This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
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)
Roads
I've been going through some of the Category:Roads in Adelaide articles and adding the Template:Infobox Australian Road as well as creating some stubs for the many missing road articles. The existing articles with infoboxes (e.g. Anzac Hwy) that I've seen have the "To" and "From" fields as suburbs. I've created a couple of articles with these fields as roads. (e.g. Tapleys Hill Rd) I'm curious what people think is the better approach.
If we use road names instead of suburbs, it makes it easier for streets/roads that are only in one suburb. GK1 22:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject South Australia?
There is currently new state projects in development. See WP:WA. Perhaps it would be beneficial to your state. Fred 16:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm open to it, either as a separate project or as a reformed WP:ADEL. However, the need is not pressing. --cj | talk 22:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Need is debatable, perhaps. Getting in now could save editors work in the near future, if not immediately. I was surprised at speed and development of other projects. They still maintain city projects and overlap is little on most articles. Do South Australian regions get enough attention through the city project? A fellow editor with fond memories of your state.Fred 14:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Holy Trinity Church, Adelaide put up for deletion {{db|Non-notable}}
I removed the template. The Holy Trinity Church, Adelaide article may need expansion but notability would be clear to people in Adelaide "first church built" Paul foord 12:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
None of these met the criteria for speedy deletion and were dismissed by the reviewing admin. The prod on Holy Trinity is disputed, so if Psmikebabbie chooses to pursue its deletion further, he must do so at WP:AFD. However, as Paul has noted, the Holy Trinity clearly has an argument for notability, being Adelaide's first (built) church.--cj | talk 14:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Beaumont
Anyone live up that way? If you do, could you take some pictures of Beaumont House, as I'm writing an article for it and it would be great if it had at least one, preferably more, pics. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant[ T · C ] 10:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to Beneaththelandslide for some pics - the article is at Beaumont House. Daniel.Bryant[ T · C ] 09:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Railway Station pages - not notable
I personally don't believe the majority of Adelaide rail stations are notable enough to have their own article. As a test case, I'm using the Gawler Line. I've collected almost all the information in the pages for Gawler line stations onto a table on Gawler railway line, Adelaide. Almost all of the pages for the individual stations contain no more data than this and have almost no prospect of ever doing so. They're mostly all template messages. In my opinion, the only pages with anything useful are North Adelaide railway station, Adelaide, Mawson Interchange, Adelaide and Salisbury Interchange, South Australia. Even in these pages, there's probably only a paragraph or two in each of text that doesn't belong on another page, or doesn't belong on WP at all (WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information). I'd like to, at least, nominate all of the station pages that are non-notable in AfD, and at best, to merge the content of those three into the page for the Gawler Line (or other pages as appropriate) and nominate the lot for deletion. Support? Oppose? Thoughts? --AtD 04:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
There has been a long-standing consensus dating back years that all railway stations are notable, and every station on every major metro network in the world has a railway station article. If you wish to change this, you're going to need to get a consensus to do it at the policy level - any attempt to override this by stealth will be met with concerted opposition.
While the quality of many of the Adelaide pages isn't great, there is plenty of opportunity to expand them, as has been done with a good number of stations around the country, particularly in Melbourne and Sydney, which have more established and long-running networks of editors. Some really quite good articles have been created, and the information generally does exist to create a good article on pretty much any station with a bit of effort. Rebecca 07:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I should note that I created all those paltry stubs 12 months ago. These days, I don't bother with creating a skinny stub anymore unless it has something substantial ready to go, or unless it is on a very notable topic. Having said that, if you look up old history books at the local council or the STate Library, I'm sure you can find a unique paragrpah that is relevant. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with AtD that many of the "stations" with nothing more than a raised platform that trains stop near are barely notable. I also accept Rebecca's argument that the general case says that railway stations are notable. I wonder what we'd say if the same argument was presented for bus stops!? I'd also caution AtD that notability should not be purely judged on the current state of a wikipedia article. Smithfield railway station for example is now little more than the raised platforms, but was once the only station (with multiple buildings and sidings) between Salisbury and Gawler. The table also does not include the bus interchange info from the articles. --Scott DavisTalk 12:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Scott for pointing out I missed out the bus connections in the Gawler Line. I was originally going to simply copy the data across, but I rethought (and then forgot). I don't think a list of routes that stop at Station X is encyclopaedic content, is subject to change and it's not useful unless you know the routes. What are your thoughts on how I should address this?
I do agree that just because the article is short, doesn't mean the station isn't notable - this is not something I indented to imply. At this time, however, if we were to adopt my second suggestion and just have a page for the line, much the information could be presented in that article. All of the articles for Adelaide's lines are stubs and lack much historical context.
However, I concede at this time that the effort required to change the convention Rebecca mentioned (is it a written policy?) is far too great in comparison to the inconvenience of many one-line articles at this time. I don't think stations like Parafield Gardens are worthy of their own article, but I think at this point our time is better spent in other parts of WP:ADEL. I'll still have expanding and collecting data to the pages for the six Adelaide lines on my to-do list. --AtD 14:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Have to agree with Rebecca and Blnguyen that most of the stations can generate a worthwhile article .... if only the influence creating the station had on the growth of the surrounding area. On the Gawler line Islington has the rail works, train construction and (during WWI) ammunition manufacture. Dry creek was a shipping point for explosives stored at the nearby magazine (I'm guessing on this one). Some like greenfields and Parafield Gdns are never likely to be enthralling articles but they can at least be expanded beyond a stub - Peripitus(Talk) 03:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
A list of bus routes serving a station is fine on Wikipedia - all the Hong Kong, Brisbane, and some of the Sydney pages have them and their inclusion has been seen to be ok - it's just important information about the way that that particular station operates. And the point on bus stops compared to railway stations is nothing more than an interesting moot point - bus stops HAVE been recognised as not notable on WP, whereas railway stations have informally been recognised as notable. I got a couple of books out of a uni library and have turned Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra railway line, Sydney into a long article that could be FA Status in the near future (I'd love some comment on it by the way, it's under peer review!) - and I couldn't include the station information in there (of which I have quite a bit); it would have made the article far too long. If that's what I can do with one page and a couple of books, you can't tell me there isn't something in the State Library of SA that has something on the particular lines and their stations. The quality isn't great at present for Adelaide stuff, but can quickly be improved. JROBBO 02:44, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I listed some images relevant to your WikiProject for deletion. See Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion for more details and consider discussing the images there. —Iamunknown 05:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
South Australia portal
Hi all. I've set up a Portal:South Australia to showcase the fine work being done by local contributors. Check it out, if you'd like :)--cj | talk 05:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks cj. We've stagnated for a while. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Bravo, I like it! :P michaeltalk 09:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Adelaide article statistics
As part of development plans for WikiProject Australia, I'm testing out a subproject assessment statistics capability on {{WP Australia}}, using our project as the guinea pig. If all goes well, we should be the first Australian project to have specific statistics for articles within our scope. The new capability also allows us to rank Adelaide-related articles according to their importance within our scope. As an example: {{WP Australia|class=FA|importance=low|Adelaide=yes|Adelaide-importance=top}}. The only change to current assessment practices is the addition of this "Adelaide-importance=" parameter. Everything else is automatic. --cj | talk 11:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Nice work cyberjunkie. Odd thing though - the template notes only 4 FAs but there are 5 in the linked category..... a bot bug ? - Peripitus(Talk) 20:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
No. I added Don Dunstan to WP:ADEL after the bot did its run through. It should be updated when it does it scheduled daily run.--cj | talk 22:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for this, Cyberjunkie. Daniel Bryant 05:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, yes. michaeltalk 11:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Another meetup would be good - the seminar he's keynote speaker at looks interesting...must see if I can hide this in the budget at work... - Peripitus(Talk) 11:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Hopefully there would be time somewhere in there for Jimbo to actually meet some South Australian Wikipedians. I don't think, given most of us are students, that we each have a spare $300 lying around to go to a one-day seminar. michaeltalk 11:56, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
As Mark Ryansaid, "Why would we pay $300 just to hear Jimbo tell us what we already know in great depth about Wikipedia?"?--cj | talk 12:19, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
I've been super bold and written to him asking him to attend a meetup. Alex Sims 11:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Ouch. I guess Jimbo needs to catch his planes in the afternoon. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
300 bucks, blimey. Hope this place has windows ;) – Rianaঋ 11:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Jimbo in the advertiser.
If you have access - read page 4 of the "Review" section, The advertiser satuday april 7th. An entire page of a Samela Harris interview with Jimbo. I love the opening line...
From the vast, amorphous universe they call cyberspace, Jimmy Wales rises as a new superstar.
Following the meetup, Janet has asked whether Adelaidean editors might be interested in helping promote wikis in the education sector. Her message is as follows:
Breakfast was interesting. I have written notes from the edu event and will type them up and blog them. Would be nice to do something where Adelaide's leaders in wp and wm are more visible as technology leaders/participants to the edu sector. Perhpas opportunities to show what you do in schools or at local community computing events? Do you think Adelaide wm folks would be interested in doing that kind of thing. Lucychili (talk • contribs) 23:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
If you are interested, please contact Janet directly at her talk page or feel free to discuss the proposal here. Regards,--cj | talk 10:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
Station Infoboxes
I was considering making a station infobox for Adelaide's railway stations. I was considering something along the lines of the former Sydney infobox but with Adelaide Metro type colours. Obviously this can be drafted and changed, but I was wondering what sort of parameters would be needed. I would include the following, but coming from Sydney I'm not sure if there's anything particular to Transadelaide that would be needed in addition:
Suburb
Street
Distance from Adelaide Railway Station
No. of Platforms
No. of Tracks
Station layout (ie. island or side platforms)
Interchange available (bus, tram, intercity train, etc)
Type of station (ground or elevated)
A link to its facilities?
Is any of this not obtainable, or is there anything else I should add? Thanks for the help. JRG 09:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd support this. One thing I can think of is, with the Distance from Adelaide Railway Station, maybe have Stations from Adelaide Railway Station as well (ie. it could read: 42 stations (23 km) or the other way around). Daniel Bryant 06:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Why not got national with this? Would there be much different in each state to justify different ones? Looks good btw ...maelgwntalk 06:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
The Sydney one is extremely large, so I wouldn't support a copy of that. I think Maelgwn makes a very good point about standardising this on a national basis (or perhaps, Wikipedia-wide basis). If the infobox was kept to the bare essentials (which is what a good infobox should do), I don't think there would be any problem in having a standard template (á la WP:IAP).--cj | talk 08:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
The Sydney one is very Sydney-specific, and it was cut down considerably to a better version than the one I linked to above, by taking out the irrelevant things like station facilities that aren't really that encyclopedic. It is only long for stations served by every line like Central Station in Sydney, but on most pages it isn't too long (see Eastwood railway station, Sydney for example). The Brisbane one, I think, is far too long, but the Brisbane Wikipedians didn't like my suggestions to make it shorter (see how long it is at South_Bank_railway_station,_Brisbane). Every state appears to have adopted their own design and are quite consistent in sticking to what they have, so I doubt a national approach would work (as good as it would be). But I'm happy to take suggestions on how Adelaide's would work. JRG 02:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Here's something I did quickly - ignore the details for the moment (I know they're wrong), but tell me what could be improved or gotten rid of - I haven't taken on your suggestion yet Daniel. See User:JRG/Transadelaide_Station/Test. JRG 02:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd still prefer to see something along the lines of {{Infobox Australian Place}} and {{Infobox Australian Road}}. I've left notes at the talk pages of those templates requesting input.--cj | talk 15:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
If only we could see one that is not state/system dependent like {{Infobox Australian Place}} - despite what is said above! SatuSuro 15:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I've done a crude mock up of what it might look like here. Please note that I've not coded all details from JRG's template yet.--cj | talk 15:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Just to note Perth also has another template and format - Warwick railway station, Perth - note I am not promoting this one as I think it's overly long. Agree with cj broadly. Orderinchaos 15:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
It can't be done (a national box) - there are far too many differences between the state systems - Sydney's and Adelaide's railway systems are very different, for example. I say we leave the state ones as they are and develop one specifically for Adelaide. Can I please have some comments on my suggestion? JRG 10:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that Adelaide railway stations, Sydney railway stations and Perth railway stations have more in common than South Australian local government areas, Queensland cities, Tasmanian towns and suburbs of Melbourne do with each other - and all of those four manage to use a single infobox with fantastic results! -- Chuq(talk) 14:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The railway station infoboxes are completely different for each capital city, also to add further, Brisbane's one is also uniform with the other mode's stations + ferry wharves through its public transport authority in SE Qld. It would take some time to make not only all rail infoboxes, but also bus + ferry infoboxes uniform to each other if such a project is to be done --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 12:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
But it can be done. It ought to be noted that Geoking66 (talk·contribs) has been adding the general {{Infobox Station}} to several Adelaide stations (videBowden). I like that it incorporates the station adjacencies, but I still would prefer a format (or aesthetic) along the lines of similar Australian templates.--cj | talk 03:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree - the box looks too American-style. Is anyone going to comment on my suggestions - everyone has just ignored them so far? JRG 12:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Politics and government
We seem to lack coverage of SA Government, I just did a stub for Arts SA. Paul foord 11:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
signage on site as reference
I am updating suburbs Kingston Park, Marino and possibly others. Some information has been gleaned from signage at the site (eg Kingston Historical House). Is this a reasonable reference to use?FionaBlinco 09:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Goode Lane, Fitzroy
I have recently put a page up for Goode Lane (mainly the history) and would appreciate advice on how to link this in to the Adelaide ProjectGoodie1 05:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, i have. It is going to be purged in a few days. Its basically bringing SA schools into line with all other school categorisations in Australia. If you have further issues with this, drop me a line at my talk. TwentyYears 13:03, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Banksia Park, City of Tea Tree Gully suburbs and Adelaide-geo-stub only show when editing. Kathleen.wright5 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 01:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
This has now been fixed. Kathleen.wright5 05:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
who lived a substantial portion of their lives in Adelaide, especially the period which established their notability,
all of the above, or
something else?
Also, what's the scope of "Adelaide"? Does it include people from, say, Reynella? Virginia? Gawler? Note that I'm not trying to be "clever"; I'm just trying to establish the scope so I can include relevant people in the article/category. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 15:08, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
The criteria from List of people from the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area and many other lists seems to be widely used. Basically having been documented as living there for a significant period of time seems sufficient. So basically the answer (based on precedent ) is "all of the above" ...does need references though, especially for claims of Adelaidianshipness that are a stretch ( - Peripitus(Talk) 21:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Certainly a few errors. "nestled along the Pacific Coast"..."the Adelaide Hills are Australia’s fruit and veggie basket"...Apart from that it's not too bad - Peripitus(Talk) 07:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
This article has been tagged as as non-notable since April 2007, and will probably be put up for deletion in the next few days. I can't find much about this organization on the web, so I thought I'd ask here if this is in fact notable as per WP:ORG. —BradV 16:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
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) 22:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Adelaide
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 22:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Waterfall Gully, South Australia: FAR
Waterfall Gully, South Australia has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. - Bilby (talk) 04:44, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I feel that Adelaide is underrepresented in the Terrace house article, having seen quite a few on a recent visit. The article has a potential branch - Terrace Housing in Australia which would be good to have some Adelaide material and/or photos on. --Biatch (talk) 00:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Railway Articles
Hey guys, I've been working on my project of improving the rail articles for Adelaide since about January 2008. I've added numerous Infoboxes and improved them over time to make them more efficient. I've listed a full list of jobs I have to do on my userpage and will keep any progress updated there.normangerman (talk) 04:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
In Adelaide's case, it definitely appears inappropriate. I and others commented at the discussion there and, following several days of inactivity there, I have moved it back. Orderinchaos 06:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Milestone Announcements
All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page.
Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project.
No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work.
I thought this WIkiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250(t, c) 21:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 04:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles tagged by their banner enter a workflow such as Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, and Peer review (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found at here.
The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts".
This is an automated message sent out by Addbot to all wikiprojects per request ·Add§hore·Talk To Me! 20:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps invitation
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 21:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Adelaide articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Adelaide articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 00:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
There hasn't been much activity here (ok, so there hasn't been any activity, but I like to be positive), but I figured this would be a good place to start. I'm thinking it is time for a meetup - January 15 is the 10th Birthday of Wikipedia, and there is loot available for events, thus it makes sense to hold one. :) I can organise the Writer's Centre in the city if we want it there, or we could go for another venue, and there may be some funding floating around that will cover drinks and/or birthday cake. Anyway, if anyone still has this watchlisted, toss in your thoughts. :) - Bilby (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Sounds like a great plan, Bilby. I'm not really putting forward any specific ideas at this point, just seconding your motion. By the way, I didn't realise Wikimedia funding would go towards meetups, not that I mind either way. Donama (talk) 11:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
There was a bit of discussion, but generally the thought was that rather than run Wikipedia birthday events, the Chapter might be able to provide support. The nature of which has net to be determined. :) Generally I'd like to see the Chapter support meetups and similar, as that fits with their purpose of helping encourage the development of free content. The Foundation is also supporting events for the 15th - I think they may be free t-shirts on offer. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Count me in, fellas.Bahudhara (talk) 02:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Cool. I'll contact the Foundation about the shirts. :) Any preference on venue? I can ask the Writer's Centre in Rundle Street, as I've used that before, but they don't supply food so we'll need our own pizza, party pies and fair bread. (Ok, I may skip the last two). Otherwise we could try and find a coffee shop or something which will feed us. Or a pub, which has advantages of its own. - Bilby (talk) 03:37, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I know it's not central, but how about Sarah's Sisters restaurant on Semaphore Road? It's vegetarian, but they do great food and they are licensed. They are open during the day and on Friday nights - I'm not sure about Saturday nights during summer (15 January 2011 is a Saturday) - but I know the owner (Stuart Gifford) and I'm sure that we can come to a special arrangement if necessary. He would be very interested in having us there. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 10:52, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Is that the same one that was off Hindley Street for a bit? I went there once, and the food was great. :) - Bilby (talk) 11:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I've only known Stuart personally since earlier this year, but I've known of him by reputation for nearly 20 years. His first restaurant (that I know of), also called Sarah's (or Sarah's Kitchen??), was for many years in Hutt St in the SE corner of the city; more recently he had one in Port Adelaide (in anticipation of the boom that was supposed to happen due to the redevelopment ... ) before moving to Semaphore Road. He's into environmental sustainability and very community-minded; and I've actually been talking quite a lot to him recently about Wikipedia. Bahudhara (talk) 12:22, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I've talked with Stuart at Sarah's, and he is quite agreeable to having us there. He is open on Saturday evenings - it's quieter in the evening than during the day. He is also willing to put on his Friday evening menu for us. (He has been encouraging locals to come on Friday evenings to meet and talk about environmental sustainability, etc., with a "green burger" for $15, pale ales for $5 and in effect operate as a wine-bar.) It's a good atmosphere, quite pleasant with a garden out back, and can easily accommodate 30 or so people. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
if it is still possible that souds good to me. I can think of at least 3 or 4 people straight off that would like to go. Should we go with that? And when would he need numbers? - Bilby (talk) 12:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
When I last spoke to Stuart 10 days ago, he was quite happy to have us and he said that he would pencil us in for that date (15th Jan). I can keep him updated re numbers as we get closer to the date. This talk page has 67 watchers and it has already been accessed 74 times this month, so potentially there may be quite a bit of interest in the event even though it hasn't been reflected in this discussion so far. I suspect that many people may not yet be focused that far ahead, and that once the New Year has passed we will get more of a response. And do you have any ideas about the format? I have a data projector and can borrow a screen, if necessary, if anyone wants to give a presentation, etc. - I have set this up previously at Sarah's, so that's no problem. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 01:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
As we are now getting closer to the 15th, we need to make some decisions, now rather than later. Although only three people have contributed to this discussion so far, looking at the page view count there does appear to be at least some latent interest out there. Maybe if the meetup sidebox on this page was updated with the proposed date of 15 January, rather than being left as 'TBA', it could elicit more of a response.
Looking at the reports of past meetups, I discovered that there are several past attendees who are still currently active - it would be good to get some feedback from them, as to how useful they found those meetups to be.
Although until now I haven't done much editing of Adelaide-related articles (as a relative newcomer, I've been concentrating on learning the ropes through more general editing) I do have quite an interest in local environmental issues (which overlaps onto environmental history, heritage, geography, etc.) and I'd like to help improve the coverage of these topics in WikiProject Adelaide. Perhaps if other project members list their particular interests, we can develop an agenda for discussion of these topics.
Recently through my involvement with another community event I printed off some T-shirt transfers, and found that it was a relatively painless process. Is this something that we could consider? Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 02:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
@Bilby, I've amended the sidebox above to confirm the date at least, and updated the ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelaide page with a link back to this page. After checking the ten.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, it seems that we have missed the deadline (1 January) for ordering the freebies from the Wikipedia Foundation, unless you have already arranged something. We can still do our own T-shirts if we want.
I've also looked at the pages for the other events around Australia and NZ, and they all seem to show a similar lack of response (so it's not just us). It may be that this just isn't a good time of year to be organising an event. On the other hand I have previously organised a number of community events involving catering where, despite pleas for RSVPs so that we could accurately estimate the numbers, regularly only about half of those who actually turned up had let us know beforehand that they were coming.
Are you happy with Sarah's Sisters as the venue? If so, I can send out a general notice, per the list in the sidebox above (which comes up if you edit it). Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 04:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Sarah's Sister is a bit out of the way in Semaphore even though I quite like the place when I don't feel like eating meat. Personally I'd be happy with that but perhaps we could consider a more central/casual option. (I don't think Sarah's Sister could accommodate a large influx without a booking that was accurate). Donama (talk) 05:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd second that. Semaphore is too remote. Stick to the CBD to minimise distance and maximise attendance. Alex Sims (talk)
If Sarah's Sisters is out (which I had considered as an evening venue anyway, perhaps more suitable for a more leisurely extended discussion), then we had better come up with another venue pretty quickly. Any suggestions? Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 09:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I generally like the idea of a nice leisurely meal. :) But if food isn't the first priority, or if we can live with pizza, I can organise the Writers Center in Rundle Street or space at UniSA City West with no notice. - Bilby (talk) 13:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Pizza means someone has to take responsibility, which is not looking likely at this point. Can I suggest a largish central cafe, Scoozi, 272 Rundle Street? Donama (talk) 06:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm all for pizza, or an internet cafe or something in the CBD. I wouldn't have turned up at Semaphore, but if it's in the CBD I may have a chance to appear. About a 10% chance, but I'm going to try. SellyminimeTalk 10:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Meetup page
Created Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/WP10 Adelaide in the hope of getting more discussion. Imagine many people are still on comms-free holidays at the moment, but for those who aren't, let's get a move on with this. Donama (talk) 05:47, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
@Donama, 22 hits on the the page you created yesterday (although I'm the only one who registered), and 29 hits on this page compared with 10 over the previous 4 days. It seems that there is interest out there, though possibly some of it could be coming from event organisers interstate checking out what's happening here (just as I checked up on them yesterday). Maybe the ethos of responding to RSVPs has become uncool in these days of flash mobs assembling in response to Twitter tweets. Do we need to be prepared to order more pizzas and cake at short notice? Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
22 hits seems piddly. I'm suspecting no one else is reading this. I really think there should be 3 or 4 confirmed yes RSVPs to go ahead with the event. I don't know how to quickly send out spam to locals. I wonder if someone can figure that out? Donama (talk) 06:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I've got two definite, including me. And I think I can get some more. - Bilby (talk) 06:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Despite 184 views of this page since the New Year (including 85 hits over the past three days), only four people have so far registered on Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/WP10 Adelaide as will / probably will be attending the event, with another couple of apologies and a 'maybe'. These high recent hit numbers are probably due to the reappearance of the banner advertising the anniversary and much of this traffic may just be curiosity-driven. The Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/WP10 Adelaide page, which can be reached by clicking through from the banner and event main page, has had 175 hits this month, including 96 in the past three days.
However some of this interest may well result in additional attendees, and I note that the Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/WP10 Adelaide page contains the item: Note: Pizza and drinks to be provided. @Bilby, have we made arrangements for this? Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 04:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
There's at least one more person going, and I've emailed some editors from Adelaide to let them know, so perhaps that will help. I think we may also be mentioned in The Age tomorrow, along with the other events. And yes - Wikimedia Australia has agreed to support the WP10 events with funding. I need to confirm the exact amount, but it should be a couple of hundred, so enough to cover all of us. - Bilby (talk) 05:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Meetup 12 June 2011
As Wittylama is stopping by, on relatively short notice, we thought it would be nice to have an informal gathering. Bruneli's seems nice, as they have decent cakes, and the Belgian Beer Cafe is just up the road for those thus inclined. So 6:00pm, Sunday 12 June 2011. Details at Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 5. Bilby (talk) 07:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Erm. I hope the title is a typo. SellymeTalk 08:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Indeed it was. :) - Bilby (talk) 08:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Meetup
At the last meetup there was a general wish to do it again, so I've started a discussion thing at Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 6. This time we have well over a month to plan, so all should be much better. :) - Bilby (talk) 05:32, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Adelaide to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 22:55, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
If there are any sport fans lurking around, Wikimedians to the Games is a collaboration drive to improve Australian Paralympic articles, with the most active contributors having an opportunity to go attend the Paralympic Games and to cover the Games behind the scenes with a press pass. The top two contributors will get their airfare and accommodation paid for. :) The drive official starts on 10 January 2012. --LauraHale (talk) 10:02, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Photo request
This is a call out to Adelaide Wikipedians. I have just created the article for your recently opened South Australia Aquatic and Leisure Centre. I have done a quick search and there doesn't seem to be a freely available image of the centre. If someone who lives near Oaklands Park could pop down and take photo of the centre (something like this image would be great), upload it to Commons and add it to the article that would be greatly appreciated. Cheers -- Ianblair23(talk) 04:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
It is only a few minutes down the road - I won't be able to get down there until later in the week, but I'll be able to have a go at it then. We're probably limited to external shots at the moment, if that's ok. - Bilby (talk) 04:29, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bilby, thanks for your quick reply. A good external shot would be great, like the example I gave. Cheers -- Ianblair23(talk) 04:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Just a note to say that I have just created Template:Adelaide landmarks. (See Category:Australian landmark navigational boxes to see the navboxes for Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth.) Could an Adelaide Wikipedian please run their eye over it to see whether anything needs to be added or removed before this get rolled out. The other navboxes also have sections on transportation and parks. However, there are two really good navboxes namely Template:AdelaideParklands and Template:Adelaide CBD Streets which already cover these areas but only in the City of Adelaide LGA. So currently, the major roads and parks outside of the city are not currently included. Cheers -- Ianblair23(talk) 07:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your good work. I'm not sure what the scope of this template is meant to be -- the CBD, the metro area, or SA. KI, for example, is nowhere near Adelaide. The MEL template is clearly only for the CBD, but SYD seems a bit more extensive. As far as transportation goes, the Adelaide CBD Streets template only covers streets, hardly a complete treatment of transportation. I wouldn't be opposed to merging this template with the parks and streets ones, but others may have very different ideas. YBG (talk) 07:24, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Accessing eResources info session
For those who may be interested, the Sate Library of SA is offering an information session on accessing eResources from home, on Wednesday 7 August. It's free, but booking is essential - here's the registration page. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 05:02, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
City of Adelaide
Members of this Project may be interested in a proposal to improve the article on the clipper ship City of Adelaide in time for the ship's planned arrival in Australia in February. See Talk:City of Adelaide (1864). Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 11:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Popular pages tool update
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Oceania may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer(Talk) 20:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
location maps
Do we have anyone here skilled in cartography? Plotting suburbs of Adelaide (or in fact most SA towns!) on a location map of the whole state of South Australia is of limited information value. Adelaide and SA maps equivalent to some I've found for interstate would be nice. Examples include:
I'm not sure I like the colours, but maps of the Adelaide metro area, south eastern SA, and maybe even each district council could help to make the locator maps more useful. Has anyone already started on this, or should I be spending the Christmas holidays learning the intricacies of QGIS and Wiki map layout? Thanks. --Scott DavisTalk 04:40, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Sounds like a great idea. I'm not sure why you'd need to know about the intricacies of QGIS, unless you are really insistent on changing the colour schemes. All you really need is an uploadable map image and latitude and longitude of its borders. The source of File:Australia Victoria complete Melbourne metropolitan area location map.svg is listed as 'Own work + VicMap Lite' by Cassowary and File:Location map Australia Sydney.png as 'OpenStreetMap' by Dr. Blofeld. Offhand, it seems like it would be easier to follow the Sydney example, but you could contact either of those users to see if they might be of some assistance. But then I've probably babbled on about stuff you probably already figured out. YBG (talk) 16:49, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for some more leads. I hadn't noticed the OSM connection. I'd noticed that the original uploader of the Victorian maps had retired from Wikipedia, had seen mention of QGIS in Wikiproject Roads for building highway maps, and had found quite a bit of CC-BY data available from DPTI. That was enough to prompt the enquiry and discussion about what maps might be most use (on the assumption there would be quite a bit of work making each one, which might not have been a valid assumption). --Scott DavisTalk 13:40, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
OK. I've had a go using OSM data. The colours in the Sydney map are OSM defaults. I found a tool called Maperitive that is supposed to do SVG from OSM data better than OSM itself. The default colours and rendering rules tend to emphasise the conservation parks and the not-quite-as main roads (e.g. Salisbury Highway pink stood out much more than Main North Road green). I think a lot more cartography is required to make a map that looks good on Wikipedia. The attempt shown here uses the Maperitive "Google Maps" rules. It is currently in use in my sandbox as an alternative to the Hillbank, South Australia article. Adelaide is really not a good shape to use a locator map oriented with North up. --Scott DavisTalk 01:48, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I think the location map would be better with no suburb names on it -- then the place being located would stand out. As it is, I can hardly tell where Hillbank is on the map on your sandbox. As far as vertical alignment goes, I agree -- it does seem to take up a lot of room in the infobox. Maybe you could have three location maps
One at this same scale from the CBD thru the northern suburbs, but with the northernmost part cut off (e.g., Elizabeth & Gawler)
One at this same scale from the CBD thru the southern suburbs, but with the southernmost part cut off.
One at a different scale that included the parts cut off from the N and S and going out further east, maybe to Murray Bridge.
Just some thoughts for you to consider. YBG (talk) 06:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Version 1 was generated only using Maperitive. Version 2 has been edited with Inkscape to remove the Maperitive branding, town and suburb names, and route shields. It leaves a cleaner looking map. I don't know if it's helpful to people not familiar with Adelaide. One of the features of Maperitive compared to other tools is that it made a large number of separate layers which make it easier to edit with Inkscape, except that I'm not an expert user, and my computer struggled to run Firefox and Inkscape at the same time :-( If I was more competent, and had more time to concentrate on it, I'd try to make the main roads stand out more (maybe even back to the default OSM colours, but emphasise the green instead of pink).
A question I haven't answered for myself yet is what scale and features are helpful to someone not familiar with Adelaide? I would be concerned that only showing part of the metro area tends to give a distorted perspective on the city, but maybe that's OK for the purpose? My chosen extents went just past the urban railway system at Gawler and Seaford. Maybe a square map going Grand Junction Road to Cross Road works for the inner suburbs? Are LGA maps useful in SA? I don't know if they have recognisable shapes or meaningful information. That is what Victoria seems to have available, with an inset to show where they are (which would take quite some extra work I expect, and might be easier with Qgis and DPTI data instead of starting from OSM). --Scott DavisTalk 13:39, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Much better! And thanks for the comment about smaller maps giving a distorted view. Maybe including locator maps of the locator maps would help -- e.g., for north suburbs, map #1 from above would be accompanied by perhaps your map with a box showing the limits of the main guide map -- and maybe even another map of SA (or AU?) showing the limits of the Adelaide metro map. But maybe I'm over-thinking this. YBG (talk) 05:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I have added it or replaced the SA map to a few articles this morning, mostly with links from the edit summary back to this discussion. I'd still like to find a way of making the really-main roads stand out more from the slightly-main roads to assist viewer orientation, but I haven't reached sufficient familiarity with the tools yet to achieve it, so hoping to find that Version 2 is good enough for now. --Scott DavisTalk 04:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
LGA maps
I've now also practiced with QGIS and made one LGA map. It's the council I live in, so I recognise the shape, but is it useful to people who read Wikipedia from further away? You can see it in use at Smithfield, South Australia. It has a nicer aspect ratio than the Greater Adelaide map. The lines on it are FREE, HWY, ART and SUBA roads, plus railways.--Scott DavisTalk 04:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment
Scott, you recently added the Greater Adelaide map to the infobox of National Railway Museum, Port Adelaide, which I had previously edited. The aspect ratio issue you have mentioned means that the insertion of that map causes the infobox of that article to be rather distorted, and I suspect it does something similar to most of the infoboxes into which it has been placed. Can I suggest a solution to the aspect ratio problem for many of the articles about Adelaide area subjects, namely a map of the Adelaide CBD and a map of Port Adelaide? What I have in mind is something equivalent to, eg, {{Location map United Kingdom London Westminster}} (which may in fact be an LGA map), or {{Location map Scotland Edinburgh Central}} (which looks like it isn't an LGA map). Bahnfrend (talk) 09:11, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for noticing and commenting. I'm happy to look into some other styles and scales of map when I have time. The extents of the Greater Adelaide map are roughly the ends of the urban railway system, and I tried it on examples of a few different types of infobox. A problem with putting Adelaide city centre and Port Adelaide on one smaller map is how to objectively choose the boundaries. For example what makes Port Adelaide worthy of including with the CBD, but not Glenelg or the eastern extent of City of Port Adelaide Enfield?
I haven't worked out how to do the wider inset like the first example you suggested yet. Getting the line weighting right based on the available data has been a challenge too; some of them put the second-tier roads standing out as more prominent than the main ones, which tended to make the maps quite difficult to understand. --Scott DavisTalk 12:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, my earlier post may have been confusing; I was suggesting two separate maps, one of the Adelaide CBD and the other of Port Adelaide. You could also create a separate, third, one for Glenelg. Incidentally, as a West Aussie, I'm also interested to know whether you'd be willing to create a Perth CBD, a Fremantle and a Perth metro area map, respectively (ie three maps). In the case of those maps, the local government boundaries would be suitable borders for the first two, and the third could be a map of the Perth Metropolitan Region. (As I'm not very familiar with Adelaide, I'm not sure whether similar comments could be made about that city.) Bahnfrend (talk) 13:15, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
If I get the time and am able to sort out the settings to generate better maps from OSM data (the source of the Greater Adelaide map), then I'd be happy to generate them for anywhere that didn't need the settings tweaking further. I don't like the colours I have used at the moment (which is derived from the "like Google Maps" settings), but the "like OSM defaults" settings wasn't sufficiently "like" it to give sensible emphasis to the right levels of roads, especially at thumbnail scale. I don't know if that's a general issue, or if the roads are tagged inconsistently in the OSM data of the Adelaide area. QGIS maps would be less likely to get done by me outside of SA, especially as I don't know where to find the right data. --Scott DavisTalk 00:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Please visit Talk:South Eastern Freeway#2015 Merge proposal for a new proposal to merge these two articles as it appears the government now considers it to be all one road. As there will be quite a bit of work, I decided to consult before being bold. --Scott DavisTalk 22:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
WikiConfererence Australia 2015 - Save the date 3-5 October 2015
Our first Australian conference for Wikipedians/Wikimedians will be held 3-5 October 2015. Organised by Wikimedia Australia, there will be a 2-day conference (Saturday 3 October and Sunday 4 October) with an optional 3rd day (Monday 5 October) for specialist topics (unconference discussions, training sessions, etc). The venue is the State Library of Queensland in Brisbane. So put those dates in your diary! Note: Monday is a public holiday is some states but not others. Read about it here: WikiConference Australia 2015
As part of that page, there are now sections for you to:
indicate your interest in possibly attending the conference (this is not a binding commitment, of course)
add suggestions for topics to include in the conference: what you would like to hear/discuss (again, there is no commit to you presenting/organising that topic, although it’s great if you are willing to do so), or indicate your enthusiasm for any existing topic on the list by adding a note of support underneath it
It would really help our planning if you could let us know about possible attendance and the kind of topics that would make you want to come. If you don’t want to express your views on-wiki, please email me at kerry.raymond@wikimedia.org.au or committee@wikimedia.org.au
We are hoping to have travel subsidies available to assist active Australasian Wikipedians to attend the conference, although we are not currently in a position to provide details, but be assured we are doing everything we can to make it possible for active Australian Wikipedians to come to the conference. Kerry (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Folks, just letting you know we will not be proceeding with Wikiconference Australia 2015 originally proposed for 3-5 October 2015. Thanks to those of you who expressed your support. You are free to watch the football finals instead :-) Kerry (talk) 08:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
party column in lists of current councillors
Am I the only one who thinks the party column looks odd in the tables of councillors of south Australian LGA articles? I don't recall any party platform advertising material or funding to any campaigns, so I feel it presents undue weight to tag some councillors as belonging to parties now, but not reporting the trade unions or professional bodies they might have declared at the same time. In SA, even party staff stand as ""independents" for local government. --Scott DavisTalk 04:41, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
It's definitely worthy of discussion. I don't really have an opinion, but I'd like to see others. Donama (talk) 05:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I have to say that I did a double-take when I first saw these edits, as (unlike, e.g., NSW) traditionally party politics haven't generally played an overt role in local government elections in SA, so it did seem somewhat out-of-place, and close to OR. Having said that, there are numerous examples of elected council members or candidates moving on to stand for Parliament at state or federal level, or indeed, moving the other way. Then I did a random search of some LGA articles for other states. Listing the party affiliations of councillors seems to have been around for a number of years for articles on NSW councils, and just Brisbane City Council, but not other councils in Queensland; and the same editor has been adding similar affiliations for council members in Victoria, just a few days ago.
This could be a sign of the times, as there has been an on-going debate in the press during the past couple of years over greater transparency, as up to now candidates for local government elections have not had to declare their party affiliations until after they were elected. Below are some links to newspaper articles on this debate. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 08:23, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I am in two minds about it: on one hand, I do find it useful and notable information and I do think there is a compelling public interest case for adding it (for much the same reasons illustrated above); but on the other, in less partisan states and councils, I worry about minor BLP issues. This actually mentally played out as "I am going to follow all of these edits and I think I like them but I won't add more because I'm not that sure". I think it's good we're having the discussion anyway. The Drover's Wife (talk) 09:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I did a double take too when I saw the first one (Prospect). It's interesting but I'm not sure its encyclopaedic as it's seems to be all garnered by original research on lists of pecuniary interests. It's never been, at least in my experience much of an issue when electing councillors. Alex Sims (talk) 09:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Looked a bit more and I want to wave the flag of WP:OR in the case of South Australia. The sources are all from each councils websites, i.e. primary sources and this is a red flag to me. In others states its there are newspapers, i.e. secondary sources, but in SA its not. I'd move strongly to delete the material unless someone can come up with some sources apart from the council's pecuniary interests register. Why are we listing political parties? Why not some of things, like sources of income? If a media outlet steps forward and issues tables for every councillor in every council then fine, but until then no.Alex Sims (talk) 12:41, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I am not necessarily disagreeing about their removal, but I do disagree about the suggestion of what would be a better source. Media coverage is awful for this kind of thing because it's never overarching, and piecemeal coverage dates like hell if people join or leave parties (and people have already picked up in this discussion cases where that would leave us to have information that would be wrong in 2016) or documenting that they are, in fact, of whatever party. The only realistic alternative to removing this to remove it from every state that party affiliation isn't on the ballot for, because they're the only two ways of getting definitive party details for councillors that isn't a raging BLP mess waiting to happen. I am not necessarily saying this would be a bad thing (I am on the fence, leading to agreein with you and Scott), but this is a case where newspaper sources (unless some newspaper is being more diligent than they ever are in reality, or some rare one-off case where a local journalist does their homework) have more issues, not less. The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:48, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
The newspapers might not be a more accurate source, but they are secondary sources. At the moment almost all of the values in the added column are from primary sources, making the whole thing a concern along WP:PRIMARY lines. There may be, other concerns along WP:BLPPRIMARY lines which might come into play. Whilst it is possible for Newspapers (secondary sources) to add a column like we have, they haven't and I think this is a clue as to how we should act.
Just discussed this with a non-editor, and this is another argument that the political leaning of a council as a whole affects their scope of services and level of rates (left more services, higher rates, right converse), but then again the political leaning of a council always follows the leaning of the council area so tracking the councillors is not useful unless the you have a situation where the political views of the councillors don't match their council area, which I believe doesn't occur in SA Alex Sims (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
We use primary sources all the time when they are official sources that are more accurate than the non-official source that may have stuffed something up in translation, which is the case here. Still not saying we should, just that making an argument that we should use sources far more likely to be less accurate and less reliable over official sources on BLP issues is an extremely bad idea. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
The Council lists are primary sources of what the individual councillor declared they are members of. It is neither a source of what funding and support they receive, nor of what their political leanings actually are. This is my problem. My local example is City of Playford which has two people who have declared membership of the Liberal party. When mayor Glenn Docherty stood as the Liberal candidate for Newland in 2014, my personal feeling of betrayal was that he stood for Newland not Napier, not that he stood for Liberal, and I don't think I was alone in that. Other councillors with no political declarations include Musolino who was a PUP candidate in 2013 (I guess we still don't know what he stands for from that), and Marilyn Baker who used to work in Martyn Evans' office, even while she was mayor![1] The register of declarations does not tell the whole story accurately. --Scott DavisTalk 12:54, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Adelaide Rams, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:19, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
New 5000 Challenge for Australia
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/The 5000 Challenge and the wider Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceania/The 10,000 Challenge are up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Australia and Oceania like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Australia but fuelled by a contest if desirable to really get articles on every state/territory and subject mass improved. After every 100 articles done for Australia this would feed into the main Oceania one. I will start a smaller challenge for your area if there is the support. I would like some support from wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start anyway with some articles to make doing a Destubathon for Australia and Oceania worthwhile! Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:14, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings WikiProject Adelaide/Archive 2 Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide/Archive 2/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Adelaide.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Adelaide, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
