Jump to content

Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LiquidGhoul (talk | contribs) at 01:13, 9 June 2006 (→Australia-related [[WP:FP|FP]]s: added suggestions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Australian Wikipedians' notice board

Portal | Project | Board | Alerts | Deletions | To-Do | Category | Related | Help

WikiProjects edit | watch
In the news edit | watch
Read and edit Wikinews


28 May 2025 – 2025 Australian federal election
The National Party rejoins the Opposition Coalition one week after moving to the crossbench. (The Guardian Australia)
25 May 2025 –
At least four people are injured, including one seriously, in a mass stabbing attack with a machete and fight between gangs at the Northland Shopping Centre in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. (ABC News Australia)
22 May 2025 – 2025 New South Wales floods
At least four people are killed in major flooding in various Mid North Coast areas of New South Wales, Australia. (Nine News Australia)
20 May 2025 – 2025 Australian federal election
The federal wing of the National Party leaves the Liberal-National Coalition for the first time since 1987, citing poor performance in the recent federal election and growing policy differences. (The Guardian Australia)
15 May 2025 – 2025 Australian Greens leadership election
Larissa Waters is elected leader of the Australian Greens, following the resignation of Adam Bandt after the party's poor performance at the 2025 Australian federal election. (ABC News)
13 May 2025 – 2025 Liberal Party of Australia leadership election
Sussan Ley is elected as the new leader of the Liberal Party of Australia following the party's defeat at Saturday's federal election. Ley is the first woman to hold the post. (Reuters)


More Australian current events
See also: Current events on Wikinews
Categories edit | watch
On this day in Australia edit | watch

Australia · Arts · Architecture · Cities · Communications · Culture · Economy · Education · Environment · Geography · Government · Healthcare · History · Law · Language · Lists · Media · Military · Music · Organisations · People · Politics · Religion · Science · Society · Sport · Subdivisions · Transport · Tourism

Australian states and territories · Australian Capital Territory · New South Wales · Northern Territory · Queensland · South Australia · Tasmania · Victoria · Western Australia

Capital cities · Adelaide · Brisbane · Canberra · Darwin · Hobart · Melbourne · Perth · Sydney

Australia stubs · AFL stubs · Geography stubs · Government stubs · Law stubs · People stubs · Paralympic medalists stubs · Television stubs

1 June:

Loch Ard
Loch Ard


Candidates for Deletion edit | watch
Announcements edit | watch
Australian Wikipedians' notice board

Portal | Project | Board | Alerts | Deletions | To-Do | Category | Related | Help

Template loop detected: Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Layout

Melbourne Meetup
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Anniversary/On this day section PROPOSAL for Portal:Australia

I've started a set of subpages at Portal:Australia/Anniversaries, which has a subpage for every day of the year, so that notable events and anniversaries in Australian history can be considered. Hopefully, if approved by the community for inclusion on the portal page, it would not be hard to maintain, as a glance at the code of Portal:Germany, shows that there is an automated device so that the reference to the relevant day's subpage will automatically update itself at 0:00 every day, rather than needing a user to switch the link every day. I've stuck a few random notable events in there just off the top of my head, etc. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's remarkably addictive. I added a few, including some obvious ones for Jan 1 and 26 :P. What about famous/important people's births and deaths? pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, notable births, deaths, elections, disasters, wars, whatever, everything.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is this to populate some Australian-flavoured "On this day" column? I appreciate that you've made a lot of effort here, but just thinking about what this is really doing and it could be used in the future... Would a better way to go about this be to use a category like [[Category:Australian anniversary|1836-12-28 South Australia founded]] and add it to the South Australia article and any other relevant article as needed? Or [[Category:Australian notable date|2006-03-18 South Australian legislative election, 2006]] (which is perhaps closer to what you're doing.
Also note: the notable Australian births and deaths is really just going to be a subset (or perhaps the full set) of the intersection of Category:Australian people with each of the Category:xxxx births and Category:xxxx deaths categories. Because I can express it mathematically that should be able to be automated for our calendar. — Donama 04:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's by calendar day, and I don't think that there is category for births by day, which would have been easier if someone just scrolled over with popups to see what the nationality was in the lead sentence. It hasn't taken much work yet, I simply cut and pasted the framework from Portal:Germany and used "Find and Replace" to substitute Australia everywhere, so it only took about 20 minutes! Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah good point. We probably should have categories on the day of the year for births and deaths for just this kind of purpose. — Donama 05:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Astute

Just started an article on the Operation Astute deployment to East Timor. Perhaps it could be used to cover the unrest there in general, given there isn't actually an article for it.--cj | talk 13:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of it on the defence website. This is breaking news though - the operation was only named two or three hours ago.--cj | talk 14:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that there have been talks over the last day or two about a multinational deployment, but since the violence escalated today, Australia sent in troops in advance of the formal invitation/agreement as to the rules of engagement. Once the agreement is hammered out (probably overnight) then the other nations will deploy their forces. The talks have involved the local UN people so it may be another blue beret job. --bainer (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of last night, the East Timorese Government had not approved rules of engagement, but the situation there was deteriorating so badly that the government deemed it appropriate to send forces there. Capitalistroadster 19:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide meetup

For those of you in Adelaide or planning to be over the next few months, there appears to be interest in having a meeting of Adelaide Wikipedians, after the style of the Melbourne and Sydney meetups. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide or add it to your watch list to get involved in this discussion. So far just 6 Adelaide Wikipedians have added their voices to the discussion there, but I sense there may be several more to speak up from Adelaide! Cheers — Donama 05:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently trying to get Cane Toad to featured article status (it is in peer review here if you would like to contribute), and I need to expand the popular culture section. So if you can think of any cultural references of the Cane Toad, could you please add it to the article. Thanks --liquidGhoul 14:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Australia state or territory

I've taken the liberty of doing some reformatting within Template:Australia state or territory. Hope you all don't mind. The main point is to make everything that looks like a row actually be a row, but while I was there I made it a bit narrower. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rick. The format was just an altered version of whatever Infobox Country was like a year or so ago.--cj | talk 08:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Young Australian of the Year Recipients

As yet, there is no article describing the award for Young Australian of the Year. All that is available is a list of recipients dating to 1979. Recently, I have added succession boxes for award recipients from 1999 to 2006. It is my intention to include:

  • An entry for each recipient
  • A concise article regarding "Young Australian of the Year"

I have also added names of recent recipients to the People of Australia "To Do list". Any contributions to these articles would be appreciated. --bernie_bernbaum12:51, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian of the Year describes the Young Australian of the Year award and the Senior Australian of the Year award. I think that is adequate. It is still a short article and can be extended. I agree that recipiants should have articles. --Bduke 03:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Timor

Coverage of this was spread around a whole bunch of articles, so I've consolidated everything on the crisis at 2006 East Timor crisis. Operation Astute (mentioned a couple of sections above) should probably still be expanded as the main article about the military details of the deployment, but other information should probably go into the new article. --bainer (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested photographs in Australia

Categories for requested photographs in Australia have crept somewhat and almost duplicated the efforts at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images. I was thinking along the lines of merging and doing away with the todo list and using the categories to centralise the requests? The Requested photographs in Australia category is automatically populated by placing a {{reqphotoin|Australia}} notice on an article talk page. Any further ideas or objections to using a system such as this? -- Longhair 21:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I support the use of tags on talk pages and automatic categorisation. Clarification of the requirement can be done on the article's talk page. Calling for the assistance of other editors for a particular project can always be done through this noticeboard or one of the other project notice board discussion pages.--A Y Arktos\talk 23:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The requested photos categories seem to be working really well. If not already done, then the contents of Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images should be categorised into the requested photos cat tree. The list can be removed, thus freeing up space in this page's header for other requests. Snottygobble 05:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There should be a centralised page for photo requests in Australia, separated under regional headings (South Australia, Adelaide, etc). Its an excellent idea. michael talk 05:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've created city based request categories for the major cities. I didn't see the sense in Sydney based Wikipedians looking through Tasmanian photo opportunities, unless they really wanted to. -- Longhair 06:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Every request listed at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images now has an appropriate talk page template added, listing them all within the relevant national categories. Any ideas on what to do now with the redundant page? -- Longhair 06:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...even those articles which already have images ;) Dysprosia 08:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Martin (professor)

While looking for Brian Ross Martin, I came across Brian Martin (professor). It's an article about an associate professor at the University of Wollongong who is anti-war. In its current state, it reads almost like a vanity article advertising rather than describing Brian's POV. Googling reveals that he has been mentioned in overseas unis and has sometimes appeared on the ABC. Should the article be cleaned up, or deleted as pacifismcruft? Andjam 12:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's worth keeping, if cleaned up. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Might qualify under one or two criteria under Notability (academics). The article in its present form doesn't really provide enough information to judge. Gimboid13 10:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cane Toad call

If someone lives in an area infested with Cane Toads, and has the appropriate equipment, could you please record the Cane Toad's mating call. It isn't required quickly, it would just accompany the article really well. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 06:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Liberals

Would it be worthwhile having an article about the proposed merger between the Liberal Party and the National Party in Queensland or is it too early as yet? It is getting a lot of media attention. Capitalistroadster 13:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The media attention should fade within a week - this has been proposed many times before. michael talk 14:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It might be worthwhile from an historical point of view. The rhetoric for this proposal was un-usually strong – a "committment" to merge was stated.--cj | talk 07:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it wouldn't hurt - it would be interesting for the historical record, for the reason CJ points out. Rebecca 10:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Coalition (Australia) would probably be a better place to write about it. Andjam 03:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think its worthy of any attention. Just the tiniest blip of the political radar. michael talk 03:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria

User:Strum that guitar has taken it upon themselves to move without discussion Victoria to Victoria (disambiguation) and to cut-and-paste Victoria (Australia) to Victoria. I have reverted cut-and-paste action, and am about to move Victoria (disambiguation) back to Victoria. Once the previous order is restored, I think we should discuss whether or not Victoria (Australia) would be more appropriately named simply Victoria.--cj | talk 09:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think every one of us would prefer the simple article title "Victoria", but there are too many notable "Victoria"s for ours to deserve that spot. That would have been the rationale when this was originally decided and I think it still stands. — Donama 11:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Donama. In Canada, it means Victoria, British Columbia, in Hong Kong it's Victoria City and in the UK it may mean Victoria of the United Kingdom, after whom most others were named. Thanks cj for undoing the changes. --Scott Davis Talk 15:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing Victoria, Australia is a heavily used redirect, and a move from Victoria (Australia) to the former is required. A great deal of articles linking to Victoria (Australia) end up there via a redirect from Victoria, Australia. When editing new Victorian articles, most don't usually think to include the brackets and create links to the redirect of Victoria, Australia. These articles are then fixed at a later date by an experienced editor who adjusts the link directly to the actual article. Why don't we just move the page? For readability, a lot of articles refer directly to Victoria, Australia rather than Victoria (Australia).
I found examples in the first three articles I checked where the text reads V, A but links to V (A),
-- Longhair 21:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support the move proposed by Longhair, though there will be a lot of fixing of double redirects. I had fixed the Moliagul redirect independently this morning (a propos of gold rush editing). It is easier to type one comma rather than two brackets and it is more intuive and in line with Australian place naming convention generally. A Y Arktos\talk 22:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the job of fixing redirects would be suited nicely to a bot if anyone operates one capable of doing so. -- Longhair 22:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Victoria has to be a dissambiguation page as there is no one Victoria that without doubt stands above the rest, so well done cj for a swiftly cleaning this one up. Now in regards to move, I actually suggested this move back in August last year, and was correctly pointed out by Xtra that Victoria is its own jurisdiction and not just a place within a country (see here) and that the "(Australia)" is to dissambiguate it from other places, people, things etc called Victoria. However, I would like to support to move that Randwicked suggested (also back in August) that we move the page to Victoria (Australian state) similar to Georgia (U.S. state), because, as rightly stated by Randwicked, in its current form it suggests this Victoria is type of Australia rather than a state within Australia. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 23:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not support the move to Victoria (Australian state). I do not accept the rationale that because it is a jurisdiction it shoudl be indicated by brackets rather than a comma. Over 1000 items link to Victoria, Australia, the policy on naming conventions at Naming conventions states "what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Linking to the state of Victoria is made easy and second nature with the use of a comma, not "Australian State" in brackets. This is evidenced by continued usage of the urrently deprecated form.--A Y Arktos\talk 23:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I feel moving to Victoria (Australian state) is aiming for 'correctness', whereas the format of Victoria, Australia makes perfect sense as per naming conventions. It's second nature to use a comma, not brackets, which I myself sometimes confuse when wiki-linking and seeing so many together ))]]. I agree entirely with Xtra in that Victoria is its own jurisdiction and not just a place within a country however I still feel strongly in favour of moving to the comma-delimited format. -- Longhair 23:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that Georgia (U.S. state) is not at Georgia (United States) because that title would fail to disambiguate between the state and the historic province. As such, I don't see a compelling reason to follow their example.
I'm also not sure I understand the "Victoria is a jurisdiction" argument. I accept the point that Victoria is a jurisdiction and Bendigo is not, but I don't see how that fact implies that it is okay to locate the article on Bendigo at Bendigo, Victoria but not to locate the article on Victoria at Victoria, Australia. Snottygobble 02:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it's Victoria, Australia or Victoria (Australia) or Victoria (Australian state), please document the final decision it at WP:ACAT and the way the consensus was reached so we can easily point people to it later. — Donama 01:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whichever name is chosen/kept, there's a big job to correct all the links—there are over 3000 links to Victoria (Australia). Personally, I don't think any of these names should be used very often without a piped link - they rarely look like natural English. I think that towns are the only things routinely disambiguated with a comma rather than parentheses providing the context. I think the current form is best - i found this quote in Naming conventions (places): For place names, the use of simple parenthetical terms such as "(district)", "(province)", "(town)", or "(village)", instead of administrive divisions, is deprecated (not recommended). so I believe that (Australia) in parentheses is the simplest and best. --Scott Davis Talk 02:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that its better to write (Australia) than (Australian state) because its obvious that if its the Australian victoria than it means the state. Its seems unusual to say "Victoria, Australia" in Australia, so it looks better to have it as Victoria (Australia). Also with the comma it makes it look like they all should have the same system (Tasmania, Australia), whereas the brackets look like its something that needs disambguating --Astrokey44 06:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should get someone to run a bot correcting links when a decision on the chosen name is arrived at. Harro5 07:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Harro ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 07:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support Victoria, Australia (comma seems to work well for the US) over Victoria (Australia) but definitely not just plain Victoria. pfctdayelise (translate?) 16:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Dictionary of Biography Online

For those interested in writing bios for Australian people deceased before 1980, The Australian Dictionary of Biography appears to be up and running. Don't counfuse this ANU site, with the public domain Percival Steel book hosted by Project Gutenberg, normal copyright restrictions apply to the text. --Peta 06:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been waiting for this to come online for ages, but now that it has I find myself a bit disappointed. The articles are short, and many were written in the 60s. Still, I suppose it will provide a good starting point for research into articles as-yet-unwritten. Snottygobble 06:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's down at the moment, so I'll have to have a look later. It could be quite a useful resource for tracking down people who should really have articles but don't. Rebecca 04:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History details

Does anyone know a a good place to find the dates of foundation for Australian cities and towns?--Peta 05:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The book Australians: Events and Places published by Fairfax, Syme & Weldon Associates in 1987, has a gazeteer including key historical dates for all cities and many towns. It isn't online though.--A Y Arktos\talk 08:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Islands of Australia

For those interested, have a look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Islands_of_Australia catagories.

I have attempted to map and enter every island from Townsville up to and including all islands of the Torres Strait. Included in each entry is the traditional name as per Geoscience Australia website and coordinates with links to Maps and aerial photos; 

         o WikiSatellite view at WikiMapia
         o Street maps from Google Maps or Street Directory or MSN Maps or Multimap.
         o Satellite photos from Google Maps and Terraserver.

Where a traditional name is used, I have created a seperate entry with a redirect to the main entry.

I envisage a template for Islands may be needed and the catagory probably needs resorting. Most islands are Qld geo stubs.

If you know anything about Marine Parks, Protected areas, Aboriginal language and tribal names, WW2 military history, protected species, Torres Strait islands, Shipwrecks, case law etc.. Please assist to contribute to these stubs/articles.

Peter --Phenss 09:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Macarthur

As I am getting in a revert war with two enthusiastic non-Australian admins on her, who have twice speedily deleted her a s non-notable?!? - anybody else like to take a look at Elizabeth Macarthur, Second Fleet (Australia), Camden Park, New South Wales and John Macarthur (wool pioneer)?--A Y Arktos\talk 04:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way should I have gone through DRV to recreate? I was not the original creator of the article.--A Y Arktos\talk 04:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She may be notable, but the article doesn't really give any clues on why. Seems her husband was though. I assume she took over whilst her husband was in exile, giving her the claim to fame that his hard work was just as much hers as well? -- Longhair 04:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just merge any info about her into John Macarthur's article and redirect. Harro5 05:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked through the articles as well, and I don't see any individual notability. Group notability (founding uh... group) or notbaility by association (with husband) is better dealt elsewhere. Either she was the subject of individual scholarly works, etc., or she doesn't deserve an article. And yes, of course you should have gone through DRV. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, when her husband John was in Sydney running the Rum Rebellion and subsequently in exile in England, Elizabeth ran the farm (Elizabeth Farm), single-handedly developing the merino stock (the only one in Australia) and running the rest of the property, which also was a succssful wheat farm. John came back and took the credit when it became successful. There are certain circles who think that John should be stripped of his title as the "father" of the Australian wool industry, and that the crown should instead be handed to Elizabeth. The article is poorly worded at the moment, but she is definitely notable and after exams I'd be happy to come back and expand it. --bainer (talk) 06:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I say keep the article, per AYArktos. Rebecca 06:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mining in Australia is new ACOTF

Australian Football Hall of Fame was Australian collaboration for the last fortnight.

Mining in Australia has now been selected. Please try to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 13:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move: Dreamtime (mythology) → Tjukurpa

There is a requested move listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves that proposes the move Dreamtime (mythology) → Tjukurpa. To contribute to the discussion related to this move see Talk:Dreamtime (mythology). Regards, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article looks very bare. I was going to give it a shot and attempt an expansion, then realised Australian related categories may already be doing the intended role this article attempts to perform. What do other editors think? Does this page serve any useful purpose? -- Longhair 07:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having started a wikipedia from scratch, it reminds of the lists one has when starting out, serving as a useful reminder of what needs to be written about etc., but invariably with time they become out of date when compared to the relevant categories and consequently become redundant. A relevant question: is a user of wikipedia as likely to look up Australian-related topics using this list as the myriad of Australian-related categories? If the answer is yes (and I really don't know one way or the other), then a case in favour might be arguable. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 07:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could serve a useful purpose if set up properly - IIRC, the Irish one was a really good example, as a means of giving a good overview of major national topics. That said, it is a lot of work, and now that categories are so prominent I'm not sure about it. Rebecca 08:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could probably complement the categories (and Portal:Australia) nicely, if it were set up properly. A flat list can be organised in any way we see fit. For example, it could list a handful of the really important topics in each of the main categories (the ones that are listed at the top of the portal: culture, economy, geography, government, history, law, nature, people, politics, society) which basically correspond to the sections on the main article Australia. It could also link to important subcategories. The one avdantage lists have over categories in this context is the possibilities for being able to point out which articles are really important. --bainer (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't see the point when categories perform a similar function dynamically. It is likely to always be out of date. --A Y Arktos\talk 09:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • It isn't intending to be a complete list, only a list of the most important topics, all of which we probably have articles on by now, so I don't know that it being out of date is an issue. Whether someone can be bothered putting it together, however, is another matter entirely. Rebecca 09:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If somebody does get around to over-hauling the list, it would be appreciated if they could also fix up Template:Australian Topics and Portal:Australia/Topics.--cj | talk 08:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Nalliah

Editing between me and Rebecca at Danny Nalliah has been less than harmonious. Would anyone be interested in giving a third opinion on my recent edits? Thanks, Andjam 11:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have removed the sentence in the intro about conservative and inflammatory remarks as they have NPOV problems and specified that the religious vilification case was in relation to Muslims. Capitalistroadster 03:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Australians I've never heard of before?

[3] [4] are both from an anon that has a history of vandalism, and google doesn't seem to know anything about either of these people. So if someone here can confirm that either exists, I'd appreciate it. If I'm incorrect, please revert my reversions. Thanks. JoshuaZ 04:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it is a joke then. I've never heard of them. Having said that, I don't know anything about speedway racing, only F1, but it is hardly in the news anyway. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neither have I, but then I wouldn't really be that aware of motorcycle racing greats. Definitely the second one is false. — Donama 04:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Luke Bowell is not an Australian billionaire and a search of Australia and New Zealand media over the past few years comes up with no-one of this name. There are two references to a Matt Priest - one in relation to a New Zealand constable reporting the death of an Australian climber and the other about the drummer of English band Dodgy. The second article was titled "Nothing Dodgy about these lads". The same cannot be said of these edits. Capitalistroadster 08:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Capitalistroadster 07:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm trying to collect about 10 FP or FP-like pictures suitable for bundling together as a themed "computer wallpaper pack". I want to get 10 Australian ones so I'm looking for suggestions here. Some requirements: made by a Wikimedian, no people (just to totally avoid any legal dramas), high res, landscape layout, suitable kinda desktop background feel (shouldn't be too busy, maybe, or too much contrast), good ID information (location/species) and of course they should be fairly evocative of Australia somehow. Because of the wallpaper thing I don't think panoramas work very well, unfortunately.

Something like these would be good...

Some more iconic animals would be good, there are a couple of featured koalas but they are not quite wallpaper material to my mind. A beach, the outback... it doesn't have to be like Uluru and the Great Ocean Road, we all know there are beautiful places everywhere that have an Australian feel even if they're not on so many postcards.

Let me know if you can think of any others. Remember they don't have to be featured! Just feature material. pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great idea. Two good places to look would be Category:Wikipedia featured desktop backgrounds and Fir0002's contributions (a great photographer from Victoria). Are there any other good Australian photograpers on Wikipedia? Category:Wikipedian photographers is fairly empty. Two possibilities:
Angela. 17:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely, check out Fir002's photographic contributions. One that sprung to mind above. — Donama 22:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want some Australian wildlife, here are my three featured pics:

They are not all the ratio as is required for a wallpaper, but I have used all three, it just takes some manipulation. Here is one of Fir's that I really like.

Melbourne Meetup
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Anniversary/On this day section PROPOSAL for Portal:Australia

I've started a set of subpages at Portal:Australia/Anniversaries, which has a subpage for every day of the year, so that notable events and anniversaries in Australian history can be considered. Hopefully, if approved by the community for inclusion on the portal page, it would not be hard to maintain, as a glance at the code of Portal:Germany, shows that there is an automated device so that the reference to the relevant day's subpage will automatically update itself at 0:00 every day, rather than needing a user to switch the link every day. I've stuck a few random notable events in there just off the top of my head, etc. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 02:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's remarkably addictive. I added a few, including some obvious ones for Jan 1 and 26 :P. What about famous/important people's births and deaths? pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, notable births, deaths, elections, disasters, wars, whatever, everything.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is this to populate some Australian-flavoured "On this day" column? I appreciate that you've made a lot of effort here, but just thinking about what this is really doing and it could be used in the future... Would a better way to go about this be to use a category like [[Category:Australian anniversary|1836-12-28 South Australia founded]] and add it to the South Australia article and any other relevant article as needed? Or [[Category:Australian notable date|2006-03-18 South Australian legislative election, 2006]] (which is perhaps closer to what you're doing.
Also note: the notable Australian births and deaths is really just going to be a subset (or perhaps the full set) of the intersection of Category:Australian people with each of the Category:xxxx births and Category:xxxx deaths categories. Because I can express it mathematically that should be able to be automated for our calendar. — Donama 04:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's by calendar day, and I don't think that there is category for births by day, which would have been easier if someone just scrolled over with popups to see what the nationality was in the lead sentence. It hasn't taken much work yet, I simply cut and pasted the framework from Portal:Germany and used "Find and Replace" to substitute Australia everywhere, so it only took about 20 minutes! Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah good point. We probably should have categories on the day of the year for births and deaths for just this kind of purpose. — Donama 05:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Astute

Just started an article on the Operation Astute deployment to East Timor. Perhaps it could be used to cover the unrest there in general, given there isn't actually an article for it.--cj | talk 13:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of it on the defence website. This is breaking news though - the operation was only named two or three hours ago.--cj | talk 14:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that there have been talks over the last day or two about a multinational deployment, but since the violence escalated today, Australia sent in troops in advance of the formal invitation/agreement as to the rules of engagement. Once the agreement is hammered out (probably overnight) then the other nations will deploy their forces. The talks have involved the local UN people so it may be another blue beret job. --bainer (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • As of last night, the East Timorese Government had not approved rules of engagement, but the situation there was deteriorating so badly that the government deemed it appropriate to send forces there. Capitalistroadster 19:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide meetup

For those of you in Adelaide or planning to be over the next few months, there appears to be interest in having a meeting of Adelaide Wikipedians, after the style of the Melbourne and Sydney meetups. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide or add it to your watch list to get involved in this discussion. So far just 6 Adelaide Wikipedians have added their voices to the discussion there, but I sense there may be several more to speak up from Adelaide! Cheers — Donama 05:47, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently trying to get Cane Toad to featured article status (it is in peer review here if you would like to contribute), and I need to expand the popular culture section. So if you can think of any cultural references of the Cane Toad, could you please add it to the article. Thanks --liquidGhoul 14:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Australia state or territory

I've taken the liberty of doing some reformatting within Template:Australia state or territory. Hope you all don't mind. The main point is to make everything that looks like a row actually be a row, but while I was there I made it a bit narrower. -- Rick Block (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rick. The format was just an altered version of whatever Infobox Country was like a year or so ago.--cj | talk 08:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Young Australian of the Year Recipients

As yet, there is no article describing the award for Young Australian of the Year. All that is available is a list of recipients dating to 1979. Recently, I have added succession boxes for award recipients from 1999 to 2006. It is my intention to include:

  • An entry for each recipient
  • A concise article regarding "Young Australian of the Year"

I have also added names of recent recipients to the People of Australia "To Do list". Any contributions to these articles would be appreciated. --bernie_bernbaum12:51, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian of the Year describes the Young Australian of the Year award and the Senior Australian of the Year award. I think that is adequate. It is still a short article and can be extended. I agree that recipiants should have articles. --Bduke 03:07, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Timor

Coverage of this was spread around a whole bunch of articles, so I've consolidated everything on the crisis at 2006 East Timor crisis. Operation Astute (mentioned a couple of sections above) should probably still be expanded as the main article about the military details of the deployment, but other information should probably go into the new article. --bainer (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested photographs in Australia

Categories for requested photographs in Australia have crept somewhat and almost duplicated the efforts at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images. I was thinking along the lines of merging and doing away with the todo list and using the categories to centralise the requests? The Requested photographs in Australia category is automatically populated by placing a {{reqphotoin|Australia}} notice on an article talk page. Any further ideas or objections to using a system such as this? -- Longhair 21:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I support the use of tags on talk pages and automatic categorisation. Clarification of the requirement can be done on the article's talk page. Calling for the assistance of other editors for a particular project can always be done through this noticeboard or one of the other project notice board discussion pages.--A Y Arktos\talk 23:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The requested photos categories seem to be working really well. If not already done, then the contents of Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images should be categorised into the requested photos cat tree. The list can be removed, thus freeing up space in this page's header for other requests. Snottygobble 05:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There should be a centralised page for photo requests in Australia, separated under regional headings (South Australia, Adelaide, etc). Its an excellent idea. michael talk 05:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've created city based request categories for the major cities. I didn't see the sense in Sydney based Wikipedians looking through Tasmanian photo opportunities, unless they really wanted to. -- Longhair 06:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Every request listed at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Request for images now has an appropriate talk page template added, listing them all within the relevant national categories. Any ideas on what to do now with the redundant page? -- Longhair 06:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...even those articles which already have images ;) Dysprosia 08:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Martin (professor)

While looking for Brian Ross Martin, I came across Brian Martin (professor). It's an article about an associate professor at the University of Wollongong who is anti-war. In its current state, it reads almost like a vanity article advertising rather than describing Brian's POV. Googling reveals that he has been mentioned in overseas unis and has sometimes appeared on the ABC. Should the article be cleaned up, or deleted as pacifismcruft? Andjam 12:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's worth keeping, if cleaned up. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Might qualify under one or two criteria under Notability (academics). The article in its present form doesn't really provide enough information to judge. Gimboid13 10:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cane Toad call

If someone lives in an area infested with Cane Toads, and has the appropriate equipment, could you please record the Cane Toad's mating call. It isn't required quickly, it would just accompany the article really well. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 06:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Liberals

Would it be worthwhile having an article about the proposed merger between the Liberal Party and the National Party in Queensland or is it too early as yet? It is getting a lot of media attention. Capitalistroadster 13:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The media attention should fade within a week - this has been proposed many times before. michael talk 14:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It might be worthwhile from an historical point of view. The rhetoric for this proposal was un-usually strong – a "committment" to merge was stated.--cj | talk 07:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it wouldn't hurt - it would be interesting for the historical record, for the reason CJ points out. Rebecca 10:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Coalition (Australia) would probably be a better place to write about it. Andjam 03:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think its worthy of any attention. Just the tiniest blip of the political radar. michael talk 03:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria

User:Strum that guitar has taken it upon themselves to move without discussion Victoria to Victoria (disambiguation) and to cut-and-paste Victoria (Australia) to Victoria. I have reverted cut-and-paste action, and am about to move Victoria (disambiguation) back to Victoria. Once the previous order is restored, I think we should discuss whether or not Victoria (Australia) would be more appropriately named simply Victoria.--cj | talk 09:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think every one of us would prefer the simple article title "Victoria", but there are too many notable "Victoria"s for ours to deserve that spot. That would have been the rationale when this was originally decided and I think it still stands. — Donama 11:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Donama. In Canada, it means Victoria, British Columbia, in Hong Kong it's Victoria City and in the UK it may mean Victoria of the United Kingdom, after whom most others were named. Thanks cj for undoing the changes. --Scott Davis Talk 15:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing Victoria, Australia is a heavily used redirect, and a move from Victoria (Australia) to the former is required. A great deal of articles linking to Victoria (Australia) end up there via a redirect from Victoria, Australia. When editing new Victorian articles, most don't usually think to include the brackets and create links to the redirect of Victoria, Australia. These articles are then fixed at a later date by an experienced editor who adjusts the link directly to the actual article. Why don't we just move the page? For readability, a lot of articles refer directly to Victoria, Australia rather than Victoria (Australia).
I found examples in the first three articles I checked where the text reads V, A but links to V (A),
-- Longhair 21:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support the move proposed by Longhair, though there will be a lot of fixing of double redirects. I had fixed the Moliagul redirect independently this morning (a propos of gold rush editing). It is easier to type one comma rather than two brackets and it is more intuive and in line with Australian place naming convention generally. A Y Arktos\talk 22:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the job of fixing redirects would be suited nicely to a bot if anyone operates one capable of doing so. -- Longhair 22:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Victoria has to be a dissambiguation page as there is no one Victoria that without doubt stands above the rest, so well done cj for a swiftly cleaning this one up. Now in regards to move, I actually suggested this move back in August last year, and was correctly pointed out by Xtra that Victoria is its own jurisdiction and not just a place within a country (see here) and that the "(Australia)" is to dissambiguate it from other places, people, things etc called Victoria. However, I would like to support to move that Randwicked suggested (also back in August) that we move the page to Victoria (Australian state) similar to Georgia (U.S. state), because, as rightly stated by Randwicked, in its current form it suggests this Victoria is type of Australia rather than a state within Australia. -- Ianblair23 (talk) 23:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not support the move to Victoria (Australian state). I do not accept the rationale that because it is a jurisdiction it shoudl be indicated by brackets rather than a comma. Over 1000 items link to Victoria, Australia, the policy on naming conventions at Naming conventions states "what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." Linking to the state of Victoria is made easy and second nature with the use of a comma, not "Australian State" in brackets. This is evidenced by continued usage of the urrently deprecated form.--A Y Arktos\talk 23:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I feel moving to Victoria (Australian state) is aiming for 'correctness', whereas the format of Victoria, Australia makes perfect sense as per naming conventions. It's second nature to use a comma, not brackets, which I myself sometimes confuse when wiki-linking and seeing so many together ))]]. I agree entirely with Xtra in that Victoria is its own jurisdiction and not just a place within a country however I still feel strongly in favour of moving to the comma-delimited format. -- Longhair 23:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect that Georgia (U.S. state) is not at Georgia (United States) because that title would fail to disambiguate between the state and the historic province. As such, I don't see a compelling reason to follow their example.
I'm also not sure I understand the "Victoria is a jurisdiction" argument. I accept the point that Victoria is a jurisdiction and Bendigo is not, but I don't see how that fact implies that it is okay to locate the article on Bendigo at Bendigo, Victoria but not to locate the article on Victoria at Victoria, Australia. Snottygobble 02:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it's Victoria, Australia or Victoria (Australia) or Victoria (Australian state), please document the final decision it at WP:ACAT and the way the consensus was reached so we can easily point people to it later. — Donama 01:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whichever name is chosen/kept, there's a big job to correct all the links—there are over 3000 links to Victoria (Australia). Personally, I don't think any of these names should be used very often without a piped link - they rarely look like natural English. I think that towns are the only things routinely disambiguated with a comma rather than parentheses providing the context. I think the current form is best - i found this quote in Naming conventions (places): For place names, the use of simple parenthetical terms such as "(district)", "(province)", "(town)", or "(village)", instead of administrive divisions, is deprecated (not recommended). so I believe that (Australia) in parentheses is the simplest and best. --Scott Davis Talk 02:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that its better to write (Australia) than (Australian state) because its obvious that if its the Australian victoria than it means the state. Its seems unusual to say "Victoria, Australia" in Australia, so it looks better to have it as Victoria (Australia). Also with the comma it makes it look like they all should have the same system (Tasmania, Australia), whereas the brackets look like its something that needs disambguating --Astrokey44 06:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should get someone to run a bot correcting links when a decision on the chosen name is arrived at. Harro5 07:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Harro ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 07:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I support Victoria, Australia (comma seems to work well for the US) over Victoria (Australia) but definitely not just plain Victoria. pfctdayelise (translate?) 16:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Dictionary of Biography Online

For those interested in writing bios for Australian people deceased before 1980, The Australian Dictionary of Biography appears to be up and running. Don't counfuse this ANU site, with the public domain Percival Steel book hosted by Project Gutenberg, normal copyright restrictions apply to the text. --Peta 06:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been waiting for this to come online for ages, but now that it has I find myself a bit disappointed. The articles are short, and many were written in the 60s. Still, I suppose it will provide a good starting point for research into articles as-yet-unwritten. Snottygobble 06:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's down at the moment, so I'll have to have a look later. It could be quite a useful resource for tracking down people who should really have articles but don't. Rebecca 04:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History details

Does anyone know a a good place to find the dates of foundation for Australian cities and towns?--Peta 05:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The book Australians: Events and Places published by Fairfax, Syme & Weldon Associates in 1987, has a gazeteer including key historical dates for all cities and many towns. It isn't online though.--A Y Arktos\talk 08:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Islands of Australia

For those interested, have a look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Islands_of_Australia catagories.

I have attempted to map and enter every island from Townsville up to and including all islands of the Torres Strait. Included in each entry is the traditional name as per Geoscience Australia website and coordinates with links to Maps and aerial photos; 

         o WikiSatellite view at WikiMapia
         o Street maps from Google Maps or Street Directory or MSN Maps or Multimap.
         o Satellite photos from Google Maps and Terraserver.

Where a traditional name is used, I have created a seperate entry with a redirect to the main entry.

I envisage a template for Islands may be needed and the catagory probably needs resorting. Most islands are Qld geo stubs.

If you know anything about Marine Parks, Protected areas, Aboriginal language and tribal names, WW2 military history, protected species, Torres Strait islands, Shipwrecks, case law etc.. Please assist to contribute to these stubs/articles.

Peter --Phenss 09:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Macarthur

As I am getting in a revert war with two enthusiastic non-Australian admins on her, who have twice speedily deleted her a s non-notable?!? - anybody else like to take a look at Elizabeth Macarthur, Second Fleet (Australia), Camden Park, New South Wales and John Macarthur (wool pioneer)?--A Y Arktos\talk 04:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way should I have gone through DRV to recreate? I was not the original creator of the article.--A Y Arktos\talk 04:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She may be notable, but the article doesn't really give any clues on why. Seems her husband was though. I assume she took over whilst her husband was in exile, giving her the claim to fame that his hard work was just as much hers as well? -- Longhair 04:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just merge any info about her into John Macarthur's article and redirect. Harro5 05:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have looked through the articles as well, and I don't see any individual notability. Group notability (founding uh... group) or notbaility by association (with husband) is better dealt elsewhere. Either she was the subject of individual scholarly works, etc., or she doesn't deserve an article. And yes, of course you should have gone through DRV. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:39, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, when her husband John was in Sydney running the Rum Rebellion and subsequently in exile in England, Elizabeth ran the farm (Elizabeth Farm), single-handedly developing the merino stock (the only one in Australia) and running the rest of the property, which also was a succssful wheat farm. John came back and took the credit when it became successful. There are certain circles who think that John should be stripped of his title as the "father" of the Australian wool industry, and that the crown should instead be handed to Elizabeth. The article is poorly worded at the moment, but she is definitely notable and after exams I'd be happy to come back and expand it. --bainer (talk) 06:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I say keep the article, per AYArktos. Rebecca 06:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mining in Australia is new ACOTF

Australian Football Hall of Fame was Australian collaboration for the last fortnight.

Mining in Australia has now been selected. Please try to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 13:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move: Dreamtime (mythology) → Tjukurpa

There is a requested move listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves that proposes the move Dreamtime (mythology) → Tjukurpa. To contribute to the discussion related to this move see Talk:Dreamtime (mythology). Regards, User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article looks very bare. I was going to give it a shot and attempt an expansion, then realised Australian related categories may already be doing the intended role this article attempts to perform. What do other editors think? Does this page serve any useful purpose? -- Longhair 07:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having started a wikipedia from scratch, it reminds of the lists one has when starting out, serving as a useful reminder of what needs to be written about etc., but invariably with time they become out of date when compared to the relevant categories and consequently become redundant. A relevant question: is a user of wikipedia as likely to look up Australian-related topics using this list as the myriad of Australian-related categories? If the answer is yes (and I really don't know one way or the other), then a case in favour might be arguable. ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 07:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could serve a useful purpose if set up properly - IIRC, the Irish one was a really good example, as a means of giving a good overview of major national topics. That said, it is a lot of work, and now that categories are so prominent I'm not sure about it. Rebecca 08:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It could probably complement the categories (and Portal:Australia) nicely, if it were set up properly. A flat list can be organised in any way we see fit. For example, it could list a handful of the really important topics in each of the main categories (the ones that are listed at the top of the portal: culture, economy, geography, government, history, law, nature, people, politics, society) which basically correspond to the sections on the main article Australia. It could also link to important subcategories. The one avdantage lists have over categories in this context is the possibilities for being able to point out which articles are really important. --bainer (talk) 08:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't see the point when categories perform a similar function dynamically. It is likely to always be out of date. --A Y Arktos\talk 09:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • It isn't intending to be a complete list, only a list of the most important topics, all of which we probably have articles on by now, so I don't know that it being out of date is an issue. Whether someone can be bothered putting it together, however, is another matter entirely. Rebecca 09:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If somebody does get around to over-hauling the list, it would be appreciated if they could also fix up Template:Australian Topics and Portal:Australia/Topics.--cj | talk 08:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danny Nalliah

Editing between me and Rebecca at Danny Nalliah has been less than harmonious. Would anyone be interested in giving a third opinion on my recent edits? Thanks, Andjam 11:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have removed the sentence in the intro about conservative and inflammatory remarks as they have NPOV problems and specified that the religious vilification case was in relation to Muslims. Capitalistroadster 03:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Australians I've never heard of before?

[7] [8] are both from an anon that has a history of vandalism, and google doesn't seem to know anything about either of these people. So if someone here can confirm that either exists, I'd appreciate it. If I'm incorrect, please revert my reversions. Thanks. JoshuaZ 04:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it is a joke then. I've never heard of them. Having said that, I don't know anything about speedway racing, only F1, but it is hardly in the news anyway. Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neither have I, but then I wouldn't really be that aware of motorcycle racing greats. Definitely the second one is false. — Donama 04:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Luke Bowell is not an Australian billionaire and a search of Australia and New Zealand media over the past few years comes up with no-one of this name. There are two references to a Matt Priest - one in relation to a New Zealand constable reporting the death of an Australian climber and the other about the drummer of English band Dodgy. The second article was titled "Nothing Dodgy about these lads". The same cannot be said of these edits. Capitalistroadster 08:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Capitalistroadster 07:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm trying to collect about 10 FP or FP-like pictures suitable for bundling together as a themed "computer wallpaper pack". I want to get 10 Australian ones so I'm looking for suggestions here. Some requirements: made by a Wikimedian, no people (just to totally avoid any legal dramas), high res, landscape layout, suitable kinda desktop background feel (shouldn't be too busy, maybe, or too much contrast), good ID information (location/species) and of course they should be fairly evocative of Australia somehow. Because of the wallpaper thing I don't think panoramas work very well, unfortunately.

Something like these would be good...

Some more iconic animals would be good, there are a couple of featured koalas but they are not quite wallpaper material to my mind. A beach, the outback... it doesn't have to be like Uluru and the Great Ocean Road, we all know there are beautiful places everywhere that have an Australian feel even if they're not on so many postcards.

Let me know if you can think of any others. Remember they don't have to be featured! Just feature material. pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great idea. Two good places to look would be Category:Wikipedia featured desktop backgrounds and Fir0002's contributions (a great photographer from Victoria). Are there any other good Australian photograpers on Wikipedia? Category:Wikipedian photographers is fairly empty. Two possibilities:
Angela. 17:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely, check out Fir002's photographic contributions. One that sprung to mind above. — Donama 22:27, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want some Australian wildlife, here are my three featured pics:

They are not all the ratio as is required for a wallpaper, but I have used all three, it just takes some manipulation. Here is one of Fir's that I really like.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board&oldid=57626480"