Talk:Bankstown Bunker/Archive 1

message: The following claims from the introduction are not correct and I have removed them. "The facility was the command bunker for the war in the South Pacific, it was also the main base from where the Battle of the Coral Sea was directed. During WWII, the site was visited by General MacArthur for the study of aircraft movements during his time as the commander-in-Chief of the Allied Forces in the Pacific"
*There was no command bunker for the war in the South Pacific, and none of the comparable HQs were located in Sydney. General MacArthur was commander of the South-West Pacific Area and had his HQ in first in Melbourne, then Brisbane and then New Guinea and finally the Philipines. The Australian Military's HQ was located in Melbourne with a forward HQ established alongside MacArthur's HQs. The South Pacific Area HQ was located in New Caledonia until this command was disbanded. 
*The bunker could not possibly have been used to direct the battle of the Coral Sea as it wasn't built when this battle was fought in May 1942. The Allied half of this battle was directed from USS Yorktown (Admiral Fletcher's flagship) and USAAF and RAAF facilities in north Queensland.
*MacArthur was never the commander in chief of the Allied forces in the Pacific as there was no such position. He commanded the SWPA only and Admiral Nimitz commanded the Pacific Ocean Areas which was responsible for the remainder of the PTO. Moreover, as MacArthur aparently only visited on Sydney a single occassion in mid-1943 which was before the bunker opened he can't have possibly visited the site to "study ... aircraft movements" --Nick Dowling 08:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect information in the lead para

message: This article does not belong in :Category:Shelters. -- Alan Liefting talk 01:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is more than just a bunker its an air raid shelter as well, which I have noticed is also in that category. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. 01:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Shelters is for types of shelters rather than a category of shelters themselves. -- Alan Liefting talk 01:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shelter category? 

message: Yes the graffiti is idiotic.
*For the images there being looked into. I believe its John or Phill. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 02:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Graffiti

message: (talk) 02:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nav box

message: I've just made the following tweaks to this article:
*Cleared up some slightly confused wording about facilities in Sydney and the units located in them (eg, No. 1 Fighter Sector was a RAAF unit, not a facility)
*Toned down the lead a bit - the RAAF's administrative HQ was located in Melbourne - this was the operations sector for eastern Australia and was home to one of about a dozen similar HQs.
*Fixed some minor typos (eg 'defense' -> 'defence' for an Australian unit)
*Copy-edited the text a bit to simplify the wording (eg, 'persons unknown' -> 'arsonists' and removed the unessessary reference to the current entrance. 
*Removed the article from :Category:History of Australia since 1945 - it doesn't seem to be important enought to be in this high-level category when it's already in a child cat (Sydney in WW2) and other appropriate cats. This was a significant facility, but not that big a deal.
You might want to consider nominating the article for either a peer review or an A-class review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Review (I'd suggest a peer review first, but it has a fair chance of passing the A-class review as it stands). My only suggestion for the article's content is that you might want to discuss why the bunker was completed - given that there was little danger that Sydney would come under air attack from 1943 onwards (this was after Midway, Kokoda and Guadacanal) it seems suprising that so many resources were sunk into a defensive facility so far beyond the front line - by the time it opened Australian destroyers were sailing off Japan with the British Pacific Fleet! Did the Australian Government plan to re-open the facility had international tensions increased after the war? --Nick Dowling (talk) 07:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am only writing according to what is in the references listed, a lot of them are newspaper articles. I will restore some of your edits but I am adding certain things back in. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 07:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the cat sydney since 1945 was created by I believe Merbabu, he categorized an article called number 3 fighter sector with this category, if number 3 can be in this category then so should number one which has a similar time frame and also the Bankstown bunker which housed the Number One Fighter Sector RAAF. Cheers_Ad@m.J.W.C. (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest that you use old newspaper articles with some care - as you'd know, journalists generally don't know much about defence matters, especially when they write about a secretive facility. I've removed No. 3 Fighter sector and a few other articles from Aust since 1945 - they didn't belong there. --Nick Dowling (talk) 07:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Not vandalising just removing photos that are not really needed. I am going to add more of the Bankstown Torch images when they are obtained. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Adam, can you explain why you stole my photographs, added them here under your name, then when I go through the OTRS process of having them credited to myself you then deem them not needed? This is vandalism Dmod (talk) 08:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not believe that I stole the photos the guy that runs the website said that I could use them and their was no mention of any Victor. If the photos are stolen then they should be removed as they are a breach of copyright but you seem quite keen to keep them here, this I don't understand. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 11:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks for hurting my feelings and thanks for this'. Do you have any better pictures of the Bankstown Bunker. You did say that you were going to add some more. --User:Adam.J.W.C. (talk) (talk) 06:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  These are as good as they are going to get as the place is burnt out. I could scan them at a higher resolution, but you would probably edit the authors name like you have repeatedly with the existing photographs. Why would I want to put them on Wikipedia when there are editors like you around? Dmod (talk) 21:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The pictures are fine, and should stay. --Gene_poole (talk) 05:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad someone else agrees. If I find the time I will replace these with higher resolution scans. Dmod (talk) 05:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Summary of tweaks