Talk:Sydney Olympic Park ferry wharf

Australia: Sydney / Transport Low‑importance

	Australia portal Sydney Olympic Park ferry wharf is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian Transport (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Transport: Maritime Low‑importance

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Notability[edit]

This wharf has definite notability; it was a major part of the infrastructure for the Sydney 2000 Olympics, the Olympic torch relay, and now serves the new developments going up at Homebush Bay West. It should not be merged as I'm trying to do these articles gradually. We can't get all articles to FA standard immediately! JROBBO 09:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This wharf, Circular Quay, Manly and maybe Parramatta are all notable. Perhaps Milsons Point too. The rest are unlikely to acheive notability, and in any case, few will have more content than can fit on the "line" pages. I would suggest that you fill out the five line pages until they get too long, and then start breaking it up. You're obviously doing a lot of work on these pages, without adding all that much content. What all the public transport articles lack is a variety of sources. Joestella 10:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I do need sources. However, I think Sydney's ferries and their operations are an iconic and notable part of Sydney (the Parramatta River services have been running since the early days of the colony, albeit in different forms...) and the wharves have played an integral part of transport to the particular suburbs in many cases; for the earlier routes, they represented the only form of transport to the particular areas as the ferries in some way, shape or form were the only means of accessible transport to an area (eg. the present Northern suburbs of Sydney, and even Manly I think...) - can I explain though what I'm trying to do? I'm trying to bring railway and ferry articles up to a minimum standard (which has route information, a bit of history, a geographic coordinate, and a userbox), and then I'll do some detailed work on each page. With 400-500 pages altogether, it's no small task. Thanks for being a bit more understanding though. I appreciate it, and I do appreicate the fact that you're trying to improve articles. I'll try and be more civil; it's just that I don't like having my work deleted rashly with no explanation. Can we leave these for a while whilst I gather information? JROBBO 10:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've said this elsewhere, but the economic or historical significance of the waterway is better covered in articles besides, say Meadowbank ferry wharf, Sydney. You see what I'm getting at? Significance rarely attaches to the nodes in the network. I'd say, get the content, then write the article. Joestella 18:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]