Talk:New South Wales/Archive 1

message: What the place for the lowest elevation doesn't say where it is. Instead, it is filled by the highest. Can someone fill that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hubert Wa (talk • contribs) 10:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The misplaced elevation should be fixed, but it might be a bit hard to say "where the lowest elevation is". As far as I know, NSW doesn't have any points below sea level, and has quite a bit of coast. JPD (talk) 15:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The Tasman Sea is part of the Pacific Ocean. JPD (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial comments 

message: I normally try to be nice and understanding but did someone from Liberal Party HQ write sections of this? To describe post-war Labor as corrupt and Bob Askin as "vigorous" is a bit much. Also why does Askin get a run and Neville Wran nothing? Please save your propaganda for meetings.
Tigerman2005  03:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV/bias 

message: This page is a bit stubby. I would tag it but I dont know how.Rudraksha 00:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuby 

message: The article is written greatly, but it's too short, first of all it needs info on the climate, popular sports in NSW, and maybe attractions...anyone want to write this up and add it, if not I will 202.6.138.33 09:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it!  You might also want to create your own login to edit from—this lets you set up preferences for display and editing, and Wikipedia can help you track pages that you're interested in following.  But if you want to do the edits anonymously, you're still perfectly welcome to do so.  Glad to have you aboard!/blahedo (t) 17:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The article needs expansion in the sections that are already there, a decent history section, people/demographics, then maybe education, culture, etc. Climate would go in the geography section, but tourism info does not belong in Wikipedia. JPD (talk) 15:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Except in the context of economy.--cj | talk 16:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course. I should have said tourist info, rather than tourism info. JPD (talk) 08:23, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page is really short!! 

message: Who took the rest of the Timeline away?  if you think the First Fleet's commission and setting out isnt of huge importance to the establishment of the Colony of NSW then you are robbing this page.  All decent versions of NSW's colonial story include the first fleet content as do most schhols etc when they ask students to do a project on it.  That info came from NSW's Timeline up to 1879 so was part of the first 100 years of colonisation.  I'm dumb though.  I dont have a degree in this stuff re Oz so dont know that any decent representation of a place isnt just about one dimension.  Actually Malaspina's report should be in that timeline also
Put the first fleet stuff on its own page then with a link back to it.
The timeline is way too short now.  Surely more than that has happened the last 230 (600,000,000) years in NSW.  It seems there are computer geeks from out of Australia editing stuff here who want to be clever with their tools but are not so clever with the content they put up or remove, and have probably no local knowledge re NSW let alone qualifications in presenting its multifaceted story.  Can the geeks that get here realise other non computer wizz people may think the geeks are divine with their editing 'tools'; but have way higher skills then they probably ever will in history/cultural heritage/Indigenous stuff etc, as well as extensive local knowledge of areas - and stop stuffing stuff up!!  If you really have to remove good and relevant content find another place to put it such as creating a page for it then putting a link leading to it from its previous site.  Imagine readign that NSW page and there is nil there on the timeline or its Indigenous story.  You know, Today's NSW started off with the colonials 'Creating a Nation' (Grimshaw, Lake, McGrath, Quartly, 1994).  A theme line for presenting that process  as its given in MODERN NSW these days runs as:  birthplaces, conceiving a colony, transplanting patriachy, making male and female worlds, man's space, women's place, sex violence and theft, contested domains, gendered settlements, giving birth to the new nation, depression dreaming, freedom fear and family, the State as Father, Affirmations of difference.  
There may be too much geek/male stuff happening re what gets put here.  Computer geeks are very very clever but its the content that gets put here is more important that geek ego.  If stuff gets put up that looks like some tired old 1950s representation of what NSW and Oz is about, then what use is that?  
Try and follow the above themes a bit when putting stuff here re Oz as its how its done.  DONT cut out the story of over 50% of the population by just putting in dead facts and the male story.  Also include the Indigneous, women and children's stories on every last topic page or wik oz content is no good for anything much.  Just simple stuff such as white women being hugely respected by their culture in 1850 (good for more than just washing up etc as labour was short) but barefoot and preggers at the sink by 1950 needs to be reflected.  There is a reason for those two differences that should be reflected in the content that gets up re those two eras etc. on any timeline.   How many women explorers were there?  None?  Right.  I'll rephrase it - how many women with exploring parties were there?  Who were they and what were their roles?  Same as Ted Egan's 'The Drover's Boy' story.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.112 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 9 July 2006   (UTC+10 hours (AEST))
What is up on the NSW page now reads like half the Australian Almanac, that I have the 1999 copy of.  Its good but geez.  If I want to read that book, I can just pick it up and read it or find it online.  Extracts fromt hat book , yeah, but not all NSW's page like that as that isnt how NSW is presented anywhere else and hasnt been for many years apart from in that sort of publication.  Add some substance to the NSW page following the above themes a bit.  Tie some of the dry fact stuff in with some of the other.
The First Fleet was hugely significant to NSW - and it got deleted.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.54.9.112 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 9 July 2006   (UTC+10 hours (AEST))
*Partial response only: There is already a page on the First Fleet, there is also a main article on the History of New South Wales. If you want to find out who did an edit, use the history tab at the top of the page - for more info on this functionality see Help:Page history --A Y Arktos\talk 04:51, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline removal 9 July comments 

message: Geoscience Australia gives the height as 2,228m. In any case, if there are further discussions to be had on this matter, I suggest Talk:Mount Kosciuszko. JPD (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mount Kosciuszko 

message: An inhabitant of New South Wales is referred to as a New South Welshman or, in gender-neutral language, as a New South Welsh person, but this is rarely used. It is far more common to say "s/he's from New South Wales" than "s/he's a New South Welshman".
Can you really say "she's a New South Welshman"?  Is it a unisex term?  Is there such a term as "New South Welshwoman"? Flapdragon 12:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are we really called New South Welshman? Its the first time i've ever heard of it...--Ari89 10:07, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: *Yes the term is sometimes used - eg Proportionately less West Australians than New South Welshmen owned cars.  or But it’s not just the local fishing gentry among the New South Welshmen ...  or While many New South Welshmen served in WWII, ...  --Golden Wattle  talk 09:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New South Welshmn 

message: To make this article better, it needs more referencing.
:You're 100% right there. Atlantis Hawk 08:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Seeing a  tag on a statement that 2/3 of the state's population resides around Sydney, I checked the city's article.  According to the city's article, about 4.2 million people live there, and the main article records about 6.8 million people.  Seems to me that this is close enough Nyttend 18:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population of Sydney relative to the rest of the state 

message: Sorry to whoever wrote it but a lot of it reads like a 6th grade school project - and a poor one at that. NSW is a state so its opinion on conscription is irrelevant. I gather this is a reference to Billy Hughes who was Prime Minister of Australia. He supported conscription, the Labor Party he led did not so he left the party. In any case it doesn't belong here. Tigerman2005  03:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early 1900 

message: Phillip arrived at Sydney Cove on 26 January, which is now celebrated as Australia Day.  But I seem to remember reading that his proclamation formally establishing NSW as a Colony (as distinct from a British possession) was not made till 2 days later, 28 January.  Can anyone confirm this?  
JackofOz 06:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of establishment of the Colony 

message: This new ABS data may allow some updating of this article. angela26 06:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Data

message: A couple of editors are saying that "touch football" has more players that Football and linking to this site - http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/4177.0Main%20Features22005-06?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=4177.0&issue=2005-06&num=&view=
I don't think  this is corrent.  In this document  outdoor Football in NSW is shown with 219800  participants against "touch football" having 131000 participants.
This document  lists participtation levels with a total for organised and non organised sport.  Again Football is clearly bigger.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tancred (talk • contribs) 
:Firstly, please don't refer to any code simply as "football" in a context like this - it's just silly. Now let's look at the figures. The organised/non-organised document is not helpful, as it refers to the whole of Australia, not NSW. The NSW document does indeed show that soccer has more participants that touch, but the claim made by "a couple of editors" (actually, only one) was that rugby league has more participants than soccer when touch is included as a form of rugby league. This is believable, but it is not clear that it is true, as participants may have been counted in both the league and touch categories, so the numbers can't simply be added together. At any rate, this is all a bit silly. If we are talking about participation alone, we shouldn't be focussing on football codes, but things like golf and cycling. The original statement that RL was the most popular winter sport was clearly intended to be about spectator interest (compare it with the statement about cricket!), so simply replacing it with a statement about registered participants is not helpful. JPD (talk) 09:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Touch Rugby league 

message: I'm sceptical about this addition:
"It is not clear whether New South Wales refers to the area being named after South Wales, or a New Wales in the Southern Hemisphere.[1]"
Can somone be more precise about this "New Wales" than saying it lies south of the equator? The cited page doesn't even mention it. Looks like a candidate for deletion to me.
Coughinink 01:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the cited page doesn't give any meaning other than the South Wales assumption, but the statement in the article makes more sense than your question? What more could be said? JPD (talk) 09:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Wales 

message: Does anyone have information available at hand they could use to create an Energy section for this page? WA Burdett (talk) 09:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Energy production 

message: Why does this article not have the ethnic groupings? Wikipedia usually does a great job on having all the information on things like this, but this article lacks much of the information about population. If someone finds this information, please post it on this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.99.98.56 (talk) 01:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic Groupings 

message: NSW has over 200 parks and reserves covering a huge area and this needs mentioning. Cgoodwin (talk) 06:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems a good idea. When you put something together you should probably include a total parks area vs state area for comparison purposes. --AussieLegend (talk) 07:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  National parks 

message: As the article itself makes clear, the Governor of NSW commissions an MP to be Premier and form a Ministry. In practice, as with every other Westminster system, the Governor does this on advice of the party with a majority of seats, and the person so selected holds office until the Governor withdraws that commission, the person resigns or they lose a no confidence motion on the floor of the Parliament.
On 5/9/08 Iemma resigned and Nathan Rees was selected by the majority party to take his place. However, Iemma has not (at this point) been to Government House to offer his resignation and the Governor has not (at this point) commissioned Rees as his replacement. Right now therefore, iemma remains Premier.
I raise this to make clear why we should not keep changing the Premier's name to Rees in the article. As of this moment it is inaccurate - it will inevitably be accurate in a few days and can be added then. Can I aslo remind people this is not Wikinews - there is no need to rush latest updates into articles, especially when to do so makes the article factually wrong. 
Other opinions or comments welcome. Euryalus (talk) 03:48, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added "" to the infobox and Government section. Just hope people read it before adding Nathan Rees before his sworn in. Bidgee (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Apparently the swearing in will occur this afternoon, so it can be changed then. Euryalus (talk) 05:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. At this rate I'll say this evening or tomorrow since it's 4pm in NSW ATM so time is starting to run out. I'm keeping and ear and eye out (Watching TV and News sites). Bidgee (talk) 06:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nathan Rees was just sworn in (National Nine News showed part of the swearing in). No online sources online yet. Bidgee (talk) 06:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added that Rees was premier after Iemma, with a reference, and that Keneally was then put in in 2009.--Amaher (talk) 23:32, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Premier 

message: The was a section entitled "Gold Rush" which I have shortened and renamed "Mid-late 1800s".  The preceding version was inaccurate, e.g. implying that the Gold Rush was mainly in NSW whereas it was mainly in Victoria, saying that the colony's self-government preceded the breakaway of Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia, rather than the other way around, etc.  It went into great depth about an act that gave responsible government in NSW, which was not appropriate for this page and out-of-place.
More generally, I worry that the history section in this article is growing (in a stunted, amateurish way), rather than leaving history of NSW to be the definitive article.  Do we really need this history section here at all?  It should certainly not be in competition to the main history article, and the other is well written and extensive.
86.9.117.51 (talk) 18:58, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably because you've linked to a non-existent article. The article you're after is History of New South Wales. --AussieLegend (talk) 19:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You've missed my point - there is a redirect from History of NSW to History of New South Wales. 86.9.117.51 (talk) 19:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ...or at least there was until you vandalized the article by removing it so you could appear superior! Please explain why what you did isn't vandalism. 86.9.117.51 (talk) 19:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There was no vandalism. Neither history of NSW or History of NSW exist so there can be no redirect. The template you added to History of New South Wales does not create redirects. The redirects have to be created at the pages themselves. Of course you would not create both history of NSW and History of NSW. Only History of NSW needs to be created as a redirect. Before you accuse people who have far more experience here than you do, I suggest you familiarise yourself with the Manual of Style. --AussieLegend (talk) 19:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is nothing to do with the Manual of Style. This is to do with you taking it personally because you wanted to delete two useful links in a list of links (below) and then going out-of-your-way to be unhelpful regarding creating a redirect page, as discussed on your talk page - you would rather leave dangling links when History of NSW would obviously be a useful redirect page. 86.9.117.51 (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm simply trying to deal with a new and rather aggressive editor who sees correction of his mistakes as vandalism, as well as dealing with actual vandalism at some of the other 375 pages that are on my watchlist. I didn't have time to create History of NSW as I was busy dealing with your reversion of corrections that were made to History of New South Wales. Now that we've dealt with that I've created History of NSW. --AussieLegend (talk) 21:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As you now know, I am not new. As others could tell if tracked your edits and comments in response to mine, you at least appeared to be deliberately unhelpful, and I reacted robustly (not aggressively) as someone who was faced with such a person. I'll take your above comment as an explanation of why your actions came across as they did. 86.9.117.51 (talk) 21:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I don't think the section in this article is too long but as a separate article exists, and since this article links to that one, I don't see an issue with pruning this article appropriately. It shouldn't be removed altogether. There needs to be something about it in this article. --AussieLegend (talk) 21:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are three issues supporting severe pruning and modification, one is that the history section constitutes about one-third (far too much) of the present article length, when there is already a separate History article; the second issue is that the history section here is not entirely correct; and the third issue is that the history section here should be more consistent with (not developed independently of) the separate extensive History article. 86.9.117.51 (talk) 21:43, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section 

message: In regards to this edit. Given that this article is primarily about New South Wales, it is not necessary to detail specific incidents between politicians. -Reconsider! 06:07, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content of 'post-war period' section 

message: Whence the name New South Wales? There is no New North Wales in Australia, is there? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 13:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I wish this issue were tackled a little better. There is indeed a distinct area of Wales referred to as South Wales . But was the first person to find NSW from South Wales? This section fails to fully explain anything.YellowAries2010 (talk) 15:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the intention of Captain James Cook (a Yorkshireman) when coining the name is unknown. It is unknown if Cook meant the name to mean "A new Wales in the south" or a new "South Wales". It is hard for this article to fully explain the situation because it is unknown. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. Fair enough. Thanks for the reply. YellowAries2010 (talk) 00:31, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Stating the fact it is unknown would already be an improvement of the article, IMHO. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

text: I beg to differ, with The Seventh Taylor, by saying it isnt an explanation, rather a speculation. I note that Captain W.J.L. Wharton's preface to his 1893 transcription of Cook's journal (as footnoted in the article) draws no conclusion as to Capt Cook's reason for "revising the wording" from SW to NewSW  New Wales to New South Wales  in the Admiralty copy of the Journal. I have previously removed the term "corrected" as it implied a mistake by Cook in giving the name New Wales in the first instant; and there is no evidence demonstrating that he made such a mistake in his original work/s -- his journal/s was what it was for 2 1/2 years at least. One may even surmise that a higher authority required Cook make the change - but that would be a speculation, yet one as 'valuable' (which it is not) as any other. Benyoch ...Don't panic! Don't panic!... (talk)  03:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's purely speculative of course, but the change could be because Cook thought that the land in the southern hemisphere looked like Wales, and the addition of "New" was to clarify that he wasn't referring to a southern part of Wales, but to the New land in the South that looked like Wales. Unfortunately, without a time machine it will never be possible to know what he was thinking. I was always surprised that he never explained his reasoning in the logs of the Endeavour. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Aussie, I agree it is puzzling why Cook never explained himself, especially as he was so meticulously sharp with everything he did. I understand the change was made when back in England, as it is only in one of the three copies. No explanation, therefore, would be expected to be found in the Endeavour's log. Perhaps he felt some political, or 'sponsor' pressure and so constrained himself from commenting. Would also be interesting to see  the argument for saying it was Cook who revised the text in the Admiralty copy and not someone else with authority and pen in hand, in the Admiralty, such as Sandwich's secretary. Benyoch ...Don't panic! Don't panic!... (talk)  16:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: It seems strange that the population figures given for Coffs Harbour and Tweed Heads are exactly the same. I have been able to confirm the Coff Harbour population from the source given, but the figure given for Tweed Heads in the same source includes the Gold coast and therefore it is hard to separate a figure for Tweed House.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.111.165.202 (talk) 01:40, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have updated the population figure for Tweed Heads. According to the source "3218.0 Population Estimates by Statistical Local Area, 2001 to 2007", cell L172 in Table 1 shows Tweed Heads (not counting Tweed Coast) with a population of 53,650 in 2007. The same table lists Coffs Harbour with a population of 50,726 so I will assume the numbers can be drawn from the same source, and that the 50,726 for Tweed Heads was a typo. 220.253.177.223 (talk) 08:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population 

message: Hi, the reason why I edited the GSP was because I clicked on the reference link which said that the NSW 2009-10 GSP was 389 billion and not 401 billion as the page suggested. So I was wondering why my edit was deleted if the reference clearly shows that the page is incorrect?
Wheeler1346 (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The figure you're looking at isn't the GSP but the SFD (State Final Demand). This Excel document shows the figure cited. Bidgee (talk) 10:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see. Thanks!
Wheeler1346 (talk) 11:00, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gross State Product 

message: '.... New South Welshmen, though the term is not in common use and residents are more likely to see themselves simply as Australian.' (per Nyamafingu's edit of 05:50, 9 April 2012). 
It's a moot point, in my opinion. What do NSW-women call themselves? What about football fans at 'State of Origin' time - Cockroaches? All depends on context and am not sure this edit does justice to the variations in usage or lack of them. I do agree, tho, it is 'not in common use' - preferring to say 'not in popular use' - in terms of the spoken language, from my experience, but that may be just splitting the same hair different ways. 
In terms of the written word, I found it interesting that google search for "New South Welshmen/man" on www.nsw.gov.au web site, gave 1140/332hits. So, does that usage by the state government affect this last edit? At least a source is offered, but such a source is only of any good use, in my opinion, if it is used by way of contrast or comparison. Generally, the term "New South Welshmen" scores 269,000 hits and it is used by Aussie media for example. But is it encyclopedic? 
The phrase 'residents are more likely to see themselves simply as Australian' needs some reliable source to be accepted as encyclopedic. Benyoch (talk) 06:24, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That last bit is is true insofar as all Australians see themselves as Australians first and representatives of their state lower down the pecking order.  The state demonyms only ever come into play in political speeches ("I promise to govern for all Queenslanders no matter which party they voted for") or when making comparisons between states ("Western Australians are less conscious of geographical isolation than Tasmanians are").  But in those contexts, those demonyms do indeed have a role to play, and we can't just dismiss them on the spurious grounds we've been doing up till now.  What did Fatty O'Barrell say in his victory speech last year?  --  ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 09:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's a moot point 

message: This page has been temporarily protected until some consensus on the Destination NSW link is found. See discussion at :Talk:Sydney#Destination NSW link. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 23:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we already have too many links in the links section (and too many links in the see also section too). I propose to trimming to:
*    Agriculture – Statistics – New South Wales
*    NSW Official State Website -- keep
*    NSW Parliament -- keep
*    NSW Police
*    NSW State Law
*    NSW State Library – History of Our Nation -- keep
*    NSW Weather and Sydney Weather[dead link] dead link
*    New South Wales at the Open Directory Project last updated 2007
*    WikiTravel – New South Wales as per usual practise with user-editable sites
I also propose to remove see also links that are linked to anywhere else (or can be linked to anywhere else) in the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Why remove the NSW State Law link when there is no discussion in the article on this subject. At least with this link readers will be able to discover something substantial about NSW law.
Benyoch ...Don't panic! Don't panic!... (talk)  10:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Destination NSW link 

message: These don't really made the grade -- the first reference would justify using "cockroach" as well as New South Welshmen and the second is an opinion piece -- and speaks against New South Welshmen as excluding half the population. NE Ent 20:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The first only supports the claim that "cockroach" is a term used by Queenslanders (mainly footballers). The entire population of Queensland is only 21% of the total population of Australia and there's no credible source that it's widely used in Queensland, any more than "Mexicans" for Victorians. In any case, it's only a nickname, not a proper demonym. The second does say that "New South Welshmen" excludes half the population, but that reinforces that it is being used to refer to all of the people, hence the opposition to its use because it excludes womenpersonpeople. (I guess "women" must exclude 100% because it has "men" in it.) As I said above, "New South Welshmen" is so widely used, and has been for so long, along with Queenslander, Victorian, Canberran, Tasmanian, South Australian, West(ern) Australian and Territorian that there shouldn't be any question as to its authenticity. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added sources 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.bom.gov.au/lam/climate/levelthree/ausclim/ausclimnsw.htm. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Dana boomer (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Substituted at 15:27, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110811120834/http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/air/operators.html to http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/air/operators.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110817203631/http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au:80/ferry/ferry-contacts.html to http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/ferry/ferry-contacts.html/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120418233242/http://www.echucamoama.com:80/paddlesteamer-river-cruises to http://www.echucamoama.com/paddlesteamer-river-cruises/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130424044933/http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/schoolcertificate/sc_review.html to http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/schoolcertificate/sc_review.html/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130506085947/http://www.ga.gov.au/education/facts/dimensions/centre.htm to http://www.ga.gov.au/education/facts/dimensions/centre.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090615222203/http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/PDF/Trade%20and%20Investment-B3_top10_merch_exports.pdf to http://www.business.nsw.gov.au/PDF/Trade%20and%20Investment-B3_top10_merch_exports.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090203210739/http://www.tourism.nsw.gov.au:80/media/news300603a.html to http://www.tourism.nsw.gov.au/media/news300603a.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150705202447/http://coolmore.com/stallions/australia/ to http://www.coolmore.com/stallions/australia/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070804082304/http://www.npansw.org.au:80/web/about/who.htm to http://www.npansw.org.au/web/about/who.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120921064833/http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=50127 to http://globaltwitcher.auderis.se/artspec_information.asp?thingid=50127
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130521073731/http://www.anra.gov.au/topics/agriculture/overview/index.html to http://www.anra.gov.au/topics/agriculture/overview/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: The “first inhabitants was Odessa”.  Summats askew there. Errantius (talk) 07:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  #History 

message: Why is it called 'New South Wales'? Is it 'the new version of the south of Wales'? Is it the south part of a formerly-larger 'New Wales'? Is it 'New Wales' in the Southern Hemisphere? At the risk of stating the obvious: Cite sources; speculation is irrelevant.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:7D80:159:6405:5041:8104:B99 (talk) 17:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Hello all
I have expanded and rewritten the History section from Settlement to Federation to make a fuller and more coherent narrative. I have added citations where necessary.I have removed some tangental material and POV statements not supported by the sources. I hope to rework and expand the material from 1901 to the present later. Any comments or suggestions would be welcomed. Thanks --Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Hello all
I have removed references to New Zealand in the History section and the lead. It is doubtful that NZ was part of NSW in 1788. It was briefly annexed to NSW in 1840 before becoming a separate colony in 1841. (see: The Cambridge History of Australia (2013), Volume I, p 140 and Beverley Kingston (2006) A History of New South Wales pp 1-2.) Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 05:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Zealand 

message: I just tried to access the sources for the Religion sub-section. It doesn't really work. The first of the two sources takes me down a convoluted path that seems to require me to download a zip file that opens an Excel spreadsheet, that is pretty much incomprehensible to me. The "other" source just seems to be another path to the same thing. This really is unacceptable. It makes that whole sub-section effectively unsourced.  HiLo48 (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that there's two links to the same data; have removed the second one. The first link is to abs.gov.au, so it's definitive. Agreed, a little hard to find. The spreadsheet tab "G14" has detailed breakdown of religious affiliation (by gender), so I can't call the section "unsourced". peterl (talk) 00:19, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsatisfactory sourcing for Religion 

message: Hello all
I have removed this sub-section for the following reasons:
1) It is recentism WP:RECENT.
2) It doesn't belong in the History Section because it is current affairs, not history. In the 230 year history of NSW it doesn't deserve equal weight to the entire post-WWII history of the state.
3) The content doesn't reflect the heading. Most of the content isn't about the response to COVID-19 but a list of random facts about COVID-19 in NSW. Most of these facts are already dated and would need to be updated on a daily basis.
4) There is already an article on COVID-19 in NSW for any readers interested in the topic. I have added a link to this.
There might be a case for a separate, very brief sub-section on the COVID pandemic in NSW , but I would argue that it would belong as a subsection to a separate major heading of Health. I would be happy to work with any interested editor on developing a health section for this article. Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 03:05, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I'd also suggest that the recent addition on the Berijiklian premiership and resignation gives undue weight. It too tends to current affairs, and the section is overly long compared to the rest of the post-war history section.--Merbabu (talk) 04:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  True. I mainly wanted to draw a line under Berejiklian and add a link to COVID-19. I'll cut it back.--Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  COVID-19 Response 

message: Tweed Heads itself has a pop of only 9000, but add in all the attached townships/settlements and that rises to well over 30000, maybe over 40000.   The lede to the Banora Point article mentions a pop of 28000, including Tweed Heads South and Terranora.  Add in Tweed Heads itself, Tweed Heads West, etc - see the list of suburbs of Tweed Heads in the Tweed Shire article. Boscaswell talk 22:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There's probably a broader issue with SUAs that span two states like Gold Coast – Tweed Heads and Echuca – Moama. Also the data in the table is the ERP (estimated resident population) and that's only calculated for SUAs, not for Urban Centres and Localities (UCL) where there's only 2016 census data available . I don't think it's possible to split the SUA over the state border for the ERP, unless you revert to using figures from the 2016 census (or wait until the 2021 census data is released then it could be done). --Canley (talk) 05:13, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Population by Significant Urban Area' - Tweed Heads is missing