Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places/Archive 4

message: After the above debate, it appears Melbourne city centre was the preferred name.  Well, might as well make them all the same - I take it that <City> city centre is the preferred name for articles that are about the central region of a city that is equivalent to a suburb?  I guess it would be appropriate for any city which has suburbs.  Not that I want to make this into a vote, but...
*Support -- Chuq 09:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You obviously missed the long debate held here. Melbourne CBD was ruled out.SauliH 00:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles names about a city centre 

message: I recently created a stub for Penrose, New South Wales in Wingecarribee Shire Council, which is an old established (but small) rail town.  But there is a new suburb of Wollongong, New South Wales, which may well be bigger by now.  Should it be Penrose (Wingecarribee), New South Wales or should the other one be Penrose (Illawarra), New South Wales?--Grahamec 07:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Penrose, New South Wales]] 

message: This is in interesting proposed guideline as it's still being discussed I thought I'd draw it to the attention of editors here Gnangarra 05:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:LOCAL]] 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 20:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: The Local Government Area page is now a disambigulation page.  There are well over 500 articles, the vast majority Australian places, that link to this page.  Is there a simple and quick way to edit these links to point to the new Local Government Areas in Australia article?--Mattinbgn 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Local Government Area - Disambigulation page

message: Firstly: I hate it when my proxy stuffs up and I lose an edit! (end rant)
I bought up an issue at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian history and it was suggested I mention it here.
I am after some comment on how much of the shared aboriginal history to mention on each of the suburb articles for the suburbs of City of Blacktown.
I would appreciate it if you could go past this talk page and provide your opinion. I'm not watching this space but I will follow that one... Garrie 03:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian history#Request for comment|Request for comment]] 

message: Hi Wikipedians, as you might already know Palm Island has become the most recent Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight, however due to lack of votes for other articles I think it was voted in a little prematurely with only 3 people having supported it to that point.  Anyway I'd like to put out a general request to members of WikiProject Australian places to help out if you can with this topic which is in much need of a better quality article considering the national attention it always gets.  Besides being a historical and political hotspot it is also an extremely Beautiful/scenic and unique island. WikiTownsvillian 08:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Palm Island, Queensland]]

message: *Just to let people know that Wikipedia:WikiProject Riverina has commenced.--Golden Wattle  talk 23:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Riverina]]

message: I've just created this template to help with the myriad references and external links to the online gazetteer. Please use it lots.  It would be great if any of you want to help me templatise the 160 current links to the gazetteer. And of course you guys need no invitation to improve the template. Hesperian 05:33, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: {{tl|Gazetteer of Australia}}

message: Over twenty Australian towns have double names, for example Beggan Beggan or Grong Grong.  A category that includes these towns, :Category:Double-named places in Australia is up for deletion at Categories for discussion and / or merger in the related discussion above which also suggests renaming.--Golden Wattle  talk 20:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category for deletion and / or also merging : Category:Double-named places  

message: Billinudgel, New South Wales
Billnudgel, New South Wales
Are these the same town? SauliH 23:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Same town - Billinudgel/Billnudgel??? 

message: A discussion is taking place at Talk:Moe, Victoria about what is a "city" as opposed to a "town".  Any thoughts from others would be welcome.--Mattinbgn/ talk 08:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Moe, Victoria]]

message: Can someone give me a hand with Road District Boards?  Couldn't find any mention of them in the archives.  My property, until late last year at least, was referred to as Sussex Location ####.  This refers to the historic Sussex Road District located in the Busselton.  There appears to be little in the way of what a Road District is on the net  however there is information on the former areas called road districts .  They appear to have been used in Victoria, Queensland and WA (phasing out in 1961).  Now I'm not sure if Busselton was the last shire to remove all references to road districts (Sussex in their case) but they may still be currently used in other places. -  Ctbolt 02:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some history of Victorian Road Boards here  Haven't yet found the equivalent WA history - but perhaps it is a line of research.  Regards--Golden Wattle  talk 05:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks Golden Wattle, I'll keep a lookout while in the library. - Ctbolt 11:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road District Boards 

message: I have had a bit of a look on google but I can't see any evidence this town exists.  Does anyone know it?--Mattinbgn/ talk 07:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a single hit on http://www.ga.gov.au 's place name search.  I've tagged the article with . -- Chuq 08:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have looked through all five of my search for a Victorian location websites - not one hit.  Should be marked for speedy deletion I suggest.--VS talk 08:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Redesford, Victoria]] 

message: The Geelong article has been requested to be translated on the Japanese Wikipedia.  If anyone has good skills in Japanese and would like to help out, please feel welcome! --Candy-Panda 05:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Geelong]] translation to Japanese 

message: I did some work on Lancaster, Victoria after someone tagged the article for speedy deletion, but the article is still just a stub. Someone else might be able to expand the article. --Eastmain 13:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Lancaster, Victoria]] 

message: I note that  has created a great number of stubs for tiny NSW localities.  I'm not sure this should be encouraged.--Grahamec 02:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw that as well.  I am not generally a fan of one line stubs, even for localities. If you can't create an article with at least minimal content such as Mayrung, New South Wales or Lancaster, Victoria, you should probably hold off.  I have tagged their talk pages for this project, but otherwise left them alone.  I am not against any of these places, no matter how small, having an article in Wikipedia, just that the article should have some content over and above its location and existence.  Rather than creating one line stub articles, perhaps the articles should have been listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do/Localities. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 04:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New South Wales town stubs

message: I note that the 2006 Census QuickStats data will be released on 27 June 2007.  I have linked a lot of articles to the 2001 Census QuickStats data and wonder if anyone knows what will happen to this data after the release.  Obviously, they will all need to be updated with the new figures sooner or later, but if the links will become dead I may need to get through the update a lot sooner.  Any ideas? -- Mattinbgn/ talk 06:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we'll just have to cross that bridge when we get to it. Hopefully they'll keep it up, but even if they don't, if we get a few people together, we should be able to get through it within a couple of weeks. I'm on break at the moment, so I'm happy to dedicate as much as time as necessary if needed. Rebecca 10:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the offer.  I guess we wait and see what is on the ABS site tomorrow!  Cheers, Mattinbgn/ talk 01:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2006 Census data

message: I found this article today and would like others thoughts on the naming convention.  The name is used for the area surrounding four small very small towns and as a general term for the community there.  Boyne Valley redirects to the Irish version -Brú na Bóinne, a world heritage site so some form of disambiguation is needed.  Should it be Boyne Valley, Australia; Boyne Valley, Queensland; Boyne Valley or Boyne Valley (Queensland)?
As an aside this may be complicated by the fact that there are two Boyne Rivers in Queensland, not all that far from each other.  One starts near Many Peaks and meets the Pacific Ocean at Boyne Island, a virtual suburb of Gladstone.  The other Boyne River starts near Kingaroy, and flows generally north to meet the Burnett River at Mundubbera.  The Burnett then meets the ocean at Burnett Heads, a virtual suburb of Bundaberg.  Therefore, Boyne River (Queensland) or even Boyne River (Central Queensland) does not resolve ambiguity.  Of course neither river has an article at this stage. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 07:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Boyne Valley, Australia]]

message: Following the release of the Report of the Local Government Reform Commission, what are others thoughts on how to progress from here.  As Premier Beattie has suggested he will adopt the report recommendations in full and has control of Parliament it is virtually certain the amalgamations will take place. Should there be mention of the future of the LGAs in the relevant articles or would that breach WP:CRYSTAL?  Would articles on the future LGAs such as North Burnett Regional Council be appropriate at this stage?  -- Mattinbgn/ talk 08:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While the boundaries will be adopted the Premier has stated that they may change the names of the future LGAs. WikiTownsvillian 08:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  While you are right, the recommendation in the report regarding names is as follows:  "Where two or more councils have been amalgamated and these councils share concerns regarding the name adopted by the Commission, that the State Government accept a unanimous submission from the councils which form the new entity for a different name. Any such submission must be with the State Government for consideration prior to the passage of any enabling legislation that gives effect to the recommendations of the Commission."   I doubt this will be all that common and if it does happen the articles can be renamed.  There may also be variations from the report recommendations with regards to the election of Councillors with LGAs either divided into wards or undivided. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 08:34, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be good to get articles on them. There's likely to be some interest, and it isn't as if there's much chance of the changes not happening. Rebecca 08:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Draft article here - User:Mattinbgn/Sandbox/North Burnett Regional Council.  I don't think this is too much crystalballery.  If there is no major objections I will stick this up in article space later this evening and see how it goes. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 09:20, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Local Government Areas of Queensland]]

message: Shouldn't this article (and Saint Arnaud, Victoria for that matter) be renamed to St Andrews, Victoria and St Arnaud, Victoria.  I know that we use names such as Mount Beauty, Victoria rather than Mt Beauty, but I can't ever recall seeing Saint Arnuad in print.  Is there any convention on towns named after saints? -- Mattinbgn/ talk 08:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this all such place names in Victoria officially have the full "Saint" prefix but I have never seen it used in practice for any of these, and it certainly looks odd. --Melburnian 09:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting how Victoria is out of step with the other states.  I note the ABS uses St rather than Saint for Victorian towns -  --  Mattinbgn/ talk 10:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Common sense should apply even the shire uses  St Arnaud on its web site is good indication that most people will be looking for it under that name. Though I suggest that Saint XXX become redirect pages just in case. Gnangarra 10:58, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved St Arnaud but an administrator needs to move Saint Andrews, Victoria. -- Mattinbgn/ talk 11:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done --Melburnian 12:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Saint Andrews, Victoria]]

message: Please improve it. Thanks. AppleJuggler 10:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I created an article on [[Kallakoopah Creek]] 

message: I don't think that is an "established protocol in naming suburbs" (as claimed by User:ROxBo in edit summaries) that supports the naming of Pimlico, Townsville, Pallarenda, Townsville, Anderson Park, Townsville, North Ward, Townsville etc.  The situation is no different from the naming of Sydney or Melbourne suburbs.  I think these should be moved to x, Queensland format.Grahamec 02:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I've moved the lot of them to x,Queensland. -- Longhair\talk 02:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

text: (edit conflict)Agree 100%.  These should be moved.  The name of the city should only be used if there is a need to disambiguate such as West End, Queensland and West End, Queensland (Townsville).  Is Anderson Park actually a suburb or a park?  If it is a park it should be called Anderson Park (Townsville). -- Mattinbgn\ talk 02:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed Anderson Park. Well spotted. -- Longhair\talk 02:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'm easy to go along with this, but I think your example of West End is effective - in showing that West End, Brisbane and West End, Townsville would be clearer and easier to search for than West End, Queensland (Townsville), which seems rather convoluted and inelegant. But whatever. ROxBo 03:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the old history for the suburb articles. I can't work out where which article is for Anderson Park, there seem to have been several forks of the history, and a bunch of double redirects. I think it should  be Anderson Park (Townsville), but I'm not certain. Basically, ", state" should be used for towns and suburbs that are postal addresses, " (city)" should be used for notable parks, gardens, buildings, housing estates etc. that are not used as postal addresses. West End, Queensland really is ambiguous without a postcode. --Scott Davis Talk 09:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Townsville suburbs

message: There seems to have been a flurry of editing overnight to move the south coast of Australia from the Southern Ocean to the Indian Ocean in a number of articles, as some other country says the Southern Ocean is only further south. I have to go to work now, so can't participate in a discussion till later, but though it worth noting now. See articles like Murray River for example. --Scott Davis Talk 23:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southern or Indian Ocean 

message: The statistics on the project page show that none of the articles have been rated for importance for the project.  I would suggest that the vast majority of Australian places articles would be rated at the same importance for this sub-project as they would be for WP:AUSTRALIA as a whole.  Would it therefore be possible to somehow use the WP:AUSTRALIA importance rating for this project.  I don't know what the best way to do this is; a bot that copied the ratings over on each article talk page; or writing the code that creates the statistics for this project to look for the WP:AUSTRALIA rating.    Others thoughts? -- Mattinbgn\ talk 03:36, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Project statistics

message: Why does WP:ACAT redirect here? Hesperian 02:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know for sure but at a guess - Australian Cities and Towns. -- Mattinbgn\talk 02:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, thats what it was - see here. -- Mattinbgn\talk 03:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ACAT

message: Is Hobart the second oldest city in Australia as claimed in the article? Or is it Newcastle as also comes up in a Google search? Is Launceston the third oldest as claimed in the article?  I can't find any references.. Should we abandon these claims? Barrylb (talk) 11:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Barry. You might get a better response at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board where more than a few editors have an interest in Australian history.  I think the claims are certainly verifiable and the crew at AWNB should be able to point you in the right direction.  Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 11:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second oldest city? 

message: Gudday mate,
:moved Bruny Island to Bruny Island, Tasmania: All Australian town/city/suburb/place articles should be at Place, State no matter what their status of ambiguity is.
You should read the naming conventions again: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions (places)#Australia. You'll find that Australian cities, towns and suburbs are always at Place, State no matter what their status of ambiguity, but geographic features are only disambiguated when necessary, and then with the parentheses convention. Hesperian 11:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What you just wrote couldn't be better stated - but I didn't want to say words to same effect first in case anyone thought I was being uppity! Cheers again. --VS talk 11:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's too late for me; everyone knows by now I am prone to get bees in my bonnet over such issues. I was heavily involved in framing that convention, and if I recall correctly I was the long voice amongst many calling for a single convention. The fact that we could potentially have a town article at "Margaret River, Western Australia" and a river article at "Margaret River (Western Australia)" was of no concern to anyone but me. I am glad to have an ally after all this time, even if it is too late to change, which it isn't, but I suspect most people would think it is. Hesperian 00:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon me for butting in but if you are saying what I think you are saying (i.e. All disambiguation for Australian places should be done with parentheses) then I am all in favour of this as well. If you are saying that towns like Orroroo for example should not be disambiguated then I am not so sure. I am prepared to raise option 1 again if there is any interest and if someone can tell me where.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattinbgn (talk • contribs) 00:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My priority would be a single convention for all places. Any single convention is bettern than multiple clashing conventions. My personal preferences are (i) to disambiguate only when necessary, and (ii) to disambiguate with parentheses. However I would happily concede both points if we could attain a single convention. Hesperian 01:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm not entirely in agreement - I think the need for separation between geographic features, regions and informal locations on one hand, and gazetted suburbs and localities on the other does need to be made, although there may be a better way to make this distinction. I use AWB a fair bit to make mass changes and it's handy to be able to search on one string and know I'll pull in only one type of article. Orderinchaos 02:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is categorisation a way of allowing for this to occur?--VS talk 02:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They're already categorised, but that doesn't work as well as it could when you've already isolated a list and can simply use the filter option to get what you want. I did this the other day with links to the major political parties. Orderinchaos 06:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Personally, I'm also opposed to mandating a "State" disambiguator. Admittedly the state is the best disambiguator 90% of the time, but that still leaves ten percent where there are better disambiguators: islands in an island group e.g. North Island (Houtman Abrolhos); islands in a river or lake e.g. Alexander Island (Collie River); tributaries, sometimes; arguably suburbs in a city. Hesperian 03:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep that's a good point - and shows me I wasn't putting my thoughts down as clearly as I could have.  I guess that means that the point of this discussion revolves more around whether we use a comma  "," ,   or parentheses ()in the case of any disambiguation? So the next thing might be to re-open the discourse (with a cut and paste of this conversation) in a central location.  Any ideas?--VS talk 05:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The current convention was hammered out at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places. But that page was more active then than it is now, so if you move this discussion there, consider advertising the discussion at WP:AWNB. Hesperian 07:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied from [[user talk:VirtualSteve]] 

message: Can I add a comment on railway stations? I've been doing some work on these for a while and it would be nice to have a consistent style here as well. What has been done officially is to have "X railway station, City" where the station lies within the capital cities' metropolitan rail system (and they are all externally defined) and "X railway station, State" where it falls outside of that. The only exceptions are where the station name is the same as the city's name (eg. "Perth railway station, Perth" is ridiculous, so Perth railway station is fine) or the station is a major landmark (eg. "Southern Cross Station" but there is a redirect from the consistent one as well). Can we have some agreement on this so we can have something to show others when they attempt to redirect an entire city's stations (this has happened before)? Thanks. JRG (talk) 12:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's just been adopted as an unofficial convention in the past, because there's enough coinciding names between cities that it'd be a pain to have to keep checking when one adds links. As such, I think we may as well just codify the norm. (And in the event that someone tries to redirect an entire city's stations, I think the only proper course of action is to tell them to get stuffed.) Rebecca (talk) 13:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pretty much with Rebecca on this. (An interesting exception applies to stations on the new Mandurah line, and I don't doubt it exists elsewhere too, where Mandurah which is beyond the Perth metropolitan boundaries has a Perth station and a Perth line). Orderinchaos 03:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Railway stations 

message: I have placed a merge tag with the two articles Eastern states of Australia and East Coast of Australia as unless either one is sufficiently expanded (for whatever reason)  they seem to be unnecessarily duplicating and potential candidates for merging despite what at first might be seen as different subjects SatuSuro 00:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. —Moondyne 08:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major region arts

message: I think the following pairs of articles could be better named:
Two Long Island's in New South Wales:
*Long Island (New South Wales) - "Long Island is one of a number of small, forested islands of the Hawkesbury River."
*Long Island, New South Wales - "Long Island, New South Wales is a former island within Sydney, New South Wales. "
Two Hunter Island's in Tasmania:
*Hunter Island (Tasmania) (also redir from Hunter Island (North-west Tasmania)) - "Hunter Island is an island in the Bass Strait between Victoria and Tasmania in south-eastern Australia."
*Hunter Island (Southern Tasmania) (not yet written): "Hunter island is a former island off the southern coast of Tasmania, Australia."
The "former" Hunter Island was only tens or hundreds of metres offshore in the Hobart harbour and the land between it and "mainland" Tasmania was reclaimed - hence it being a former island.  I don't know about the "former" Long Island.
Making the unverified assumption that there are no other former islands of either name, I suggest:
*Long Island (New South Wales) (for Hawksbury River island)
*Long Island (former island)
*Hunter Island (Tasmania) (for the North-west Tasmania island)
*Hunter Island (former island)
Suggestions? -- Chuq (talk) 07:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are actually 6 current Long Island's in NSW. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:42, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with your proposal chuq - former islands have a slight monty python ring - but nevertheless makes sense as explained SatuSuro 11:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming clarification 

message: As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level.  The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
*The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.  
*The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.  
*A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.  
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at :Category:C-Class_articles.  If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages.  The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles. 
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme.  This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year.  Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

message: Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations. 
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible. 
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Australian places 

message: *This thread copied and pasted in full to here for posterity and ease of access by other wikipedians from this original location. --VS talk 23:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've come to realise these edits are erasing history. Take Karawinna, Victoria for example. I've been overly busy for the past two weeks but I will add my piece and say that these recent edits are erasing valid Australian placenames in a way I'm not liking. I'll give more time to this topic when time permits, sorry VS. I've got a full deck here ATM. -- Longhair\talk 09:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks Longhair - I have similar concerns.  I will leave this topic open and invite Epistemos (and any others reading) to correspond.  I should add also that a similar example might be Wagga Wagga which has a township nearby called Alfred Town - both the same postcode but Alfred Town is its own location also.  In that case we have kept these towns separately (and I might add there are many similar examples).  The reality seems to me that localities are in fact notable even if they have a small population and our history in Australia and the respect we have for these areas should allow them to remain.  Let's see what Epistemos et al have to say also.--VS talk 09:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Galah, Victoria should stay as an article even if the location may no longer (If it's the case that it's no longer a locality) as it should be kept for historical purposes. There are a number of locations in Australia that are no longer localities and just because it's no longer doesn't mean there should be an article for that location/place. Well looking on http://services.land.vic.gov.au/vicnames it still shows it official and also has a railway station/sliding listed. Bidgee (talk) 10:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Mattinbgn said it best.  If references support the notion that the place was a distinct locality, even if at some time in the past, IMHO it deserves its own article.  That is the encyclopaedic way.  –Moondyne 11:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to offer a considered view but really Hesperian, Moondyne and Mattinbgn between them have captured my thoughts rather well. If we can write an encyclopaedic article about it and it's of clear historical significance, I don't see the problem. We have many articles on ghost towns for example. Orderinchaos 17:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Well there could be some sourceable information held in the archives at the Mildura Library (I know that Wagga Wagga Library has a local archive section and so does CSU's South Wagga campus). Bidgee (talk) 23:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

text: The grand project sounds terrific.  Question, if you came across the Galah article - does that mean it had a post office?  You note it also had a railway station.  That's 2 factoids (plus the sheep that are there today).  I think it is worth a stub so when somebody drives along the highway and sees a sign, they can look up wikipedia and find what was there.  The other big reason is genealogical interest - the place was probably more important in the past than today. Two examples I can think of are Lamplough, Victoria and Homebush, Victoria - my interest in these is family history.  They are still signposted and I chose a BP road atlas over another brand because it had these old localities marked.  Galah is going to be a bit harder to research than some other localities because of the potential confusion of search results with the bird.  Can you (Epistemos) please give us a cite for the PO and the railway station for Galah?  Thanks --Matilda talk 06:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Galah Railway Station (services.land.vic.gov.au) and also Galah shows up as a Neighborhood (services.land.vic.gov.au). Bidgee (talk) 06:51, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

text: *Thank you for your return Epistemos and certainly no need to apologise for any delay in your response.  As you can see all of us think you are an excellent editor and that feeling continues - we do however have a different opinion (in the main) for the retention of the content and history of these location stub articles.  Whilst I do appreciate your feeling that there may be no prospect of anyone ever adding notable content to the Galah, Victoria article the reality is that locations are by convention for the most part considered inherently notable, and often when pushed (see for example Mattinbgn's link to One Tree, New South Wales and perhaps also my own example of Boinka, Victoria) articles actually not only end up having more notability added but they actually get to be DYK's and better.  Anyway I do not want to belabour the point overly except to ask whether I am reading your words correctly in that you are happy enough to leave the Galah article and similar small localities in their original rather than a redirected state?--VS talk 05:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "I see no prospect of anyone ever adding notable content to the Galah, Victoria article" Well that's your opinion and you're open to have one but I wouldn't say it has no prospect since it only takes one new editor or even an long term editor to add sourced content to any article including Galah (Epistemos don't take this personally as I'm not trying to attack you just explain a possibility). Bidgee (talk) 06:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

text: *I am happy to leave them, but will keep to my plan of listing names under Localities but with a link back to the article e.g. Galah -perhaps a bit of duplication but no problem.
To Matilda, all Vic. post offices are here  - I think thers a Wikipedia ref. to the railway station somewhere, however  will verify (Epistemos (talk) 06:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Galah, Victoria]] redirect