Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places

message: I just noticed someone has added information and a few articles about the cadastral (property/allotment) divisions in Australia. See Cadastral divisions of Australia. I think this falls under the scope of this project and probably should be mentioned here. Also, it would be nice to see project members have a look at these articles in an effort to standardise them and make them more accessible/useful (I never knew they existed). 
This came about because a guy in the army was shot in the head last night in a training exercise at a place called Cultana and I couldn't find it on Wikipedia. Finally I found it is the name of a hundred (parish) in South Australia. There is an airstrip and army base of some sort there apparently. Consequently I created Cultana,_South_Australia] (which, on reflection, is probably misnamed but that was what the link from Cadastral divisions of South Australia prescribed to turn the red link blue). Feel free to edit/move/merge to other.
What do you think about these hundreds. Do we need an article on each hundred/parish? Each county? Donama (talk) 05:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: (Centralised discussion on the same topic at WP:AWNB#Cadastral_divisions) Orderinchaos 04:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cadastral divisions 

message: This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP 1.0 bot announcement 

message: Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone.  Articles were selected based on their assessed  importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Australian places articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details.  You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010.  As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide.  Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback! 
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 21:55, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian places articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: I don't understand the policy for when there's two places in the same state with the same name: what does "the same method of disambiguation that is used in that state" mean?
Concrete example. In Victoria, there's two Bellfields: Bellfield 3081 in the City of Banyule in Melbourne which is what Bellfield, Victoria currently talks about, and Bellfield 3381 split between the Northern and Southern Grampians Shires, in the state's west. Google Maps for the Grampian Bellfield and the Melburnian Bellfield; search for similar information in VicNames and Australia Post.
So what does the policy say for this? I guess the Grampian Bellfield is not notable enough to get an article—it doesn't look like there's any development there and it's surrounded by a national park. And no-one's tried writing about it yet. But perhaps having a name clash is enough to warrant discussion.
The example given, about Kingston, South Australia, seems to be completely irrelevant, because no such place exists; instead, there's Kingston SE, South Australia and Kingston-on-Murray, South Australia, and "Kingston" is just a historical/local name.
—Felix the Cassowary 19:47, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fwiw, the ABS distinguishes "Bellfield (Grampians)" and "Bellfield (Greater Melbourne)",  which seems to be consistent with what we do with rivers like Avon River (Gippsland) and Avon River (Western Victoria). Note that the ABS does not create official names; it just needs unique ones. —Felix the Cassowary 20:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yup, on the basis of Springfield, Victoria up in Mildura and Springfield, Victoria (Macedon Ranges) this is approximately the right solution. Obviously the idea of using LGAs won't work in all cases—as many localities are split—but the general idea of a mid-level disambiguator is useful. I'm going to update the article page with a practical example, instead of the current irrelevant one. —Felix the Cassowary 20:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two places with the same name in the same state 

message: WikiProject Australian places is looking a bit too quiet these days. The last talk page activity was in November 2010. What's more, a lot of what should be discussed at this project is being discussed at WikiProject Australia. What do others think of a merger of some sort? ClaretAsh 23:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge to WikiProject Australia? 

message: Editors here may be interested in this multiple RM that I have initiated. My preamble:
These articles are all concerned with street names in Melbourne. (I would have include another 17, but the template has a limit of 30.) I do not support these moves; but I know that some very active editors do. It is time to air the matter, once and for all. Is it better to have an article on Collins Street in Melbourne called simply Collins Street, or to have it called Collins Street, Melbourne as at present? Which option serves the needs of Wikipedia's worldwide readership better? In almost all cases that I list there is no content in the destination article, just a redirect. And in almost all cases there is no Wikipedia article that very closely resembles the Melbourne-oriented one. There are, for example, no other Collins Streets with their own articles.
Your vote ("Support" or "Oppose") would be welcome, along with your reasons.
NoeticaTea? 12:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested moves of 30+ Melbourne street names 

message: I have just returned from the lower Shoalhaven in NSW and noticed a lack of coverage on some of the villages down that way so I am endeavouring to add some content (starting with a few photos). The existing stub for Tabourie Lake, New South Wales seems to be incorrectly named. The Shoalhaven City Council refers to it as Tabourie Lake, but the Geographical Names Board website and ABS Statistical divisions list the current naming of the village as "Lake Tabourie". I propose the article title is changed to Lake Tabourie (there is already a redirect from here) and the redirect on Tabourie Lake, unless anybody can provide a definitive answer? I know it is a minor stub, but as someone who grew up in the area calling it Lake Tabourie, it is irritating and incorrect! Dfadden (talk) 11:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Geographical Names Board lists "Lake Tabourie" as the suburb's name on the Geographical Names Register. The ABS uses Lake Tabourie as well. "Tabourie Lake" is the name of a village in the suburb. There is also a rural place and a lagoon called Tabourie Lake. --AussieLegend (✉) 08:19, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lake Tabourie or Tabourie Lake? 

message: I noticed that some of the station names in Winton Branch Railway (Queensland) are redlinks. Perhaps someone familiar with Queensland geography could start articles on them. I created Prubi, but it's just a stub. Eastmain (talk • contribs)  06:52, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redlinked place names in [[Winton Branch Railway (Queensland)]] 

message: Perth is no longer a disambiguation page. Also there can be ambiguity between, for instance, the name of a place and the name of a person. I suggest changing
:*Where the town/city name has or is likely to have other uses somewhere else on earth, a link from the appropriate disambiguation page should be made (eg. Perth contains a link to Perth, Western Australia, and Kingston contains links to several Australian towns).
to
:*Where the town/city name has or is likely to have other uses, a link from the appropriate disambiguation page should be made (eg. Darwin contains a link to Darwin, Northern Territory, and Kingston contains links to several Australian towns). —rybec 00:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh. No problems with your change (WP:JUSTFIXIT applies surely?) but why are participants in the US Placenames discussion all of a sudden interested in changing the Australian naming guideline - especially ones who have never shown any interest in Australian topics ever. The Australian project is not a place to fight proxy battles over US placenames. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 00:51, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed it. Cheers. —rybec 01:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Perth]] example 

message: Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

message: Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: Trying to improve my articles, I thought I would look at the GAs in this field.  I see from this page that there are three of them.  But I cannot see any way to find out what those articles are, so I can read them.  At first I naively thought I could just click on the number "3" in the table and it might show me what made up that count, but no such luck.  Can anybody suggest how to find these GAs?  If not, are there any generally agreed guidelines, or some known good examples I can look at? --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: try :Category:GA-Class Australian places articles and its subcategories. --Scott Davis Talk 05:38, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Muchas gracias - just what I wanted, thanks!  --Gronk Oz (talk) 08:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are the Good Articles? 

message: Our first Australian conference for Wikipedians/Wikimedians will be held 3-5 October 2015. Organised by Wikimedia Australia, there will be a 2-day conference (Saturday 3 October and Sunday 4 October) with an optional 3rd day (Monday 5 October) for specialist topics (unconference discussions, training sessions, etc). The venue is the State Library of Queensland in Brisbane. So put those dates in your diary! Note: Monday is a public holiday is some states but not others. Read about it here: WikiConference Australia 2015
As part of that page, there are now sections for you to:
* indicate your interest in possibly attending the conference (this is not a binding commitment, of course) 
* add suggestions for topics to include in the conference: what you would like to hear/discuss (again, there is no commit to you presenting/organising that topic, although it’s great if you are willing to do so), or indicate your enthusiasm for any existing topic on the list by adding a note of support underneath it
 
It would really help our planning if you could let us know about possible attendance and the kind of topics that would make you want to come. If you don’t want to express your views on-wiki, please email me at kerry.raymond@wikimedia.org.au or committee@wikimedia.org.au 
We are hoping to have travel subsidies available to assist active Australasian Wikipedians to attend the conference, although we are not currently in a position to provide details, but be assured we are doing everything we can to make it possible for active Australian Wikipedians to come to the conference. Kerry (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Folks, just letting you know we will not be proceeding with Wikiconference Australia 2015 originally proposed for 3-5 October 2015. Thanks to those of you who expressed your support. You are free to attend the football finals instead :-) Kerry (talk) 07:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiConfererence Australia 2015 - Save the date 3-5 October 2015 

message: Hi! Is Comleroy, New South Wales a (notable) place? - Nabla (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, You might get more of a response at :WP:AWNB - this project is dormant and used mainly for record keeping and a repository of links. A search of Geoscience Australia show "Comleroy" listed as an "unofficial" locality. I don't know the place, however. Wikipedia:GEOLAND may be useful. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comleroy, New South Wales 

message: For more information, please see Wikimedia Australia Community Conference, Sydney, 15 June 2019  via  Kerry (talk) 10:18, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimedia Australia Community Conference, Sydney, 15 June 2019 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: Hey there! A discussion on what to illustrate, and which images to include, in a potential  for the Sydney article is currently taking place at Talk:Sydney#Selection of images for a photomontage. Feel free to join in on the discussion and share your thoughts on the matter! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 22:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on photomontage for [[Sydney]] 

message: Hi everyone,
I just discovered that :Category:South Australia articles missing geocoordinate data has been deleted.  It was deleted because it was an Empty category.  It now contains two pages.   Should this type of category be protected against deletion?
Regards Cowdy001 (talk) 23:43, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so. Kerry (talk) 13:07, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:South Australia articles missing geocoordinate data 

message: I have kicked off a discussion of which region(s) apply for the suburb of Epping at Talk:Epping, New South Wales#Region(s) of Sydney for Epping, because there have been a lot of back-and-forth changes about whether it should be described as being in Western Sydney.  For transparency, I am proposing that it is categorized as being in both the Western and the Northern suburbs (some sources say one, some say the other).
But it is just a two-party debate, which is getting nowhere, and some more contributions would be very helpful.
Please contribute if you have an opinion, or better still, relevant sources.--Gronk Oz (talk) 23:40, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed that this topic was raised here several years ago at #How to deal with repeated changes that contradict sources.  That conversation died for wont of sources.  If you check the current Talk page though, I have put together a collection of sources that should help.--Gronk Oz (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems Regions of Sydney is almost entirely uncited, probably because as it says in the lede that these regions are mostly unofficial. I have a similar problem with Regions of Queensland which is based on the view of one Qld you Govt Dept at one point in time despite the fact that other Qld Govt Dept's also divide the state into a various other sets of regions. The problem is that some region names have long-standing *usage* (e.g. Northern Beaches, the subject of previous arguments here in Wikipedia) but have no precise definitions. This then leads people to think everywhere must be in some kind of region and that there is some precise test to identify the region. Personally I think we would be better to back away from using regions for categories or in definitions in the lede para. I believe we should use LGAs for such purposes as these do have precise boundaries. I think with these ill-defined regions, we should follow the guidance of WP:NPOV and say (not in the lede para, but the geography section) something like "Smallville is sometimes described as being in the Nasty Region [1][2] and sometimes in the Nice Region [3]." In my experience these disputes tend to follow the pattern of places in Nasty Region being redefined as being in the Nice Region rather than vice versa, which I presume is because it suits the real estate agents and residents to affiliate the suburb with the nicer region. Kerry (talk) 03:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for input: Region(s) of Sydney for Epping 

message: I have updated the list of regions and sub-regions on Template:Victoria to reflect those listed on the Victorian Government sites. See discussion Template talk:Victoria#Sub regions. -- ThylacineHunter (talk) 04:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regions, Sub-regions, & Districts of Victoria 

message: Kardinya, Western Australia is at peer review as a potential WP:FAC. Any and all comments would be welcome. Steelkamp (talk) 06:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review 

message: Opinions are sought at Template_talk:Infobox_Australian_place#Nearest_neighbours as to how to handle boundary cases - eg what is displayed for "suburbs around ..." when the suburb is on the coast and there isn't another suburb on one side of the suburb. Mitch Ames (talk) 05:31, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nearest neighbours" or "suburbs around" in Infobox 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: Williamsdale Wikidata links should link to Williamsdale, New South Wales, not Williamsdale, Australian Capital Territory. Willimsdale was split in 1913 and now Williamsdale, NSW has some population as a rural commuter area while Williamsdale, ACT is effectively greenbelt. The ABS links in particular are a concern with the automatic linking of population figures, but others such as Allhomes, GeoNames and theOpenStreetMap also link to the wrong Willimsdale. Could somebody who knows how to chnage these links please fix this.--Grahame (talk) 02:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Williamsdale Wikidata links

message: Bayswater, Western Australia has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: GAR Notice

message: Editors are asked to contribute to a discussion at , as to whether:
* It's worth mentioning that an arbitrary non-notable geographic point is within Stony Head
* If it is worth mentioning, whether a citation is required to verify that fact
Mitch Ames (talk) 11:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stony Head, 41°00'00.0"S, 147°00'00.0"E 

message: I have noticed that cities such as São Paulo, New York, Mexico City, Los Angeles and Boston are utilising a new style for their infobox montages. Instead of having the caption below the montage, the captions are underneath each individual image making it easier for the reader. Would this be acceptable for our cities' infobox montages? Ashton 29 (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox montage -- new design 

message: Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a  parameter to , which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to , and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass  a new  parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project-independent quality assessments 

message: As of 7 June 2023, both the geographical feature and locality Fraser Island are officially renamed K'gari.. Comments sought on:
* Talk:Fraser Island#Requested move 7 June 2023 (geographical feature)
* Talk:Fraser Island, Queensland#Requested move 7 June 2023 (locality)
* Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 7#Category:Fraser Island (category)
203.8.131.32 (talk) 05:52, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official renaming of Fraser Island to K'gari 

message: I'm working on a draft of a page (here) about the standard, as with the arrival of Module:PopulationFromWikidata I thought an introduction to its data source structure would be useful. However I don't want to go too far until others agree it's worth it. Please let me know on the talk page for it. Innesw (talk) 07:26, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian Statistical Geography Standard - draft page 

message: WikiProject Bendigo is currently seeking interested editors to join the project. If interested, please add your name to the project's participants list and start editing! Lotsw73 (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Bendigo needs you! 

message: Hi everyone. I invite you all to participate in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes to come to a common interpretation about the infobox image format for the city related articles. It would be of a great help. 456legendtalk 16:52, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invitation to participate in infobox discussion 

message: I have noticed that the infoboxes for many Australian places are inconsistent in whether they measure distances between places by road or as the crow flies. For example, the pages of many smaller cities such as Sale, Victoria often give the distances by road whereas pages for larger cities such as Perth tend to show direct distances, typically citing https://geodesyapps.ga.gov.au/distance. Template:Infobox Australian place states that distances should be by road, though I am unsure how strictly the template needs to be adhered to.
I have even noticed such an inconsistency within a single article: The page for Melbourne gave the distance from Canberra as 659 km (the distance by road), while giving the direct distances to other cities - erroneously implying that Melbourne is closer to Adelaide than it is to Canberra. For now I have changed the distance to be the direct figure of 466 km to match the other distances in the article, but I am wondering if going forward my future edits should adhere strictly to the infobox template and always give the distance by road. Timbrhoggvandi (talk) 08:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies in Distances Given Between Locations 

message: There is now a Lua version of the whole of Template:Infobox Australian place, open for testing. The Module (lua) code is at Module:Sandbox/Innesw/Infobox Australian place, the template to call to test the module is . There is a testcases page, based on the testcases for the original template. Please put comments and (especially negative) test results either here or on the module talk page. Innesw (talk) 06:38, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: What is it supposed to be doing that's new, different, better? Kerry (talk) 02:31, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Module (Lua) version of Infobox Australian place