Talk:Australia/Archive 3

message: Wikipedians wishing to contribute with an Australian focus are encouraged to take a look at Wikipedia:Australian wikipedians' notice board -- Chuq 02:44, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. The correct and official terminology is 'Australian Aborigine'. The term 'Aboriginal' simply refers to something being the first of its kind in a particular region. - Mark 15:14, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc

message: I have removed some external links. For following reasons.
The link to the Worldwide press freedom index was out of date, also the freedom of the press in Australia is not even mention in the article.
The link to AUSMAG was removed because it didn't have much information on the site.
I replaced the link to the Sunnybank directory with a link the the Australia section of the Open Directory Project because it is more comprehensive. 
-- Popsracer 12:50, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: External links removed

message: I removed the HRP reference from the main page, because it gives an amusing little hobby of a few cranks a prominence that it does not deserve.  Nobody else takes the claims seriously, unlike, say, the "Provisional Aboriginal Republic" stunt pulled by Michael Mansell and his Tasmanian Aboriginal buddies in the 1980's. --Robert Merkel 12:39, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hutt river province 

message: Australia had been removed from :Category:Oceanic countries and added to :Category:Australia.  However all sub-sub-articles of :Category:Countries should only contain country articles.  :Category:Australia contains many more articles that just Australia, for example, Australian fauna.  See the Beatles/John Lennon example at Wikipedia talk:Categorization -- Chuq 00:30, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categori[zs]ation 

message: The article contains "sixth-largest country in the world (geographically), the only one to occupy an entire continent, and the largest in Australasia" in the opening paragraph. This contains mutually contradictory statements:
*the only one to occupy an entire continent
*the largest in Australasia (which is described as including the country of New Zealand)
Will those with an interest in this article please modify this as  required? Jamesday 15:19, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? Where is the problem, James? Are you getting Australia and Australasia mixed up?Tannin 19:12, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No! What James is saying is that if Australia is the largest country in Australasia, being larger than New Zealand, it cannot therefore be the only country in the continent. I understood James, thinks most of us did! have changed accordingly. Grunners194.168.3.18 11:40, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe you are under the mistaken assumption that Australasia is a continent. It is not - it is a region. Examine its article. The article continent also spells out that "a continent ... is a large continuous mass of land... ." It says that Oceania and Australasia are terms used to define the region including Australia and the Pacific Islands. The article Oceania also mentions that the islands of Oceania do not form part of a true continent. Thus, I see no problem with the article as it stood. However, I will change it to more clearly state that Australasia is merely a regional grouping of islands. - Mark 12:04, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: In Australasia or only country in a continent

message: I have removed the SAMPA and IPA pronunciations from the first sentence of this article. They were far too long for the first sentence (it is jarring for the reader) and the IPA ones do not display properly on a standard XP/IE setup. I have placed them in their own section entitled "pronunciation" until someone can write a more interesting thing about the pronunciation (though I cannot see how it can be made to be interesting at all). Anyway, Wikipedia is not a dictionary. We have Wiktionary for things like pronunciation. - Mark 05:51, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  SAMPA pronunciation 

message: I am considering reverting this; even if it is true, I don't think that Violet Crumble warrants a link as an Australian-related article - it's just another chocolate bar. -- Chuq 02:46, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I am surprised that there is no "Food of Australia" or "Cuisine in Australia" article to link to it from. - Mark 03:04, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I found Australian cuisine :) -- Chuq 09:16, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Violet Crumble 

message: I was reading the Australia page, and I cannot figure out why there is no distinction between Australia the continent and Australia the country.  Since many people confuse Oceania and Australia, should this not be made more clear?  Just a thought.
--LuYu
:Hi LuYu. The country and the continent are coextensive, so 'Geography of Australia' should describe both the country and the continent adequately. Having said that, I would not be opposed to a separate treatment of the continent and the country, so long as Australia remains as the country article. - Mark 07:49, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about the Continent?