem is that "Brisbane Valley" is not as far as I know an officially designated area with boundaries. However, the part of Somerset that was part of the former Shire of Kilcoy is nowhere near the "valley with the Brisbane river running through it". It could probably reasonably be described as the "Stanley Valley", due to the presence of another river, but that name doesn't seem to have stuck. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC).

Worth noting, this is probably the result of a WMAU workshop held in Somerset; see Wikipedia:GLAM/SLQ/16 June 2012. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

1986 Melbourne Turkish consulate bombing

A lot of detail was added to this article, and it has been copied to the talk page Talk:Melbourne Turkish consulate bombing as it wasnt sourced. There are concerns it is from an eye witness, so it might need to be removed from the talk page too due to WP:BLP. Good search for 'Levon Demirian "ICP 444"' brings up only copies of this text. Could it come from a court document that isnt in google? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

See WP:HISTRS, we shouldn't be interpreting primary documents, such as legal records, to produce content on historical articles. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination review request

Hi. :D There are a number of Australian Olympian DYK nominations open. If some one has the time, could you please review one or two? They are the following:

• Template:Did you know nominations/Melissa Hoskins
• Template:Did you know nominations/Josie Tomic
• Template:Did you know nominations/Rebecca Henderson
• Template:Did you know nominations/Lauren Reynolds
• Template:Did you know nominations/Regan Lamble
• Template:Did you know nominations/Jo Brigden-Jones
• Template:Did you know nominations/Alana Nicholls
• Template:Did you know nominations/Kathryn Mitchell
• Template:Did you know nominations/Jessica Trengove

Any help reviewing these Aussie Olympians to hopefully run during the Olympics would be fantastic. :) There is a bit of a backlog of unreviewed DYKs which makes it hard to get some things reviewed. :) --LauraHale (talk) 09:42, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Gosford Glyphs

See [5]. Finding that someone had added this to Kariong, New South Wales (which still needs fixing), I rewrote it - see Kariong, New South Wales#Gosford Glyphs. Dougweller (talk) 17:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Hijinx at Paul Lucas (politician)

An editor has added a poorly referenced statement here that Lucas posted on a blog making certain explosive claims about the QLD Health payroll. Sure enough, there is a post on said blog, signed by "Paul Lucas", but no evidence that it's him, nor does the story seem to have been picked up by anyone else. I'd remove it myself, but I have a COI in this case. Can someone else take a look? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC).

Done. It was a pretty straightforward matter. On another note, I see that there's plenty of IP wrestling on a range of QLD political bios at the moment, including Jarrod Bleijie but probably including most of them, I haven't had the time to check. Orderinchaos 21:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:37, 22 July 2012 (UTC).

Illegal immigration in Australia

I was wondering what others Australian editors think about the Illegal immigration in Australia page. It hardly treats the topic fairly. Instead it is basically a rehash of a Pacific Solution article and a list of boat arrivals. It discusses asylum seekers many of which aren't unauthorised arrivals. It should be about human trafficing, visa over-stayers and the groups mentioned in the lead, not some trivial boat arrivals or a subtle critic of policy. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:07, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

As you imply, it's fundamentally flawed as a Wikipedia article topic. I suggest any decent content be merged into Immigration to Australia. --Merbabu (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Currently the bulk of the article is a section "Pacific Island processing of illegal boat arrivals (2001–2007)" which has a link to a main article, so is redundant. The only non-redundant part is the two line lead section. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:31, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Thus, can we just delete/redirect it? Say, to Immigration to Australia? --Merbabu (talk) 00:02, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Better redirect, I think; it's a plausible search phrase. Maias (talk) 03:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Similarly for Illegal immigration in New Zealand. Moondyne (talk) 06:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

War Memorial in late August?

We're trying to set up something with the Australian War Memorial in Canberra in late August, with an emphasis on attracting photographers to take pictures. If you're interested, please get in touch with me and as soon as I get the details, I'll pass them along. --LauraHale (talk) 00:28, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I've put my hand up to attend, and I hope that others do as well. Nick-D (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I'd be happy to attend. It's just a short walk for me. And I love that place. --Pete (talk) 10:39, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I am interested. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:31, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review: Bloke (word)

Australian editors may be interested in the deletion review:

• Wikipedia:Deletion review#Bloke (word) which seeks to overturn a keep decision. WWGB (talk) 10:41, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Expand, redirect or delete?

Monuments of Australia and Mythology of Australia showed up on the new article list, and I was surprised that we didn't already have articles on them. With apologies to the editor who created them in good faith, they aren't in very good shape at the moment (and us non-urbanised Westerners are too busy looking for monuments to help out). Are there existing articles that they should be redirected to, or should they be expanded? I think that she probably found the redlinks on {{Culture of Australia}}. The-Pope (talk) 14:23, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

If nothing else Monuments... needed expanding to cover the whole country, not just the right edge of it. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Redirect Mythology of Australia to Dreamtime. Moondyne (talk) 10:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Theres also Australian Aboriginal mythology, I actually think there is room for a parent article as some myths are of more recent origins like Drop Bear Gnangarra 11:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes the Australian War Memorial has the details. :) --LauraHale (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

s:The Aborigines of Victoria and Riverina

Not sure whether any one is doing work on the Koori people, however, I have just transcribed this work at Wikisource, and it would seem to relate to one of the parts of the Kulin nation. It has a vocabulary list that may be of interest, though note that the work was a posthumous production and the editorial work was not the best. — billinghurst sDrewth 12:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent work. As a journalist working in the Indigenous sphere, it's great to come across old sources like this for background and I also like to work on the odd Indig-related article. Any more to come? --Roisterer (talk) 03:43, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

See s:Category:Indigenous people of Australia. Moondyne (talk) 05:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

ABC Looking for Comment

Hi all,

Matthew Bevan from the ABC just tweeted: "Anybody know a talkative Wikipedian from the Sydney area? If you do, may I cordially request you tweet me their handle?"

Blarneytherinosaur ^gabby? 02:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup this Friday evening

Brisbane Meetup Next: 3 August 2012 - Dinner Last: 26 May 2012 - Dinner @ Southbank

There will be a meetup in Brisbane this Friday night. Sorry about the late notice. Could a bot operator notify everyone in Category:Wikipedians in Brisbane please..? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I've notified everyone in the category. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:36, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Request for Comment at Australian Cattle Dog

Hello All,

I have opened a request for comment at Australian Cattle Dog, here. The discussion is meant to decide whether the article should have a separate subsection on Aggression. Your input would be valuable. Thanks. Ebikeguy (talk) 13:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Beware to participants - smells like Perth all over again... the length of the talk page is absurd SatuSuro 13:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

<sarcasm>I think this calls for a dedicated Australian Cattle Dog attacks in Australia article.</sarcasm> The-Pope (talk) 14:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Damn! Beat me to it. --AussieLegend (talk) 14:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

One small section and its like editors whole careers found just there on the talk page... SatuSuro 23:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Australian Bank

I've done some work on Garrick Agnew and have come across the Australian Bank, apparently founded in 1981.[6] Does anyone know anything about its fate? I'm guessing it was taken over or folded in the early to mid-80s because I've never heard of it before. Hack (talk) 05:52, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Inappropriate moves by tag-teaming new editors

New and inexperienced editors are wreaking havoc with University of Newcastle (Australia) related articles and cats. The university is commonly known as Newcastle University but this conflicts with the English university, which is why the article name is disambiguated. There is a disambiguation page at University of Newcastle and a redirect from University of Newcastle (disambiguation). Related cats include "University of Newcastle (Australia)" in their title. At least that's the way it's supposed to work. Instead, University of Newcastle has been cut and paste moved to University of Newcastle (disambiguation) and University of Newcastle (Australia) has been cut and paste moved to University of Newcastle. A number of other moves have been made without any discussion or consideration for our disambiguation practices etc. I've warned editors on their talk pages but one editor, User:Lillywaterpower is unresponsive and continues to make cut and paste moves etc, reverting every attempt that I've made to restore the correct structure. I've run out of reverts at University of Newcastle (Australia) so there's not much more I can do at this point. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I have been fixing up all the categories, and will assist you in reverting the vandalism. StAnselm (talk) 06:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. That was pretty quick. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Sent to SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tone.itdown1901 --Rschen7754 09:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

All confirmed as socks, all editors indef blocked. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds similar to what I'm dealing with but rather then an article name, it is a love sick 17 year old with a fixation with Eamon Sullivan, who keeps readding that she is his spouse (no reliable sources prove this) and is now creating socks. Bidgee (talk) 10:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Semi protected (and why aren't you an admin!?). Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC) Nick-D (talk) 10:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

University of Canberra

Could use a bit more watching - recent edits include article damage, misformatting and introduction of apparent copyvio/promo material. User:UCan2012 seems WP:SPA, perhaps WP:COI on this. Dl2000 (talk) 02:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Onto it. --Greenmaven (talk) 04:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Indigenous Australians edit war

Hi. I am not a particularly experienced editor, and have stumbled into my first ever edit/undo war on the page Indigenous Australians. IP editor 220.236.68.72 is removing statements and references that seem valid enough to me. Could someone with more experience in such disputes and/or with this subject area please provide some mediation and guidance? Thanks Mozzy66 (talk) 12:51, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

My contribution here. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

New Australian wikiprojct proposal

FYI, I just noticed this: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Transport in Australia

-- 76.65.128.60 (talk) 08:44, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Anyone in Canberra on Friday?

It would be really great if some one was available Friday to help run a workshop at the University of Canberra for the Australian research group doing work on dementia. --LauraHale (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

you may want to notify mail:wikimediaau-l. It has 121 member subscribed (22 are using digests); while most of them will be in the 348 watchers of WP:AUSN, they arnt notified of the posts to this board. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Images - 51st state of the USA?

After having 2 of my photo uploads challenged as they are in the 1945-1955 window of uncertainty, in that they meet {{PD-Australia}} of all images taken prior to 1955 are Public Domain, but not the URAA date of "if it wasn't PD in the USA in 1996, then your grandkids might be able to upload it one day", why do we bother having PD-Australia at all. I thought it was a "not OK at commons, OK here" rule, but even that doesn't seem to be the case. Any good international copyright lawyers on WMAU or similar who can advise for sure, not just what we or someone else thinks? I had another photo challenged with some comment about "freedom of panorama" that I have no idea about. This basically ends any chance I'll ever upload any other photos here. Text only from now on, lets go back to green text on black screens. The-Pope (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I once had a looney next door neighbour who woke me up at 3:15 one morning in the middle of a drought when hosing lawns was prohibited. We ended up in court because I filmed her drowned yard (she was also hosing the eaves, IN THE DARK!) and she tried to take out an AVO, claiming I was breaching copyright by photographing her and that I assaulted her by shining a torch on her. (what would you do if you heard weird noises coming from your looney next door neighbour's dark yard at 3:15am?) A solicitor I spoke to told me three things: 1. Generally, despite what the copyright council tells you, you can take photos of almost anything. 2. Don't believe the copyright council. 3. Move. Your next door neighbour is mad. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

"You can take photos of almost anything", but that doesn't imply that you can publish those photos. Example: Can I upload photo I took of plaque?. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The Copyright Act doesn't distinguish between taking the photo and publishing them. Essentially, if you photograph something, and it doesn't infringe copyright then you can do what you want with the photo as you own the copyright in the photo. If that wasn't the case, you may as well shut commons down. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

But the photo does infringe copyright. I am not a lawyer, but:

• The Copyright Act, Part V, Division 5, Subdivision C has several sections the describe offences relating to publishing infringing copies. It also includes a separate section (132AD) about making infringing copies commercially. So to my eye, it does appear to distinguish between taking the photo and publishing it.
• Assuming that my photo was of an artistic work and thus was an "infringing copy", S132AI clause 2 says that my uploading ("distributing") it is an offence (assuming (2)(d) applies). Which section/clause says I committed an offence by taking the photo (which I never intend to sell)?

Mitch Ames (talk) 13:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I assume that the plaque is on permanent display. S65 of The Act says "The copyright in a work to which this section applies that is situated, otherwise than temporarily, in a public place, or in premises open to the public, is not infringed by the making of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of the work or by the inclusion of the work in a cinematograph film or in a television broadcast." If you've taken a photo of an artistic work that is permanently on display, you haven't infringed copyright. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Does that mean I can upload the photo? It appears that the original advice was incorrect. It said "Australian law is based on the British law, so presumably the situation in Australia is the same as the situation in the United Kingdom", but in looks like UK law treats "graphic works" differently, but Australian law does not. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:37, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

No one knows. Some claim to know, but I think this is getting to the point that we need the WMF/WMAU to sort this out for once and for all. I'm all for "anyone to edit" but I get a bit pissed off when it's "anyone makes/interprets the rules" and "anyone helps clean up". Expiring or laggy toolserver accounts that do vital problem/cleanup tracking is another separate issue where the WMF is happy to outsource/crowdsource the issue and hope that someone else does some good. The bottom line is that because the Hollywood/music publishing machine realised that some of their big money earner old movies might fall into public domain, they lobbied to tighten and extend the copyright laws so that they don't. I'm sure photos from old newspapers weren't their main targets, but just caught in the crossfire. As for public art, do you think anyone in Canberra, let alone Washington knows what a creative commons type licence is? Was the concept of "publish a copy of it to the world for generally educational purposes" considered when writing the laws? Textopedia. That's where I'm heading.The-Pope (talk) 11:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

And, having now made some comments at WP:PUF I'm further convinced that en.Wikipedia should be split into us.Wikipedia and non-us.Wikipedia. --AussieLegend (talk) 18:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

The following was posted on my talk page:

Was reading over your commants about the odd US copyright laws the rest of us are forced to follow. In Canada we created Wikimedia Canada you guys have anything like this? Trying to get this to help us with copyright.Moxy (talk) 19:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps we should support Wikimedia.au more. --AussieLegend (talk) 19:29, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

From memory, there was a suggestion on the Wikimedia Australia mailing list a while ago to set up an Australian version of Wikimedia Commons to get around this issue (the reasoning being that if the post-1945 PD-Australia photos were hosted in Australia, their copyright status would be fine). I don't think that anything came of this. In regards to freedom of panorama in Australia, we're fortunate enough to have copied the British laws and the guidance on Commons explains that you can take and upload photos of all buildings and most sculptures in public places. Nick-D (talk) 23:23, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I reckon the issue with old Australia photos is pretty straight-forword myself:

Pre-1946 photos

are in the public domain in Australia and the US.

1946-1954 protos

are in the public domain in Australia but not in the US, so Commons cannot legally host them.

post-1954 photos

are still under copyright in both Australia and the US, so Commons cannot legally host them.

I could bang on about URAA restoration dates and free trade agreements and so forth, but that would as likely confuse as explain. Keep it simple: don't upload Australian photos taken after 1945 unless you own the copyright on them.

Hesperian 00:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

like most wiki discussions we've merged 2 similar but separate issues here. In regards to the old PD images there doesn't seem to be any differentiation between what commons can have compared to here for the 1946 to 1955 photos. The worst thing is it isn't a case of every year we can upload a new years worth of photos-the copyright expired date isn't moving. Our grandkids might be able to one day upload PD Melb olympics photos.

The other issue is the our current photos of objects being rejected because of the subject matter, whether it be art, graphics, banners, buildings etc. Noone seems to fully understand what we can and can't photograph. The-Pope (talk) 02:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Building architecture is definitely fine (assuming we take and license the photos). Do you know of any buildings that have been deleted? The other things you've mentioned are more complicated and depend on issues like permanence / 2d vs 3d / artistic crafstmanship vs 'pure' art / the threshhold of originality, etc. But that's why we need deletion discussions, to sort through the issues applicable to each picture. --99of9 (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

If what Hesperian says is the case, can something be done about the PD-Australia template? It's misleading people (i.e. me) into thinking things can be on Commons when they probably can't. Another question - does the exception granted to government-owned material (point E on the PD-Australia template) still apply? Frickeg (talk) 02:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the PD-Australia template needs to be fixed. It cannot speak to whether the work is in the public domain in the United States and therefore legal to host. It can only speak to Commons policy of only hosting material that could also be legally hosted in its country of origin. Pre-1946 photos should therefore be tagged {{PD-1996}} to indicate they are legal to host, and {{PD-Australia}} to indicate they fall within Commons policy. Hesperian 06:50, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The crown copyright part for government creations still applies, so government publications from before 1962 are public domain in Australia. They would also be PD in USA if made before 1946. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

{{PD-Australia}} was "fixed" on 16 October 2010, with this edit. There's also a related template, {{PD-URAA}}, for URAA compliant images. --AussieLegend (talk) 09:23, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

The Commons template is the same, though; I guess that's something to bring up over there. And if government publications aren't PD in the US unless they're pre-1946, we still can't use them, right? Frickeg (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Infobox prime minister

{{Infobox prime minister}} is being used both on the personal page for the Prime Minister and the page about the corresponding government, causing problems. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes#Infobox prime minister. --Mirokado (talk) 20:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Meetup in Hobart

Hi there,

There will be an informal Wikipedia/Wikimedia meetup at 10.00am, Saturday 8th of September 2012 at Infusion Bar & Cafe' by Vanidol, 361A Macquarie street, South Hobart, Tasmania. Please come along! JJ Harrison (talk) 05:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Just as an update, I've added the invite box to this section :) There is also a Facebook event here - https://www.facebook.com/events/345158692230648/ -- Chuq (talk) 02:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Contested History of Australia edit

This edit [7] where I tried to improve the article layout by removing one image is contested on my talk page. Having too many images on the right stuffs up the ref section and pushed the portal box lower than it should be. It was a prior edit to the one of mine shown in the diff. (BTW, the Aussie History WikiProject is a little too quite to be justified - IMO). -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Mad Max 2#Requested_move

Recently-raised proposal to rename Mad Max 2 to Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior Dl2000 (talk) 23:28, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress at Talk:Springvale Airport, Western Australia that affects multiple Australian airport articles. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism protection

Could someone please protect Queensland Core Skills Test from the persistent vandals once again. - Shiftchange (talk) 11:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Small towns

Hi. I've noticed a lot of small towns across Australia don't have a page, and a vast majority of those with pages have no picture. I just created Guanaba, Queensland, but I could only find one good reference. Is it possible to focus on this? Can we have people driving to those towns and taking pictures? That would be very useful. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 18:10, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your interest in articles on small towns in Australia. You have touched on one of the reasons it is difficult to write articles on small towns in Australia - a lack of quality on-line sources. There is a "to-do" list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do/Localities that you may add to if you wish. While I support your idea of focusing on creating missing articles on small towns, we are a project of volunteers and everyone has their own interests. Some of us are quite busy driving around to small towns and taking photos but Australia is a big country and it takes time to get around everywhere. That said, there are a lot of places that we have photos for that don't yet have articles - so that may be an option for you. Cheers, Mattinbgn (talk) 23:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I would advise some caution with this query - this user is regularly puts reqphoto against places (and has been doing so for years) without much appreciation of the innacessability or context of locations. For anyone who has driven the long distances of Australia, or been to the more outlandish and hard to access locations, perhaps Zigzig needs to understand that (a) many small towns have so few redeeeming features as to be un-notable or distinguishable from other small towns as top make photos close to pointless (b) Australia is a big place and there are few wikipedians in isolated locations (c) reqphoto becomes redundant and nuisance when done in blanket editing with little or no understanding of local context (d) many small towns dont have a page as they are possibly not even towns but names of localities with very low level notability, and consequently are unlikely to have adequate WP:RS to justify addition.

Please note I queried this editors actions in relation to inconsequential localities in Tasmania some years ago (other editors were querying this form of editing as early as 30 June 2007) and I remain sceptical of such a project as adding 'reqphoto' as having any long term benefit to the larger sheme of things. SatuSuro 23:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm in agreement. He tagged a bunch of relatively isolated localities near Mandurah a week or two ago and I queried it at his talk page. It makes the tag itself worse than useless if it's blanketed, as we stop using it and start using more observational measures. Orderinchaos 16:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, I disagree, I think the tag reminds us we need to add a picture. Sure, it may take time, but at least we know it. I don't drive, but I intend to travel to Australia soon and I will definitely take a bus to those small towns to take pictures if I can. Everyone should try to do the same thing. Meanwhile, on another topic, I am going through Australian politicians and adding reqphoto tags when they don't have a picture. This should be VERY easy to fix as most politicians are in parliament either in Canberra or the state capitals. Thanks again for your help. I do hope we can create more pages with pictures.Zigzig20s (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for improving Guanaba, by the way!Zigzig20s (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Unless you're volunteering to fly out and take all the photos yourself, I strongly suggest you stop adding the tags. It's disruptive to the project. And you can't take a bus to Anketell, Banksiadale, Casuarina, Keralup, Mount Wells, Nambeelup or North Yunderup, to name just a few examples (Mount Wells you can't even drive to, it's on the Bibbulmun Track). A fair number of these locations are simply the area bordered by lines on a map looking a lot like this. If your intention is to put a tag on every single article which does not have a photo, this *prevents* Australians from adequately using the tool to identify likely targets, as it is not "A user who actually has use for an image has requested", it's just "Someone who was bored one day decided to tag this for no apparent reason, we have no idea why or whether a photo of this location would even add to the quality of the encyclopaedia, and we can't tell whether this location is more important than any other of the zillion others the same user has tagged". And given literally dozens of the articles you have tagged have photos on Commons, people may be going out of their way to take photos which already exist on a Wikimedia project. Orderinchaos 17:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I would love you or someone else to go through wikicommons and add pictures once I've tagged them--or even if I haven't. I don't have time to go through wikicommons. I also don't have time to read your angry diatribes, sorry.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Yet you have time to sit on here tagging hundreds of articles... Orderinchaos 18:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I just added a picture of Hilton, Western Australia, but it's not a good one at all. So it's absurd. Somebody please take a better picture (of the townhall or main street).Zigzig20s (talk) 18:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

By the way, reqphoto tags aren't meant just for people in this wikiproject. Someone about to travel to a small town may very well see a reqphoto tag and then decide to add a picture.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

There isn't a "town hall or a main street" - that church is probably the most major feature in the suburb. See [8] Orderinchaos 18:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually this picture looks good: Perry Lakes Reserve. But I wish I didn't have to do it all on my own...Zigzig20s (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why these tags are such a bad thing. It would be good to have a photo on every geographic article we have. Even if the photo does just contain scrubland... that's what's there, that helps us to understand the place. I wouldn't go miles out of my way to get it, but I don't see why it shouldn't have a reqphoto tag on it. --99of9 (talk) 05:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

over quite a few years these tags have appeared on articles about places that would be difficult to access even for the well equiped - it is one thing if they are placed by an ed who knows what (and where) they are tagging... then there would be some appreciation of the difficulties involved in acquiring an image.... but to have years of tagging places that are unlikely to have an image available is tantamount to nuisance editing... SatuSuro 05:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I still don't get it. Just because obtaining a picture is challenging, why does that mean we don't want it? --99of9 (talk) 07:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

It isn't that we don't want a photo - its just that mindless mass-tagging is unhelpful, as explained above. If people tag the odd article selectively, knowing there's a reasonable chance a photo will be taken, than thats great. Tagging every Australian politician and every Australian town (which appears to be whats happening here) is less than useless. It makes the reqphoto categories useless. Moondyne (talk) 07:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I think it is useful from a project point of view. Tagging gives a sense of scale, indicating how many tasks, in this case taking or finding a photo that should be completed. While I don't always tag articles which lack a photo, it shouldn't be discouraged because every article is better with at least one photo or image than none. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

The key issue here is whether "reqphoto becomes redundant and useless when mass-tagging occurs". The current longest state list we have is Category:Wikipedia_requested_photographs_in_New_South_Wales, and I for one think that that list is quite a good length to print out and have in the glovebox to check if I drive through a random town and wonder whether to stop. Many of the other state lists are much shorter. How do other people use these lists? --99of9 (talk) 10:57, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Is there some sort of guideline on what sort of photos should be in articles about places? Hack (talk) 03:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Not as far as I am aware - what do you have in mind? Disagreements over photographs in articles on major cities are depressingly common. Anything smaller than Newcastle and we don't often have the quality and quantity of photographs to be picky. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

We're never going to get images for everything but maybe some sort of competition or improvement drive could add some value - I'm sure a lot of people have a decent camera, even a reasonably high resolution camera phone. I was thinking maybe creating a generic checklist of things to photograph. For example municipal chambers, sporting grounds, tourist attraction (big things), welcome sign and so on. Hack (talk) 04:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

For most of our smaller cities and towns there is not enough room in the article for more than two or three photographs without creating a "gallery" section - which is no longer encouraged AFAIK. That said, I agree that we should - as a Commons project - improve our photographic coverage of Australian towns and cities. A very preliminary draft list is at User:Mattinbgn/Desired photographs for Australian localities. Feel free to add, edit etc. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 05:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

That all looks pretty good. I think the number of photos added to a WP article would generally need to be proportionate to the size of the article. There is not a blanket ban on galleries but there needs to a compelling reason for inclusion. Hack (talk) 02:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Attention Melbourne editors!

Isabelle Oderberg from the Herald Sun is looking to contact some of the more prolific Melbourne Wikipedians for an upcoming feature. If you would like to assist in answering any questions, could you please contact her - Oderbergi [at] heraldsun.com.au. I have also informed her of the monthly Melbourne meetup and she will likely be attending the next one on August 26th! -- Chuq (talk) 02:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm - well in March 2012 Herald Sun senior business journalist Olga Galachi rang me (at my place of work) about Wikipedia and wanted to question my editing a page from 8 months before! It ended up in an article entitled "Northcote High shuns ties to Collingwood players."[9] It may or may not have been a set-up by a blocked former editor, but all the same, I wouldnt leap into this offer without careful consideration.Nickm57 (talk) 04:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I remember that story - particularly how they tried to pin it on the school (because you work/worked there, from memory?). The journalist clearly didn't understand the wiki concept. I don't suppose anyone reading this was at the Melbourne meetup today and can give us an update? -- Chuq (talk) 10:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

No reporters from the Herald Sun fronted the meetup. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

at Talk:Echium plantagineum in Australia. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 08:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Towns in Moira Shire

Last year a series of sub-stubs with infoboxes were created for rural localities in the Shire of Moira, a local government area in northern Victoria. The complete list can be seen at {{Towns in Moira Shire}}.

Some of these need tidying and others - especially ones lacking any sources - probably need redirecting to another article. Some help in tidying would be appreciated. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 00:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Bundaberg Rum

Could interested editors take a look at Bundaberg Rum? Another editor, originally User:Bundabergrum (blocked) and now User:Showcase-R-liars keeps re-inserting a list of every special product that Bundaberg has ever released. I think this breaches WP:NOTDIRECTORY and is just spammy. I have reverted a few times but don't want to run foul of 3RR. Any thoughts? Am I too harsh? Regards, WWGB (talk) 07:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with your reversions (based on inspection of this version before your reversion). The product list is not appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I do enjoy my Bundy, but I concur that a listing of every special edition product they've ever released is excessive. Added to my watchlist. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:36, 29 August 2012 (UTC).

Satellite images of Australian cities up for deletion

See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 August 26 for multiple images up for deletion -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 03:00, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Just a note: I created these - years ago! - from NASA Worldwind and as such they are public domain. Images like these can be recreated if required. At the moment the reason for them being deleted is because they are not used. If people think they are worth keeping, they only have to be added to the relevant articles! -- Chuq (talk) 23:35, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

If they are PD then they are better off over at Wikimedia Commons in any place if someone wishes to transfer them. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:38, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

All images have been uploaded to commons under the same name and tagged here with {{Now Commons}}. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:27, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

And still somebody there nominated them for deletion. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Requested move - Goulburn River

Discussion at Talk:Goulburn River (Victoria)#Requested move. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 22:35, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

File:AWMH02982Kuteife.jpg & File:AWMB00727Homs.jpg

File:AWMB00727Homs.jpg and File:AWMH02982Kuteife.jpg have been nominated for immediate deletion as being unsourced. As they are Australian WWI photos, I thought you'd like to know. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 14:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I've removed the tags and added some extra source information so that it shouldn't happen again. :) - Bilby (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

File:Crown inn hotel 1910.jpg

File:Crown inn hotel 1910.jpg is in cleanup categories for missing author and missing source information. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 15:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Victims Compensation Tribunal

Per serious WP:OR/WP:NPOV concerns identified on the talk page, some cleanup and refactoring was done on Victims Compensation Tribunal (NSW). Additional cleanup and watching still seems needed. Dl2000 (talk) 03:38, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Copyright question re Norfolk Island

Is Norfolk Island considered part of Australia for copyright purposes? I have been advised that the image of the Norfolk Island stamp at right, which I uploaded yonks ago and is used at Norfolk Island, will probably be zapped because it apparently has the wrong licensing. So I had a look around at other Aussie stamps, and see this article which shows the image of the queen stamp also seen here.

Commons licensing is a mystery to me (and I suspect many, many other Wikipedians). If Norfolk Island is part of Oz re copyright, then I should be able to use the same licensing as is used for the queen's coronation image. Yes? No? User talk:Moriori (talk) 00:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Most a mystery to me too, but NI stamp was issued in 1980 and is copyright of Norfolk Island Post Office; The 1953 stamp (once copyright of forerunner of Australia Post) dates from more 50 years before 2005 and is thus out of copyright. Suspect that neither Australia Post or NI Post would be too concerned with images of their recent stamps being used on Wikipedia (and would probably welcome it) but what licensing would be required I don't know. I will add scans of pre-1955 NI stamps as soon as I get around to it. Most Aussie from that period I have done. Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:53, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a lawyer, but it it appears that the Australian Copyright Act applies to Norfolk Island: [10] (under section 18 of the Norfolk Island Act 1979 it appears that Australian laws apply to Norfolk where this is explicitly stated in in the relevant act, which appears to be the case here). Nick-D (talk) 11:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

but Australian or NI law is irrelevant. USA law is all that matters. The-Pope (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Not true I suspect. Surely if the uploader can be identified and lives in the country whose copyright is affected, they could be prosecuted even if the offending image is hosted elsewhere. What that country cannot do, IIRC is tell Wikipedia (which is hosted in the US) to take it down. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:38, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

read recent discussions here, PUF discussions linked from my talk page and URAA. If it isn't Public Domain in the States they don't care about the status in the actual country of origin. 1955 means nothing, 1946 is the key date. Of course the chances that it will ever be tested in an actual court is microscopic, but the self appointed image wikilawyers will eventually hunt down your 1950 published images and banish them forever! U. S. A., U. S. A. Come on everyone, join in the chant. The-Pope (talk) 23:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Identification of Australian athletes

I've posted this on both Wikimedia Australia's list, I'm needing some people whom are a little more knowledgeable with our Olympic athletes. I have photographs taken at the Welcome Home parade in Sydney which was back in August, but have some photos that I can't identify them.

26 photos have been uploaded but still have more but don't have the time. Unidentified Australian Olympic athletes‎. Bidgee (talk) 09:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

List of Central Coast Mariners FC players FLRC

I have nominated List of Central Coast Mariners FC players for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

"Of" or "in"?

Some time ago I created List of rivers in New South Wales (A-K) and List of rivers in New South Wales (L-Z). These were subsequently moved to List of rivers of New South Wales (A-K) and List of rivers of New South Wales (L-Z), supposedly to comply with a naming convention.[11][12] Today, User:Lady Lotus has moved List of rivers of Australia to List of rivers in Australia because it's grammatically correct. She ha also moved several other river articles. I was planning to revert, but can't find the naming convention that justifies the name. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:21, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I think the recent move(s) need to be reverted. It's not made explicit at WP:RIVER, but Lists of rivers clearly shows the convention. StAnselm (talk) 10:54, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

However, I notice many lists have been moved, and not just Australian ones. It would be better to post a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Rivers, and ask for the convention to be made explicit. StAnselm (talk) 10:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

The Wiki convention (WP:NCCAT) is that landforms are "XXX of Foo" wheareas e.g. man-made objects are "XXX in Foo". I have to say the former sounds a little stilted to me - I'm not sure why we don't always use "in". But I'm sure there's a logic somewhere...it just isn't explained at the convention page AFAICS. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Grammar; if something is intrinsically a part of or defined thus as a social construct, we shall use of (Rivers of..., Politicians of...); if something may be taken out of, or reasonably exist somewhere else, we use in (Crime in..., Outdoor dunnies in...). As a rule-of-thumb, if belonging to sounds reasonable use of. if not, use in. Sometimes, local colloquialism is at variance which may explain the edits of the contributor discussed above. Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:16, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

It does sound a little strange to me. To my mind, "in" would imply that something is "inside" of something else, thus being incapable of being inside of another comparable entity. This is the case in Australia, where all of our rivers are ours alone and we don't share them with anyone else. However, our position is unusual in the world. To my mind it would be just as odd to say that the Donau is "in" Germany, "in" Austria, and "in" Hungary as well. In that case, "of" would be a more natural term. Yet another reason in my mind why the excessive standardisation and generification of terminology undertaken by some editors is short-sighted and silly. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC).

Attention Melbourne editors! Pt 2

Just a follow up on Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians'_notice_board/Archive_40#Attention_Melbourne_editors.21. Isabelle was in touch to say she was unable to make the last meetup due to an unfortunate incident the day before, but she is looking forward to the next one! I notice the next meetup isn't on WP:Meetup yet, but I'm assuming the "fourth Sunday" routine is ongoing? -- Chuq (talk) 06:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

There will NOT be a Melbourne meetup on Sunday 23 September. The next meetup has been proposed for Sunday 25 November 2012. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 02:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to more Wikipedia stupidity!

Another discussion that no one was informed about on a page that hardly anyone is going to read yet the Admin whom made the move (both the IP whom listed it and the Admin who moved it as both from the same little country) but refuses to revert the move. Next this page will be known as Wikipedia:Australia Wikipedians' notice board. sigh! Bidgee (talk) 09:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I hope that Bidgee will retract that ABF message above. I have better things to do with my time that check where an editor comes from when reviewing a request for a speedy process; I assess the contribution, not the contributor, and I had no idea that the IP was Irish.

Anyway, these categories are now listed for a full discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 September 17#Television_navigational_boxes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Australian place

I've asked a question at Template talk:Infobox Australian place#ACTgov, NTgov that somebody may care to comment upon. --AussieLegend (talk) 00:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

National parks naming

I recently completed the Template:National Parks of Queensland. It is quite large with 238 national parks, more than any other state or territory. Possession Island (Queensland) is a national park but doesn't have a article about the park. All other national parks in Queensland have articles specifically about the parks rather than the place. Is that the same in other states? Should I rename it or create a new national park article? We don't have an article for Main Range, just Main Range National Park. Does that matter or not if redirects are used? I know we have Carnarvon Gorge and Carnarvon National Park. - Shiftchange (talk) 04:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Why not just add it to the template? Its status as a national park is already mentioned, so there is no need for either renasme or duplicate article. Maias (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Oops! Did not see entities not identical. Suggest separate article if sufficient non-overlapping material. Maias (talk) 13:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Aboriginal Reserve

I notice that several Australian place articles talk about Aboriginal reserves, but there's no article for Aboriginal Reserve, is there coverage for this topic somewhere? -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 22:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I noticed this was the case some years back. I feel we should have an article for it, possibly without the capital R. - Shiftchange (talk) 00:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Definitely could do with an article. (Is it reserves or reservations, though?) Frickeg (talk) 00:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Definitely Reserve/Reserves. Probably also need some coverage of Aboriginal Missions as well. Hack (talk) 01:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

would suggest a state by state identification (I am sure there are variant terminologies between states - as well legal status) it would not be a good idea to have a blanket australian generic term. SatuSuro 01:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Then Aboriginal reserve would be a list article pointing to state articles? -- 76.65.131.248 (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Better to start with a national article with state sections - then break out the state sections when large enough. I understand about differing state terminology but a good article on the topic would allow for contrasting and comparing the treatment of these reserves in various states. This is difficult to do without repetition if we create 6 or 7 stubs. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Mattinbgn's suggestion makes a lot of sense. --AussieLegend (talk) 03:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Second that SatuSuro 04:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

See Indigenous Protected Area. May just require expansion and a redirect. Moondyne (talk) 04:32, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Above discussion is in effect redundant due to the link provided by Moondyne - agree with suggestion of expansion and redirect - the terminology in the article is a lot less POV and weighted with associations - SatuSuro 04:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

So is Indigenous Protected Area referring to the same thing as mentioned in the Framlingham, Victoria article? - Shiftchange (talk) 05:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

They're not quite the same. Protected areas are owned by the indigenous inhabitants, while the state holds title for reserves. Hack (talk) 05:33, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Agree with Hack. On reflection, I think they're sufficiently different to need separate articles. Moondyne (talk) 05:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

In that case please feel free to utilise the redirects created to an appropriate new article - just please, dont try a generic one size fits all generalisation without qualifying inter-state variances... SatuSuro 07:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

See also Talk:Indigenous Protected Area#Requested move Mitch Ames (talk) 06:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Huge number of proposed mergers

Bus transport in Queensland has a huge number of proposed mergers going back to 2010 that need to be sorted out. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Comparison data in Ranked list of Australian states and territories

Also, List of Australian states and territories by gross state product and one other but I can't find it now.

Are these comparative data valid or worthwhile maintaining? Seems like WP:SYNTH. Moondyne (talk) 04:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Missing file

File:ClaremontDesign.png has been deleted. See Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2012_August_2#File:ClaremontDesign.png. It needs replacing since it is used on nine articles. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 06:19, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I have restored one old version that is PD-shape. Since this seems to be used for decoration. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Useful resource for Queensland articles

I've just discovered the Text Queensland website, which has a bunch of full-text books, journal articles, etc. on the history of Queensland. I'm going to have a field day with it, but I figured it might be of interest to some others as well. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Classical music countdown

Next week a group of Wikipedians will be following the ABC FM radio Classic 100 Music of France countdown, and holding a meetup/edit-a-thon in Sydney. See Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/October 2012 for details. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:40, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Australian rules footballers from cities

Category:Australian rules footballers from Sydney and Category:Australian rules footballers from Brisbane, which are related to this project, have been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The-Pope (talk) 14:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

"chopping block" or "butcher block"

Which is the more common term in Australia? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:14, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

The two terms imply different things. A chopping block implies the sort of thing that, for example, one might use to discuss the demise of Mary, Queen of Scots, whereas a butcher's block is just what it says - something used by a butcher to chop meat. Therefore the two expressions are not interchangeable and talking about which is more common is a bit like asking which is more commonly used: "ball" or "hammer"; you might get an answer but it wouldn't tell you anything. - Nick Thorne ^talk 06:23, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

In response to the original question, are we talking metaphorically or literally? Hack (talk) 06:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

A thousand pardons. Sorry for being unclear. I'm referring to the hunk of wood known at enwp as butcher block. I'm trying to figure if it should be called "chopping block", and Google isn't providing conclusive information.

See: Talk:Butcher block#Page move: Butcher block --> Chopping block

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

I've never come across anything like the thing in the first pic at Butcher block but the other pics on that page and chopping block show what I would call a chopping board though cutting board is also pretty common. Hack (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Where I come from, a chopping block is a bloody great block of wood from your woodheap that you leave intact in order to have a surface to cut your kindling on. Hesperian 10:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Beaudesert, Queensland

Someone's been wrecking the Beaudesert, Queensland with poor edits which don't belong such as lists of services and tourist attractions. Could a few more editors please keep an eye on it? - Shiftchange (talk) 08:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

For those interested

A quite current issue John Gillard shame controversy not easy to spot yet - no project tags or categories (when originally sighted)... SatuSuro 04:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Now visible with categories and project tag... SatuSuro 04:31, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

While this seems to be a textbook example of WP:NOTNEWS, it's interesting that we're starting to get the articles on minor political and media scandals which have been common for topics in the US for a while now. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I hardly think it's just passing news. It's become a big deal, it's become a landmark social media campaign that won't be forgotten anytime soon, and it seems to have - possibly permanently - damaged the reputation of a fairly significant media player in Australia. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:26, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

The longevity of social media campaigns seems to always be pretty short. I doubt anyone will remember this in six months. It deserves a mention on Jones' page, but it can't really sustain an article. Nick-D (talk) 05:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

There's never been a social media backlash so strong that a station has had to actually shut down advertising to cordon off the damage before. It's notable in three different senses: the "subject of thousands of media articles" sense, the "landmark use of social media in Australia" sense, and the "severely damaged the reputation of a very prominent and very powerful media player" sense. There seems to be a bizarre tendency to dismiss things that are plainly notable in some of these Australian topics just because they're new/perhaps because people haven't been paying attention. It's ridiculous to suggest that it deserves a mere "mention in Jones' page", and it makes Wikipedia look flat-out silly when you've got articles on every footballer who played a game, and yet people arguing it shouldn't on a scandal that's the front page of every newspaper in the country day after day and will have lingering consequences. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:00, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Let's see how many references there are to this in a few months time. My money is on none whatsoever :) (and that most of Jones' advertisers will have returned, much like Kyle Sandilands' did - remember that social media storm?) Nick-D (talk) 06:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Except that this is about five times the size of the Kyle Sandilands furore. Kyle Sandilands didn't lose nearly a hundred advertisers, his radio station didn't have to shut down advertising on his show, there wasn't an orchestrated campaign on anything like the same scale as that in this case, and there wasn't the same fallout re: government influence because Sandilands didn't have any to begin with.

It's an extremely superficial comparison, and it's just embarassing having to have this argument when people write articles without nearly this drama on the minutest football players or tiny and irrelevant battles from wars long ago. Apparently no topic is too un-notable if you've got enough dudes who obsess over it, but if it concerns the treatment of women in public life, front page after front page apparently isn't notable enough. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

? (seriously, suggesting that I'm not taking this article seriously enough because its about attacks on women is really out of line, and highly offensive; I think that the comments are disgusting and Jones is a vile scumbag - my concerns are related to notability of this incident given the way these things play out, as was demonstrated by the Sandilands case). Nick-D (talk) 06:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Except that the fallout from this is larger by about a factor of five. Like I said, it's funny how any minor skirmish from World War II is apparently deemed notable because there's enough dudes who obsess about it, but if a scandal over the treatment of women in public life blows up, no amount of front pages is apparently enough - it can just be hand-waved away as "totally like that Sandilands thing", even though it's, y'know, not. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I think that we'll need to agree to disagree then (I sure don't want to escalate to also make ad hominem attacks like your comments). If this is still getting coverage in a few months time, I'm happy to be proven wrong. Nick-D (talk) 06:55, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

It's hardly an ad hominem attack to point out that having drastically different sourcing demands, with relatively small requirements for topics of obsessive interest to certain men, and no amount of front pages enough for a topic of more importance to women, is a bit rich. If the notability standards you're trying to apply here were applied to your own articles, you'd lose half your contributions. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I rarely contribute to articles on recent or ongoing conflicts due to similar concerns about our ability to assess the lasting notability of current events. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 07:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

It is definitely notable according to Wikipedia policy, and is allowed to have its own article, but it is just a big news story focused on a single guy. I am not convinced that Alan Jones career will survive this, but I am sure the station will, and thus the impact is quite small. Unless there is some lasting impact on the radio industry in Australia by this backlash, the event isnt notable in its own right in the eyes of many Wikipedians who will lament that these articles are allowed while articles like Shock jock#Notable incidents: Australia, radio in Australia and timeline of Australian radio are not improved. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 13:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Timeline of Australian radio has not entirely been abandoned. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

But this wouldn't appropriately fit in either: at the most it warrants a sentence in each (otherwise it would create massive undue weight issues), whereas an appropriate coverage of the topic itself requires far more than that. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Spelling troll

This IP: 121.210.140.64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) has a hobby of changing spelling of Australian pages to American style. He only appears once or twice a month, so the usual brief IP blocks wouldn't bother him. But if you notice him at work, as well as reverting, please add an appropriate warning to his Talk page, if he continues eventually he can be blocked. Barsoomian (talk) 15:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Merge discussion: List of road routes in Perth, Western Australia and List of road routes in rural and remote Western Australia

The above articles, which are within the scope of this WikiProject, have been proposed to be merged into a single article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. - Evad37 (talk) 05:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Demographic maps

Cantonese speakers as a fraction of population in Greater Brisbane

Hi Everyone. If anyone is interested in demographic maps of Australia/States/Capital Cities/particular-coordinates, let me know. Over the past few nights I've been writing scripts which generate maps from any field of the 2011 Census data. For example here's one about the Cantonese speakers of Greater Brisbane. Eventually they'll all make their way to Commons, but I'm happy to make specific ones available while I'm testing them out and improving them. --99of9 (talk) 02:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

That's cool mate. Good work! --Breno ^talk 11:36, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Central Australia a hive of Wikipedia activity?

Apparently a location in northern South Australia has more WP activity than Darwin and Hobart.

Hack (talk) 09:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I expect that you will find that dot represents Australia, where state or city is undefined. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:19, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Then again, Coober Pedy can lack excitement. --AussieLegend (✉) 09:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I ran into that issue when I was locating IP addresses for Australian editors of articles. --LauraHale (talk) 01:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Here was me hoping it was some Centralian conspiracy... Hack (talk) 01:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Project articles cleanup

Just a reminder that this list of articles that have had cleanup tags from 2006 still exists. The articles tend to be neglected and while some of them may be obscure they do need a little attention. Its embarrassing to have such a backlog! Please help if you can, challenge yourself. - Shiftchange (talk) 21:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Once we clean up 2006, the full project cleanup list is here and most subprojects have their own list which you can find from the index. The-Pope (talk) 23:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

This needs attention

PS Ruby (1907). Moriori (talk) 23:15, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

De-spammed Nick-D (talk) 23:30, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

...and my change was immediately reverted by an IP editor who issued me with a bad-faith warning for good measure. Extra eyes on the article would be great. Nick-D (talk) 23:37, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Naming knight articles

I've raised an issue I've been having with the article titles of many Australian knights here, if people want to contribute. Frickeg (talk) 10:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Good point. Quite apart from the issue of article name, if what you say is true than the name at the top of the infobox at Ken Anderson (Australian politician) needs to be changed. StAnselm (talk) 11:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Format for dates

I am not sure the normal format for dates used by Australians. But I am here to inform all that a user as seen here is changing date formats ...as I say not sure what is the norm - thus just checking in making sure all is ok.Moxy (talk) 23:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

dmy is the normal date format in Australia. I had a look at a few diffs and what I saw was fine. However, after reading User talk:1exec1, we should look out for false positives that got reformatted. - Evad37 (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

The most recent edits are changing articles at the rate of 1 article every 2 seconds or so, which indicates the user isn't checking the results at all before moving on. My experience with date changing scripts is that you really need to check the output. For example, at Prisoner (TV series), the script results in an incredibly inconsistent result in the "Original, UK, Sweden and UK repeat Air dates of significant episodes" section.[13] --AussieLegend (✉) 07:25, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Woolloongabba

Hello. We have only one Wikipedia article on a place called "Woolloongabba" and it's currently titled Woolloongabba, Queensland. Is there any need for this level of disambiguation? Would it not be more sensible to have the article over the current redirect at Woolloongabba? If there is more than one Woolloongabba, I'd argue strongly that this one is WP:PRIME, not least because of The Gabba. --Dweller (talk) 09:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The article can be safely moved to Woolloongabba. The unnecessary disambiguation is a hangover from the past practice of mandatory disambiguation that was applied to all localities in Australia other than the state capitals. This has been modified somewhat nowadays - see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Australia - but the migration to undisambiguated names is hastening slowly. The US is still working their way through the same process - have a look at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names) if you have a spare hour or two. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 09:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)There probably isn't any great need for the disambiguation, but there probably also isn't any great need to change the status quo. The current convention is "most Australian town/city/suburb articles are at [[Town, State]] no matter their state of ambiguity" (with the exceptions generally being capital cities) – see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)#Australia and Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian places#General_strategy_and_discussion_forums for more info. - Evad37 (talk) 09:53, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The remaining part of the convention you left out of your comment below is " ... but the undisambiguated Town is also acceptable if the article has a unique name or is the primary topic for that name" This is clearly the case here. This statement "with the exceptions generally being capital cities" is also no longer true. Most states - with the exception of WA - have many, many localities at their undisambiguated name. This should be encouraged. Needless disambiguation is needless. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:15, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Personally I don't think it matters very much either way, undisambiguation is fine by me. Having all/most articles in one format does make coding templates and editing list pages easier, but this should not be the primary concern - Evad37 (talk) 10:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. It seems to be uncontroversial, so I've moved it. --Dweller (talk) 11:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Category: People from Subiaco, Western Australia

There is a dispute between me and user The-Pope (talk · contribs) about the abovementioned category. The-Pope (talk · contribs) is removing the category from all the articles listed there -with the explicit aim of then bringing the category to CSD. I have asked on his talk page about this, but I am unconvinced. He claims it makes sense given his "local knowledge" but I am unsure how much sense this does on WP -it's kind of a WP:OR-tainted reasoning. Your opinions? Thanks. --Cyclopia^talk 17:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

The category is now at CfD: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 9#Category:People_from_Subiaco.2C_Western_Australia - Evad37 (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

(ec) It is now listed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_November_9#Category:People_from_Subiaco.2C_Western_Australia, which is now being misled by people not understanding our local government naming standards. Sigh. The-Pope (talk) 00:46, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

New stub Boomalli Aboriginal Artists Cooperative

Started a stub on this Indigenous art-space in Redfern, which among other things hosted the first Deadly Awards. Thanks for any work in expanding it, I just saw a needed redlink and reckoned it needed at least a stub. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:The Abbey Road Sessions (Kylie Minogue album)#Status as a compilation album

You have been invited to join this discussion regarding an article that is a part of this WikiProject. Statυs (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

2012 ICAC inquiry

With so many revelations and big wigs set to fall [14], it's surprising we do not yet have an article. WWGB (talk) 07:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

The Royal Commission announced today by the PM will get an article soon, I am sure. An article on Operations Jasper, Acacia and Indus [15] would seem appropriate if care is taken not to be defamatory. If Kevin Rudd's ute gets an article ... -- Mattinbgn (talk) 09:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Geography at portal peer review

Portal:Geography is now up for portal peer review, the review page is at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Geography/archive1. I've put a bit of effort into this as part of a featured portal drive related to portals linked from the top-right corner of the Main Page, and feedback would be appreciated prior to featured portal candidacy. Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Royal Commission into Institutionalised Child Abuse

I know the terms of ref or composition haven't been announced but, ... waiting for this to turn blue. Moondyne (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Won't it be given a formal name or be named after the Commissioner? See Costigan Commission. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 05:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Possibly. there's several that aren't named after Commissioners. Moondyne (talk) 05:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

2011 census data template

For the 2006 census we had two templates; {{Census 2006 AUS}}, which is widely used to provide citations, and {{Census 2006 AUS link}}, which was used to generate a bare url for use in lists, such as List of cities in Australia by population#50 largest Urban Centres by population. For 2011, {{Census 2011 AUS}} was created sometime ago, although only 841 articles have been updated with 3,718 to go. To avoid duplication ({{Census 2006 AUS link}} is only used in 7 articles), I've incorporated the functionality of what would have been {{Census 2011 AUS link}} into {{Census 2011 AUS}}; adding |link=yes turns the template's output into a bare url. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:59, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Excellent - exactly what I've been looking for. Took me a while to find though. Is there a centralised place to find this kind of info?--Russell E (talk) 23:21, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Photo request

Would someone like to photograph the Qantas head office buildings at 203 Coward Street, Mascot? There are four buildings: Diagram of Buildings

• Qantas Building A - Map
• Qantas Building B - Map
• Qantas Building C - Map
• Qantas Building D - Corporate service building - Map

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 02:27, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Kay Nesbit (the two of them)

I was looking for Kay Nesbit, the Australian woman who survived a shotgun attack in 1985, and she wasn't here, so I made the article. It's just a rough stub - I'll leave the rest to others.

I also found an article about another Australian Kay Nesbit, in German: . She's a badminton player, with no article here on en. If she's notable on de, I'm guessing she'll be notable on en. Would that be Key Nesbit (badminton player)? --Chriswaterguy talk 03:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Good to see both articles developing. I would note that the victims advocate is actually a New Zealander. [16]. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:16, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre

Created a page on this notable research centre, which the NSW state Government wants to 'de-centralise'. Enquiry by Fred Nile says it should stay. Unfortunately most available information on it relates to its' impending closure. Please have a look and improve it, especially history, if possible! Regards, 220 of ^Borg 15:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Free access to EBL, OED, etc. in WA

Forgive me if this is already well-known (I only recently discovered it). The State Library of WA offers free online access to the OED, CSIRO publications, an ebook library of 120,000 non-fiction titles via EBL (includes lots of textbooks), etc.. The sign-up involves scanning something (driver's license, utilities bill - can't remember) and emailing it, but it is well worth the minimal effort. Don't know if other states offer this. Does anyone know if any WA or federal institutions offer free journal access? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 05:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Not really sure how it compares, but the National Library offer a fair bit online with or without one of their library cards. Hack (talk) 05:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Encyclopædia Britannica Online Library Edition, works with my City of Melville library card. Other councils may also have subscriptions.

City of Melville library also has other online resources (including Oxford Dictionaries, but I just tried it and it did not work), at least some of which may require a library card number. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

all member libraries of the State Library of WA System have their access tied to cards - interesting to see if any other states have a similar system... anyone? SatuSuro 08:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Iron Range

a pair of Iron Range base photos are up for deletion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2012 November 23 -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 07:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

List of massacres of Indigenous Australians could use cleanup

List of massacres of Indigenous Australians could use cleanup.

IMHO the main body of the text is fine, but the lead paragraph is essay-like. (WP:NOTESSAY)

-- 186.221.139.38 (talk) 00:56, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

There's a new GLAM in Sydney-town

Wikipedia:GLAM/SLNSW Please drop by and help - particularly on Tue/Wed next week (27 & 28th Nov), put it in your diaries over lunch. --99of9 (talk) 12:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

We're up and running now, please help out if you want to improve any users's sandboxes. The related changes list is [17]. --99of9 (talk) 01:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. The participants noticed some edits during the day, and we analysed them a bit, so your contributions were both exciting and constructive. The day had a very positive feel, and the team leader has already left some great feedback. Go for it again tomorrow.--99of9 (talk) 13:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

We're on. No content yet, but everyone's on the participant list. --99of9 (talk) 23:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for the help. Another successful day. Improvement suggestion for future instructors: do a more extensive check for existing articles under alternate names (newspapers seem particularly prone to change names a lot). This disparaged some unlucky trainees, especially those that were fearful of editing an existing c-class article once they found it. Whiteghost.ink is writing a full report. --99of9 (talk) 12:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Aborigine or Aboriginal people

This edit claims that the word "Aborigine" is offensive. I am not as up-to-date as some on current racial slurs, but this one is news to me.

If it is an offensive term, then we should probably look at renaming some articles such as Australian Aborigines, Tasmanian Aborigines, Victorian Aborigines etc. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

It is considered negative by a lot of Aboriginal people. Government agencies often have manuals of styles that suggest that Aboriginal or Indigenous is used instead.

'Aborigine' - Meaning: generic term for the original inhabitant of any country. Usage: not to be used because of its negative connotations;ACT Health

Most Aboriginal people prefer not to be called an Aborigine, and it's preferable to say Aboriginal person or peoples. Although the style guide refers to the correct grammatical use of the word Aboriginal and Aborigine...it is becoming the norm to use only Aboriginal when writing about Aboriginal people… whether it is grammatically correct or not because of the changing times.ABC Hack (talk) 01:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

It seems really silly when you look at it from an entirely neutral point of view. "Most Aboriginal people prefer not to be called an Aborigine" is the same as saying "Most Aboriginal people prefer not to be called an original inhabitant of Australia". Is that the opposite of what they (not using either term to avoid offending anyone) keep saying they are, and which is supported by history? "Australian Aborigines" (i.e. original inhabitants of Australia) is really more neutral than "Aboriginal Australians" (i.e. original inhabitants of Australia who are Australians) since there is a sizeable group of Aborigines don't consider themselves to be "Australian". --AussieLegend (✉) 04:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I have no particular opinion on this, but a random white dude pronouncing himself as arbiter on what Aboriginal people prefer to be called and calling himself 'entirely neutral' on the subject is completely hilarious. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

The relevant policy is WP:COMMONNAME. We should use the titles that most closely reflect common usage. We do not need to be politically correct, but nor should we go out of our way to be offensive. The thing is, some of these articles have already been moved. We have Aboriginal Tasmanian, which seems to be a ridiculous title. A quick look at the references in that article, such as this one, show usage of "Tasmanian Aborigines". And it should be in the plural, like Saxons. I think there has been some hasty moving here. But I notice we still have Victorian Aborigines. StAnselm (talk) 01:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

It's simply better manners to say "Aboriginal people". HiLo48 (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Speaking as an "Aborigine", there's nothing inherently offensive about that word (it's a perfectly ordinary noun). It's how it's been used in history that has led to it carrying, for some people, derogatory connotations. I have no objection to being called an "Aborigine", but I know a lot of people that do. My father always says it reminds him of the days when we were considered fauna by the government (before the 1967 referendum). On the other hand, blackfella is widely used and not considered offensive. It's really just based on perspective. As for the article names, the first two look fine to me. The third, Victorian Aborigines, isn't really a thing. The article is describing Aboriginal nations and language groups whose country falls within the modern boundaries of Victoria, not Victorian residents of Aboriginal descent. It should really be moved to Aboriginal peoples in Victoria (or something similar) to match its subject. See here for a similar naming style. Osiris (talk) 03:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, are you saying that "Tasmanian Aborigines" looks fine (as it's mentioned above), or that "Aboriginal Tasmanian" looks fine (the current article name)? StAnselm (talk) 03:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

(replying to Osiris) A lot of it comes down to context. I don't think you will find many reliable sources referring to "blackfellas" outside of quotes. As an aside, despite popular misconception, the 1967 referendum only changed two things - including indigenous people in the census and allowed the Commonwealth to legislate on Indigenous issues. Hack (talk) 03:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hack: I don't think this is particularly relevant to Mattinbgn's question, but "blackfella" is used as a formal word in many, if not most, varieties of Aboriginal English. You'll find it (and "whitefella") written in Aboriginal literature from most parts of Australia. They do often end up in quotation marks in Euro-Australian literature, but that was the point I was making about perspective. I'm not sure I've understood the point you're trying to make about the referendum... Osiris (talk) 05:05, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Anselm: "Aboriginal Tasmanians" (plural) sounds fine to me, although it'd be better to have a consistent naming pattern for all states. Tasmania is slightly different, so I don't have much of an opinion when it comes to that. Osiris (talk) 05:05, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

• Anyway, my thoughts are keep Aboriginal Australian (on analogy to Polish Australian), keep Victorian Aborigines (since having "Victorian" as a noun in an article title seems silly), and rename Aboriginal Tasmanian back to Tasmanian Aborigines. StAnselm (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

The Victorian title is ambiguous, as I explained. And if we are really going to have articles for indigenous peoples by state, then we should try to aim for a consistent naming pattern. Not all states and territories can be written as an adjective. Aboriginal peoples in Victoria is the best I can suggest. Osiris (talk) 05:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

How about Indigenous Australians in Victoria and make that standard for all of the other states and territories? Hack (talk) 05:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

That's better, although it still suggests that it might be referring to indigenous Australians living in Victoria, rather than language and cultural groups... It is better than the current, though. Osiris (talk) 05:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

How about using "of" instead of "in"? Hack (talk) 06:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Some Aboriginal Australians prefer the term Aborigine because, without a qualifier, it is almost always intended these days to refer exclusively to the indigenous people of mainland Australia {though it often includes Tasmanian Aboriginals), while indigenous without a qualifier is non-specific to Australia, and even qualified as Indigenous Australians it includes Torres Straits Islanders, so having a different meaning. I am not objecting to the proposal - just pointing out that the matter is not as simple as some PC government agencies would like to make out. Maias (talk) 06:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Most Aboriginal people I know use Aboriginal or a specific tribe/group to identify themselves. I've maybe heard two or three people self-identify as "Aborigine". Hack (talk) 06:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Persons of Aboriginal descent actually :P Timeshift (talk) 07:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Back on the Victorian Aborigines article - it seems a bit odd that a general article like that seems to be entirely focused on the pre-European era. Hack (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

If it's expanded to include information on modern-day residents of indigenous descent, then your suggestion for the title would be excellent, in my opinion. I prefer "in" to "of" because the latter confers belonging. Osiris (talk) 20:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Cigarette packets in Australia

Hi, can somebody expand this, it seems to be a notable current issue. Needs updating with recent sources.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:10, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Would the more inclusive Tobacco packaging in Australia be a more appropriate title? - Shiftchange (talk) 03:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Feedback desired

Hey guys, I'm a long time wikipedia user and sporadic editor, but I want to get a bit more involved with it, and being the true-blue patriot I am I though that involvement should be for the benefit of Australian pages. I just did a big expansion of James Scullin and have previously done them for Australian plebiscite, 1916, John Hope, 1st Marquess of Linlithgow and Vida Goldstein. I'd really appreciate any input you have for them, revised assessment ratings, and perhaps some advice as to how I should go about getting them to Feature Article status, particularly for Scullin. I'd really like to become a more useful and active member of the community as well, so any advice you have on that would be great as well. Unus Multorum (talk) 02:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

GA/FA processes are all about citations and compliance with WP:MOS. You will need references for every paragraph at least.--Grahame (talk) 01:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

This is terrific work, and it's so nice to see someone doing detailed writing on Australian politics. Main things that stand out: watch the opinion creeping in, copyedit, reference a lot more tightly than at present, and don't put external links in the body of articles. Content-wise, the plebiscite article is terrific, Hopetoun seems good apart from its lack of content on his UK activities, Goldstein is decent but could do with more work. Scullin is terrific in terms of content but could really use some solid copyediting for clarity. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at the WP:Good article criteria and WP:Featured article criteria, and compare them to the articles you've been working on. You can also get ideas on how to improve them by looking at articles on similar subjects that are FAs or GAs. With ratings, anyone can rate/re-rate articles upto and including B-class (see assesment department instructions), though you can also request an assessment here. If you want to be more "useful and active", there are plenty of tasks you can do to help out - for ideas, check out:

Australia-related pages:

• This projects To-do list
• Articles with images requested (Upload free images/other media to Commons)
• Help out at a sub-project

Wikipedia-wide pages:

• Wikipedia:Community portal
• New Pages Patrol
• Volunteer at the Wikipedia:Teahouse
• Keep up with Wikipedia news by following The Signpost
• Discuss/propose ideas and policy at the Village pump

or create an article, or keep expanding articles, or participate in discussions here.

Feel free to do any, all, or none of the above: Wikipedia is entirely voluntary - Evad37 (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Timetables for train stations

I notice there is repeated feedback for some train station articles where readers are frustrated they cannot find timetable information. I realise that it wouldn't be appropriate for us to include that for a number of reasons. What I wanted to suggest is that in the external links section there should probably be a link to a website which has timetables but that we also add ", including train timetables." after the link. - Shiftchange (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I see no problem with that, as long as the links themselves comply with WP:External links, i.e. official websites. - Evad37 (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

All melbourne railway stations have an infobox with an existing website link. I have added "includes timetables" to this link for all station articles eg. North Melbourne railway station. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 03:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Gibraltar Rock, Porongurups

The sourcing for Gibraltar Rock, Porongurups is pretty thin. I am asking myself if it would not be better just to have a single article on the Porongurups Range, covering all the peaks rather than separate articles dealing with the individual peaks. Anyone have an opinion? Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 13:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion, but it looks pretty well referenced to me considering the subject matter? The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:07, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Lake Eyre: move to official name?

Input at Talk:Lake Eyre#Move to official name? would be appreciated. (Note: the lake's official name was recently changed to "Kati Thanda-Lake Eyre"). IgnorantArmies – 11:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

January public Wikimedia Australia meeting

The Wikimedia Australia board will be in Melbourne on 5-6 January for a board meeting on the Saturday 5 January, and attending the public meeting on Sunday 6 January. Follow wmau:Meeting:Public (2013-01-06) for more details as they are announced.

It would be good for the other capital cities to either organise a meetup:

• before 4 January, so you call tell your local board member what you think is important, or
• on Sunday 6 January, and we'll teleconference and use online collaboration tools to link you to Melbourne, or
• soon after 7 January, so your local board member can brief you on the activities, outcomes, and todo list, and integrate your feedback into our planning.

Prior to the meeting Siska & I will be travelling on CountryLink (backtracker) from Sydney to Melbourne, and after the meeting we'll be travelling from Melbourne to Armidale via Sydney. I am available to attend any wikipedia:meetups anywhere that is interested on or near a CountryLink station such as Wollongong, Wagga Wagga, Goulburn, Albury, Shepparton, etc. Newcastle? I am happy to build my travel plans around whoever sets up a meetup first; CountryLink flexible passes are great. Don't worry if there is only one Wikipedian in your town - we'll be two, and maybe more will turn up.

I am making myself available especially for Canberra and Sydney meetups either before or after the Melbourne meeting, as I am your 'local' board member ;-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 17:15, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I've started meetup pages for

Wikipedia:Meetup/Wollongong

Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 26

Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/January 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Vandenberg (talk • contribs) 08:40, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Australian redirects

Note - user blocked Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#copyright violation.
Would like this project to be aware that in the past 2 months almost 1000 redirects have been made regarding Australian topics. All done by one NEW editor SEE HERE - I believe a review of the redirects should take place by this project over someone like me from outside the country. Thank you for your time.Moxy (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of redirects, could someone please move Results of the 2010 Australian federal election in South Australia back to Results of the Australian federal election, 2010 (South Australia)? Some rando moved all the 2010 federal election pages to something different from the convention we use for every other election article, and for some reason all the others were able to be fixed without admin rights. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Seems sorted out. Some rando (whatever that may mean; I trust it is not an offensive term, editor may have been more appropriate) did move articles beginning Results for... to Results of... for what should, one hopes, be an obvious reason. A handful remain, however. Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Typo for "random", perhaps? :) Frickeg (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

handball

Is handball a significant element of rules football? The topic of the title "handball" is under discussion at talk:handball -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 14:24, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Australia at the multi-sport events

I created Australia at the Summer Universiade, but other articles of this type have yet to be written. Does anyone want to help? --Kasper2006 (talk) 09:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Copyright question at WP:HELPDESK

A user has a question regarding image copyright at the WP:HELPDESK. See Wikipedia:Help desk#Photograph under Australian copyright jurisdiction Hack (talk) 03:21, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Sydney Opera House

There is a discussion at Talk:Sydney Opera House#Recent revert - 3 December 2012 where some extra opinions would be appreciated. --AussieLegend (✉) 15:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Legit place?

Can anyone confirm this place exists? - Shiftchange (talk) 11:32, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Geoscience Australia shows that it exists. Bidgee (talk) 11:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I should of checked there first. - Shiftchange (talk) 11:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

No problem, been a few times when I've forgotten about GA's place names database. Bidgee (talk) 12:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears to be a ghost town on Google maps. Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

The Angels (Australian band)

Could use some extra watching what with recent round of edit warring and apparent WP:COI editing, and perhaps input from editor(s) who are more familiar with the group. Dl2000 (talk) 04:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Protection for Holden VH Commodore

Could someone protect the Holden VH Commodore article from a strange removal of content due to theft claim. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Apparently there is no longer a problem. The editor removing the images from the article has had them deleted from commons. One reason the admin who deleted them did so was because they were unused. --AussieLegend (✉) 07:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Problems with The Angels and VH Commodore articles, hmmm... shall I do a preemptive WP:RFP for Victoria Bitter (why hasn't this been moved to Victoria (Australia) Bitter yet????) and Flannelette? The-Pope (talk) 08:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Admin help

Can someone please delete the useless redirects at Electoral district of Murray (South Australia) and Electoral district of Gumeracha? An editor is apparently going around redirecting these to a general article which contains precisely zero content relating to these electorates, and they need to show as redlinks so we know where still needs to be worked on. The Drover's Wife (talk) 17:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

EnergyAustralia

There is a proposal concerning EnergyAustralia and TRUenergy articles. Your opinion is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 06:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Public commentators and notability.

AfD's for Bruce Haigh and Daryl Dixon (economic writer) illustrate an issue regarding notability, others, such Alan Ramsey (chosen at random) could also be caught up in a purge. It appears that a high public profile of reporting/commenting with articles published by Fairfax, News Ltd publications and broadcast on the ABC is not enough to prove notability. -- Paul foord (talk) 07:22, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Sigh. Someone's going to need to hit up Factiva and go through and source them. All of these shouldn't be that hard to find, since they're significant enough to have things written about them. I know Haigh definitely has been profiled because I've seen them, I suspect the easiest way to keep Dixon's article would be through independent coverage of his books, and Ramsey's been around for so long someone has to have written something about him at least once. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

The (now free) Fairfax news store is very useful for SMH & The Age articles. Just make sure you realise how its boolean logic works. The-Pope (talk) 11:09, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Woah. That is a phenomenal resource, and so much easier to use than Factiva. This is going to change a few things. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Might be worth doing up a list of resources for Australian subjects. Hack (talk) 03:48, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Rejuvenate the "Resources" section of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australia/Help? --99of9 (talk) 04:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Added a bit but it's a bit incomplete - I've only added a few I am familiar with and use. Hack (talk) 06:25, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Shootout at the local coralle

In view of the above item - editing at Gun_politics_in_Australia has seen a SPA take issue (which hasnt been checked), and the general ambience seems to suggest that it will require more than just the usual eds to keep it on watch - regular watches from any admins would be helpful...SatuSuro 00:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Field and Game Australia

There is a bit of a stouch at Field and Game Australia. It needs a bit of a look-see. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Is Australia (2008 film) a "Western"?

At List_of_Western_films_of_the_2000s the question has arisen of whether Australia (2008 film) is a "Western", specifically an "Outback Western", which oddly isn't mentioned at Western (genre). Also several other Australian films, such as Ned Kelly (2003 film) are included in this list. 202.81.242.188 (talk) 09:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Weird - Australian does not necessarily correspond to Western by genre, content or subject SatuSuro 09:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Or geography. HiLo48 (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Some of it does ... Mitch Ames (talk) 12:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

There is also Category:Australian Western films. The question is whether sources widely describe them as Westerns. A single reference to "Outback Western" probably won't cut it. Osiris (talk) 12:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

There are zero references to "Outback Western". And as for "Australian Western"; who invented that category? Seriously. Does it have any provenance? I think Quigley Down Under is the only film that one could describe as such. 202.81.242.188 (talk) 19:06, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, Category:Australian Western films was created and entirely populated in 2008 by one editor, Jules90 and has gone unnoted, undiscussed and uncited ever since. It's no more than one person's opinion. 202.81.242.188 (talk) 07:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And that person hasn't edited in almost three years. It won't be easy to discuss it with him. HiLo48 (talk) 07:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

CfD anyone? --AussieLegend (✉) 07:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not a made-up concept. There's a bit of coverage in reliable sources about the concept of an Australian Western film (films using motifs and styles borrowed from American Westerns), most recently in relation to The Proposition and Red Hill. During the 1940s, a series of "Australian Westerns" were made by Ealing Studios, most notably The Overlanders. Hack (talk) 07:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

So, where is this cited? The Overlanders (film) is "notably" an Australian Western? There isn't a word about that in the article, and it's not in the category either. It just says it was a "film set entirely outdoors". Seems the category has been applied fairly randomly. Having elements of some genre doesn't automatically make a film a member of that genre. It would be more descriptive to call them "Outback" films, perhaps. At the National Film Archive it's tagged "Aboriginal stockmen, Australian soldiers, Second World War, cattle drives, crocodiles, drovers, families, nationalism, outback, pioneering spirit, rivers, role of women". But not "Western". Saying these films have some common elements with US Westerns is one thing. Saying they ARE Westerns is quite another. Some things look similar, but the stories are rooted in Australian history, not American.202.81.242.188 (talk) 09:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

CfD would have my support. Keneally didn't write Blacksmith as a western. Ned Kelly stories (even when played by Mick Jagger) are not westerns. The nearest to a western is Mad Max 2, which isn't even in the cat. Agree with the comments by editor above. Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

There are most certainly Australian films that can be reasonably described as Westerns. The Proposition is clearly a Western set in Australia. The Gregor Jordan film was very much within the "Western" film tradition. The 1982 version of the The Man from Snowy River was filmed as a Western. The television show Five Mile Creek was clearly a Western television series. The idea that anything set in Australia is automatically not a Western is overreach. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:46, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

One could argue that a movie not set in the old U.S.A west is not a western, since that is why westerns are so named. Having elements of a western does not mean that it's automatically a western. --AussieLegend (✉) 11:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

There are lots of arguments about genre labels for films, TV shows, books, etc. here. In case of dispute, (and many are disputing, it seems) it comes down to citing a significant number of reliable sources saying that it is one genre or another. 19th C Australia was a British colony, quite different from the US of the period. The relationship of settlers with Aboriginals was very different to that with Indians. Most importantly perhaps, there was no "Western" frontier leading to fertile farmlands, but a vast arid Outback. You can find elements of Western stories, but drovers aren't cowboys. The label "Western" needs to be strongly justified if it is proposed on any film not actually set in the US West. 202.81.242.188 (talk) 11:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Some Australian films, like The Proposition (which is excellent, by the way), have been marketed as "Australian Westerns" though. I think that The Proposition pretty much fits in the bill, in that it has a lot of Western stylistic tropes in it. Australia the film... not so much. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC).

You know, retailers still market products with capacities in "lts" and lengths in "mts". That doesn't mean these abbreviations are valid though. I'm really not sure what an "Australian Western" is though since (fortunately) in that area the U.S. and Oz are kilometres (or should that be "kms") apart, both literally and figuratively. The American Film Institute defines "western" as "a genre of films set in the American West that embodies the spirit, the struggle and the demise of the new frontier."[18] The American Film Institute would seem to be fairly authoritative on this. There may be some films that are "Australian Westerns", but they're not "westerns" unless they're set in the U.S. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Yet, here we have professional film journalists who describe The Proposition as a Western. All genre is somewhat subjective, but if it's set in a frontier region, has shootouts, outlaws, cattle, hats, and a lot of dust, that says "Western" to me. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC).

"Frontier"? Frontier of what? There isn't any in Australia. No Mexico, Canada or Indian borders. They have "shootouts" in every country in the world. They have "outlaws" in every country in the world. They have "hats", "cattle"... you get the idea. All of those things are seen in Westerns. All of those things are seen in many other genres. The specific thing is the location. Every definition of a Western starts with that. 12:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.81.242.188 (talk)

(ec caused by some local outlaws) Well, not quite. All qualify it; the first calls it a "revisionist Australian western", the second and third call it an "Australian western". A true western it is not. A frontier region, cattle, hats, and a lot of dust sounds a lot like the places I've been in the Northern Territory. I'm sure there were plenty of outlaws around and hell, I've been involved in a couple of shootouts up there, although our weapons were bigger than six guns. Anything can be made to fit the bill if we interpret too loosely. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You know, the argument would be far more convincing if there were a large proportion of reliable references for the usage of "western" to describe any Australian films. I concede that there are a handful of such examples, but these are overwhelmed by the great majority that do not. As I stated before, a western is set in old west of the USA, not Australia. You may with justification describe some Australian movies as "western like" but on no account can you reasonably describe them as actual westerns. - Nick Thorne ^talk 03:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

According to the Macquarie Dictionary, the correct term is "meat-pie western". It is "a film made in Australia in the genre of a US western". lol Hack (talk) 05:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I think that narrowing the definition of a western to those films only taking place in the American 19th century is an editorial construct. As editors, one of the first things we learn is that our personal opinions, wants and dislikes never - I repeat, never - get to supplant or overrule reliable, verifiable and notable opinion from professional reviewers. We editors aren't citable. Verifiability, not truth, is the litmus for inclusion in Wikipedia. We have several film reviewers who name a number of films not set in the American West as westerns. We don't get to gainsay that. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 08:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

That isn't "narrowing" the definition. It is the definition. See Western (genre) where the consensus WP definition is found. Westerns are devoted to telling stories set primarily in the latter half of the 19th century in the American Old West, hence the name. It's people who want to broaden it to include every movie with a guy on a horse and a big hat that are "overreaching". It's obvious that there is a Western influence on many Australian movies set in the bush. That doesn't make them "Westerns". As The Magnificent Seven is a Western and not a samurai movie, despite being based on Seven Samurai. 202.81.242.51 (talk) 11:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Wrong, anon. It is one definition. That it was pulled from a Top Ten list at AFI isn't exactly a ringing endorsement. Find some citations that maintain that same sort of narrow interpretation. I am guessing that unless they have copied it from the same list, you aren't going to find it. You know why? Because it doesn't exist, as it is an Amerocentric view and, well, stupidly limiting. The Man From Snowy River and a host of other films are so obviously westerns that failing to classify them as such - when professional film reviewers and critics call them such - that prompts my initial comment about how our personal opinion as to the definition of what a western is (or clinging to a single definition offered by a single source) does not override our responsibilities as Wikipedians. As editors, we don't get to supplant citations with out personal views. period. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Wrong, Jack Sebastian. Westerns have always been about the "old west" as per the AFI definition. It has only been relatively recently that the definition has been expanded to include anything with lots of dust, people on horseback and cattle. Westerns have traditionally been the sort of movie that you'd expect to see John Wayne starring in. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I will agree that most citable definitions of westerns refer to events taking place within the latter half of the 19th century through the very beginning of the 20th, but I am guessing that is where our definitions diverge. It is my impression that you are pinning your entire argument upon a single, one line definition found within a Top Ten list within the AFI website. This seems a faulty predication for a discussion, especially when there are other, more encompassing definitions out there, not just from reviewer websites and professional reviewers but from scholarly sources. I feel that your trivialization of the tropes associated with the Western genre tend to undermine your own arguments. If, to be a Western, a film must take place in the Primitive West of 19th century America, you are excising entire swaths of films deemed within the genre by better reviewers and academics than you or I. Westerns are not just John Wayne. Your personal view of what a Western is - a view that you have readily admitted is one of a personal, "traditional" nature - cannot be used to govern any article concerning the genre. We work of cites. Note that I used the plural version of that word. Not one citation; several.

I will tell you what: on my way home, I will stop by the college library and grab up some references that offer better definitions of the Western genre. In the meantime, I'd suggest you do the same. My first stop will be Konigsberg's Complete Film Dictionary. We can talk later on this evening, when I have a free moment. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I think a reading of this policy page may be apt. In Wikipedia, things are grouped into articles based on what they are, not what they are called by. - Shiftchange (talk) 19:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you should expand on your answer, Shiftchange, as it seems subject to diametrically-opposed interpretation. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I mean that it doesn't matter if lots of reviewers describe it as a western when that description contradicts Wikipedia's definition of what a western is. That means the film Australia is not a western. - Shiftchange (talk) 06:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia as a reliable source? Hack (talk) 07:08, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The article Western (genre), where the definition is given, is sourced. For a list article it's appropriate to refer to such parent articles for definitions and discussion. And if the definition is disputed, again better to argue it at the parent article, as it may affect many related articles. 202.81.243.40 (talk) 11:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

• OK, I think it time to get back to some basics here. The burden of providing reliable sources lies with those seeking to include information in the encyclopaedia as per WP:Burden. In this case, to include films about Australia or any other place or time other than the "old west" in the US (which everyone here agrees can be called westerns), requires the presentation that a majority, or even a significant minority of reliable sources consider those films to be westerns. This does not include descriptions with modifiers, such as "Australia western", or "western like" or any one of a plethora of possible variations on the theme. Finding a just handful of sources for a film that actually say that a particular film is a western is not enough if the overwhelming majority do not make the same association. In those cases the provisions of WP:Fringe come into play. In this case the clear majority of editors discussing the issue are opposed to including these films, so there is not even a consensus to keep them. No RFC is required as the removal of un-sourced or poorly sourced information is clearly allowed, again, the burden lies with s/he that wishes to keep or restore the info. This burden has abjectly failed to be met. It is time to delete this nonsense from the articles concerned, unless someone can satisfy the obvious and clearly stated requirements. - Nick Thorne ^talk 08:08, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Executive reserve powers in Australia

A dispute around the reserve powers in Australia has erupted at Talk:Australian head of state dispute and has now spilled over to Talk:Governor-General of Australia. Some input by other editors would be appreciated; hopefully a resolution can be found before the squabble spreads farther. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 22:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd love to join in, but I made a commitment to avoid engaging with Pete/Skyring after far too much unpleasantness in the past. Good luck. HiLo48 (talk) 22:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to see more eyes on this, too. The discussion revolves around the source added by Miesianiacal here, specifically the third and fourth paragraphs dealing with the reserve powers of the Governor-General, notably Section 64, used by Sir John Kerr to dismiss Gough Whitlam in 1975. Paragraph 16 of this source also places the reserve powers in the hands of the Governor-General personally. --Pete (talk) 10:23, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I have been looking through the discussions, and have some thoughts for consideration:

1) The dispute seems to basically come down to the appropriateness / accuracy of the phrase reserve powers of the Crown
2) What phrasing do the sources in the citations given (cites 4 - 11) actually use?

• Cite 4 only uses "reserve powers"
• Cite 5 only uses "reserve powers"
• Cite 6 (II.61) doesn't use either "reserve powers" or "reserve powers of the Crown"
• Cite 7 (p. 213) uses "reserve powers", and compares "discretionary powers of the Crown" - in the UK - to those "of the Governor General"
• Cite 8 (p. 345) only uses "reserve powers"
• Cite 9: Barwick mentions "reserve powers of the Crown", but later in the same paragraph has "The notion of reserve powers being available to the Crown was developed in Imperial days when it was thought that in the long process of converting an absolute monarchy into a constitutional monarchy there remained some powers of the Crown which were exercisable without the concurrence of the ministry. Whether or not this was a correct view, the Commonwealth Constitution leaves no room for any such notion." (emphasis mine)
• Cite 10 uses "reserve powers of the Crown"
• Cite 11: Byers (Solicitor-General of Australia in 1975) writes "The point of the above is that the opinion does not deny the existence of the Crown's reserve powers"

3) Are the sources reliable sources? What is the due weight to give to each source?
4) Would any of the following ideas, perhaps with some tweaking, work as solutions?

• Change the wording in the article to be just reserve powers
• Include a footnote mentioning the different phrasing in different sources
• Include a footnote mentioning that in this context, "the Crown" should not be confused with "the Sovereign" (as per Pete's comment at 18:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC))

- Evad37 (talk) 12:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Jon Mannah date of death

The death of Mannah was originally put on his page (and still is at Deaths in 2013) as the 17th. However some IP editors have been changing it to the 18th. It is a bit unclear as the source for this article with a publication date of the 19th[19] does not mention the date specifically, but says "4am yesterday". It is possible there is UTC / AEDST confusion, also possibly on my part!

Can anyone confirm the date (17th or 18th), or suggest a more reliable source? - 220 of ^Borg 01:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

SBS News has "Mannah died aged 23 on Friday morning...", which would make it the 18th. - Evad37 (talk) 05:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Yep, concur. 18th January seems pretty certain by that source. Much appreciated, regards 220 of ^Borg 06:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)