Talk:National Heritage List (Australia)

message: I want the list to look at little more like List of World Heritage Sites in China. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:HMAS Sydney (AWM 301473) cropped.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: None of the listings links in the article work. Peter Bell (talk) 05:28, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed them (they had consistently renamed the URLs) but with one exception. I could not fix #4 Old Great North Road. I checked on the Australian National Heritage website and their link to Old Great North Road is also broken. I have sent them an email pointing this out and hope I will get a reply with the updated URL, so I can add it here. So all but one should be fixed. Kerry (talk) 06:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Prompt and efficient response - well done! Peter Bell (talk) 03:38, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I got a reply to my email and the Govt department has fixed the problem and the link for Old Great North Road is now working again. So all listing links should be working again. Kerry (talk) 02:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dead links

message: Sorry I am slow to come up to speed here.  Per the Australian Convict Sites article, it "is a World Heritage property consisting of 11 remnant penal sites originally built within the British Empire during the 18th and 19th centuries on fertile Australian coastal strips at Sydney, Tasmania, Norfolk Island, and Fremantle; now representing '...the best surviving examples of large-scale convict transportation and the colonial expansion of European powers through the presence and labour of convicts.'  These properties were all individually included on the Australian National Heritage List before inclusion on the World Heritage list." [emphasis added]
And there seems to be 117 or 119 or so places officially reported by the government as constituting the "Australia's National Heritage List", as here (linked from this article).
So it seems to me the big table should number to 117 or 119 or whatever is the current number, not 97, and the small table should then conform to that.  I think the commonality of the 11 penal sites making up one World Heritage Site listing should be indicated by color coding and/or by asterisks or other indications.  I'm not saying this is the best example anywhere, but I am familiar with National Register of Historic Places listings in Syracuse, New York using both color-coding of the number column and using asterisk-type indications, supported by a key, to indicate commonalities of a couple types. Hmm, there are designated colors for World Heritage Sites set up in wikipedia already, in color schemes shown at wp:HSITES, and a color is there for Australia National Heritage List too.  So why not use those to color the narrow first column of numbers, i.e. use the light brown for regular rows and the specific shade of yellow for the rows that are part of World Heritage Sites?  I suppose one could use symbols to denote which WHS site applies, as done in the Syracuse list, for the several WHS specific sites.  Or the current way of stating the WHS name in each row could suffice, without setting up symbols.  Perhaps a separate narrow column could be used to indicate the WHS sites and to make the list sortable by these.  From multiple rows being used for each of them, I am figuring that each of the following is a WHS site, is that right?:  Australian Alps National Parks and Reserves, Australian Convict Sites, Australian Cornish Mining Sites, Australian Fossil Mammal Sites, Budj Bim National Heritage Landscape, Gondwana Rainforests of Australia.  Another question which could be revisited is presentation order, should the list be presented in alphabetical order of Australia's names.  Would it be okay for me to try to do some or all of this stuff? --Doncram (talk) 20:26, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely happy for you to go ahead with that proposal. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 00:00, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: new proposal