User talk:Rangasyd/Archive 9

Stop immediately

Surname lists are not dab pages. Why the hell are you making mass edits without knowing that? —Xezbeth (talk) 13:31, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Please read MOS:DABNAME before editing any other name articles. In addition, human name disambiguations do not need the standard dab template, so I've reverted those too. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Xezbeth. Thanks for that. I was doing a cleanup of a long list of names from New Pages Feed and was not aware of the distinction between human name disambiguations and the standard dab template. Thanks for alerting me to my oversight. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

The NPP backlog at the end of the drive with the number of unreviewed articles by creation date. Red is older than 90 days, orange is between 90 and 30 days old, and green is younger than 30 days.

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Post-nom fomatting

Hi Rangasyd! Please have have a look at MOS:POSTNOM as some of your recent edits to post-nomnials have been going against the usually standard. For example, when small post-noms are used (which is when there are 3/4+ post-noms) then commas aren't used. On the other hand, if there are few post-noms, you can have them at 100% and separated by commas. It is also the case that in infoboxes the size is set to 100% (due to accessibility issues with the default small size combining with the built in small size of the honorific-prefix/suffix parameters) and commas are not used. You may have been getting your guidance from Template:Post-nominals, which didn't actually reflect MOS, so I have updated it. I hope this is clear but I've happy to go over it again if its not. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 20:00, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Gaia Octavia Agrippa: Thanks. Got it now. :-) 09:46, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Glad to help. One more issue though: the tiles Sir, Dame, Lord and Lady are a special case, as per MOS:HONOURIFIC. Some of your changes to Anthony Buzzard, 2nd Baronet where therefore incorrect: the article should be returned to Sir Anthony Buzzard, 2nd Baronet, "sir" is bolded with the rest of the name, and "sir" included in the name parameter of the infobox rather than the pre-nominals parameter. The tiles Sir, Dame, Lord and Lady are treated as if they are part of the persons name. I hope you don't mind me pointing you in the right direction, I'd rather do it this way than revert your edits and possibly have an argument via edit summaries. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 14:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I realised that just after I did the move. Doh! It needs to be moved back and I don't have permission to do so. Thanks again. 14:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

No worries, if you've got any questions I'm happy to help. It's let me move the page, its now back to how it was. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk 11:47, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Financial Ombudsman Service (Australia) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Financial Ombudsman Service (Australia). Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 09:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Mary O'Kane

I have removed content you added to the above article back in 2016. You stated that the source web page is released under a CC-by-SA 3.0 license, but it's not; it's actually released under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, which is not a compatible license. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa 🍁. Thanks for the correction and pick up. Gratefully appreciated. Rangasyd (talk) 13:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: St Mark's Church, Darling Point has been accepted

St Mark's Church, Darling Point, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Bkissin (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

New South Wales State Heritage Register - starting to work on an article generator

@The Drover's Wife: I've had to clear a backlog of other things I promised to do for various people, but I started work yesterday on generating articles from the NSW State Heritage Register by web-scraping. I started with the program I used for the Queensland Heritage Register and am progressively adapting it to the vagaries NSW SHR. As with so many things, all states of Australia appear to find it necessary to adopt delightfully different ways to do more-or-less the same thing, sigh! I picked a random heritage site, the Denison Bridge, to use as my initial test bunny. You can see the NSWHR entry for it here and my Wikipedia version of it in my sandbox. As it happens, there is already an article on that topic on Wikipedia called Denison Bridge, so this generated article will never "go live". Now there is a lot still NOT done on this generated article. At the moment, it is wikifying (adding wikilinks) using my Qld wikifier and my architectural elements wikifier. That is why you are not seeing many wikilinks and some of the ones you are seeing are wrong (e.g. George Street links to the one in Brisbane not the one in Sydney). You are seeing some architectural elements correctly wikilinking but even there we do have different architectural styles between the two states and hence there may need to be further development on the wikifier for architectural elements. I haven't yet included the significance statments by criteria but I do have the narrative preamble in place but it needs the last few sentences trimmed (Qld does not have a narrative preamble for significance). The template for NSW SHR citations isn't written yet but will be more-or-less identical with the Qld one -- the NSW SHR uses 2 identifiers (like the pre-2015 QHR did), one for the official registration number (which is just window dressing for our purposes) and one for the database entry number (which is used to construct the URL to the relevant webpage). I also need to construct the CC attribution template but again it will be similar to the Qld one but I will probably parameterise with the 2 numbers (which provides us with some future-proofing against database changes in the NSW SHR).

I am getting to the point of needing "many eyes" to compare what's on the NSW SHR website with what I am generating. Is there important information I am failing to include? Am I picking up rubbish that I could easily exclude/fix (if you read the first sentence of the lede, you see a good example of "garbage in, garbage out" which isn't something I can probably do too much about)? Since when has a bridge been a festival activity?! So I would appreciate any comments you have about this -- might be easier via email (as you can more easily include any screenshots to point out things) - I think you both have my email address (if not, ask).

I am not sure what to do about the citations as the NSW SHR uses parentheses for them (Barker, 1995, 34) but also uses parentheses for other purposes (1900-1920). The QHR mostly used [] for citations which made my life easier. As always with a generated article, a human has to go through and tidy up the things the generator could not figure out. In this case, no machine is likely to figure out what the obvious citation (HO and DUAP, 1996, 88) refers to -- there's nothing in their table of references that matches and indeed, even as a human, I have no idea what this might be refering to.

In this example, there are subheadings present in the History section. Now my generator is actually smart enough to guess these - it warns me when it executes when it sees very short paragraphs as these are often sub-headings. In this case, it said:

Warning: short para Aboriginal people and colonisation.
Warning: short para Bathurst:
Warning: short para Bridging the Macquarie River:
Warning: short para HISTORICAL NOTES ON KEY INDIVIDUALS

but missed what appears to be a subheading about "The Russell brothers and P. N. Russell and Co: " because it is presented as a run-in heading (these are almost impossible to distinguish from normal sentences). My experience is the generator is more likely to be right than wrong about sub-headings, so I might change the generator to emit the suspected subheadings. The human user can always restore them to normal paragraphs if it's the wrong call.

I have not worked out what to do about the images. I did them manually for the QHR using the Upload Wizard on Commons. There may be a better way but I don't know it. Anyhow, that's where I am at. Feedback welcome, indeed wanted. Note the version in the Sandbox may change as I go along so it may not reflect exactly what I write above. Kerry (talk) 22:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond and The Drover's Wife: Firstly, WOW! A huge thank you for putting in the time and effort on how to start this mammoth task. I started doing manual entries but realised that it was beyond the scope of possibility to achieve in a realistic timeframe. Secondly, I hear you about vagaries of each state register. The NSW SHR website repeats a lot of information and some information that is valuable is not included in the places where you would expect it. Thirdly, you chose a great subject to start with. I have walked, run, cycled and driven across the Denison and even swam under it when I was a lad. I knew Theo Barker (cited author) who was, prior to his passing, a local historian. I'm not sure that I have your email address. Although, I'm happy to exchange to facilitate productive discussion. HO = Heritage Office. DUAP = Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (now, Planning NSW). The template for NSW SHR is at {{cite NSW SHR}}; unless you're thinking of creating an {{infobox NSW SHR}}. Oh, a personal preference, I do prefer use of the relief map as much as possible. Rangasyd (talk) 08:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: oh wow, this is fantastic! Looking at the SHR article and your sandbox, it'd be good to have the condition information somewhere (though I figure probably hard to do with a bot if there's no infobox field). We might have to take the citations on a case-by-case basis: include the footnotes if we can work out what they mean (I was about to have a crack at tracking that one down and Rangasyd beat me to the punch) but if not just cite the SHR directly as is the case in many of the QHR ones IIRC. It seems like the SHR ones might need a bit more manual editing than the QHR did but that's manageable. Everything else looks good (apart from the obvious things you've highlighted). I very much look forward to seeing this get rolled out! The Drover's Wife (talk) 09:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me at the existing template, Rangasyd. So long as the infobox supports the relief map option (I have not checked), it is no problem to generate it. Yes, it is unrealistic to write all the NSW HR articles manually. I also started doing it manually for the QHR and realised I probably wouldn't get the job finished in a lifetime unless I found a better way to do it. While I should be able to get the generated articles a bit better than what you see so far (I have already implemented a couple of the items I previously mentioned e.g. detection of probable sub-headings, and I am actively working on the NSW Wikifier at the moment. TDW, there are lots of fields in the infobox that I didn't use in the QHR articles plus a few you can redefine to suit yourself. So things like the condition may be possible to include there (so long as they are short). Otherwise the condition can go into the body of the article in some suitable place (perhaps with a subheading). I guess my immediate question are what other information to include form the NSW HR web site. Just looking at Denison Bridge, I see the alternate addresses, owner, physical condition, modifications, themes, other heritage listings, which might be candidates for inclusion. I don't think the procedure/exemptions are worth including. Plus, there is the mysterious "further information" which might be worth including but not knowing exactly what one might find in such a field makes it hard to know where to put it in the final article. My immediate goal is to get Denison Bridge to the best we think we can do it to, and then I'll start generating other articles from the NSW HR (which may have different kinds/volumes of information which may make us re-think some decisions we already took). As a general principle, if I can put information from the NSW HR into the generated article, I probably should (it's easier for the human to delete something that isn't interesting than it is to include it). So I think I'd only exclude stuff that it's hard to imagine as ever being relevant to a Wikipedia article (like the procedures/exemptions). In the same vein, I can't see what I might usefully do with the "Type" field of the References. At the moment, I am generating cite-web templates if there is a URL present, or cite-book if there isn't. I have no idea what I would do with "tourism" vs "written" type. I am guessing that the NSW HR means "written" to be "reliable source" and "tourism" to mean "puffery" in Wikipedia-speak, but whether that's a basis for inclusion, I dunno. Kerry (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes Kerry, the {{Infobox building}}, {{Infobox bridge}}, {{Infobox dam}}, etc., supports relief maps and generally I've been using the NSW map for non-greater Sydney locations and the greater Sydney map for locations that fall within that map's scope. I use the parameter |map_type=Australia New South Wales; |map_relief=yes; etc. Please refer to Denison Bridge as an example; or Sydney Opera House as a variant where options exist to select map location in Sydney, in NSW, and in Australia. Also, I'm not too sure what you did with the QHR coords, yet is there an Australian MOS preference for decimal over dms coordinates? I'm an old skool person myself, so I prefer dms; but, if not already in place, we should gain consensus on which is used for all Australian geographic features. It's a bit hard to assess the "tourism" source, as the links are dead and my search of Bathurst Regional Council website yielded no tangible results for 'Denison'. The written sources appear, on face value, to be reliable. Rangasyd (talk) 03:41, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Relief map - done. Most of the weekend was spent on the NSW wikifier. The article in User:Kerry Raymond/sandbox is now using the NSW wikifier (instead of the Qld one) and the architectural elements wikifier (as before). It is doing an OK job at wikifying the article but there are a couple of errors, the link to John Russell is to an artist rather than to an engineer as you might expect (because there is no article for the mentioned engineer) and a mention of Berry Park is linking to the town Berry. Wikifying is an imperfect task. It is looking at stream of words comparing them against a set of article titles (or aliases for them) and trying to see what it can link. It works with "words"; it does not understand their meanings. Mostly the wikifier is working with proper names (of places, of people, of organisations). The "Berry" example is a typical example of what can go wrong, single words tend to get more wikilinking errors. The wikifier is case-sensitive so, it would not have wikilinked "They ate a berry pie" but it would cheerfully wikilink "Berry pies are served in the cafe" to the town of Berry article. There about about 45,000 articles in the NSW wikifier (but probably it won't link to most of them ever). As I say, the wikifier will always be inherently imperfect, *but* we can improve its performance by altering its rules. As I have it set up, it will wikilink to any exact article title match OR an alias. The current set of aliases are sort-of machine/hand generated. Any article disambiguated with ", New South Wales" or "(New South Wales)" can be matched against its undisambiguated name, e.g. "Berry, New South Wales" will link to that town as will plain "Berry". We can add articles and/or aliases to the wikifiers list (which was initially constructed from the set of all articles directly or indirectly in the Category New South Wales). This will cause it to wikilink more things (rightly or wrongly). If it is constantly adding a wikilink we don't want, we can take away the article or alias to stop that behaviour (e.g. we could remove Berry as an alias for that town). I had to stop "Howard" as an alias for the town of Howardin Queensland, because it seemed that almost every QHR article mentioned a man called Howard Something which was wrongly linked to the town. It was less work for me to add the wiklink manually when the word Howard really refers to the town than to remove it most of the time. So, as we progress with rolling out the NSW SHR articles, we can modify the wikifier if it seems to be frequently not linking something it should or frequently linking something it shouldn't. If problems occurs onlyoccasionally, we fix it by hand in the individual articles. The aim is to get the wikifier good enough to minimise human work of fixing it when it gets it wrong. I'll now try to add in some other material found in the NSW SHR entry, e.g. condition. Kerry (talk) 05:17, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm still chugging away with the generator (Easter, Commonwealth Games, and other things having delayed things a bit). As we speak, I am making the first attempt to generate an article for the approx 2000 NSW State Heritage Register entries; the generator is up to SHRNo 1908 as I write this. Now this is not saying the job is done, but (fingers crossed) it will be the first time the generator has been able to generate all the articles without hitting a fatal error (previous attempts found plenty of fatal errors, caused either by a bug in my code or my inadequate grasp of just how bizarre some of the contents of the NSW SHR entries actually is!). There are still some sections in the NSW SHR entries that I am not including into the article, but I think they should not be too difficult (famous last words). The harder problems remain the citations in the entries and the photos. I think I may be able to make some progress with the citations (at least for ones that use the common formats). Photos are likely to remain in the "too hard basket" (not all of them are covered by the CC-BY licensing due to being taken by 3rd parties). Kerry (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

However, one thing that has become apparent to me is that there seems to be some confusion between the New South Wales State Heritage Register (about 2000 sites) and the NSW heritage database which contains many thousands of entries including the State Heritage Register sites but also including many others, some of which are local government entries (or other organisations) and some of which appear to be heritage application/assessments since the entry does not list any heritage listing by any organisation. Glover cottages is an example of the problem. It is a City of Sydney local government heritage listing and not a State Heritage Register listing, but the infobox refers to the designation of New South Wales Heritage Register (which isn't well-defined), there is a citation using Template:Cite NSW SHR whose name and some (but not all) of the documentation suggests it is for State Heritage Register sites, and a Category:Houses listed on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (which is quite definitely incorrect). I think we need to unscramble this omelette. What I think we need to do is to rename the existing template to be something like Template:Cite NSW HD which enables us to cite anything in the NSW Heritage Database and does not imply any heritage listing (so slightly alter what the template emits and the documentation). Then create a new Template:Cite NSW SHR which is only used for State Heritage Register sites and includes the State Heritage Register number as a field (in addition to the the Heritage Database number). This template could include as part of it to automatically apply the category. I think we need to go back to the designation registration and replace the ill-defined New South Wales Heritage Register with the precise New South Wales State Heritage Register so the infobox box designation is precise. I suspect the reason that this confusion came about is because the NSW designation and template is copying from the Queensland equivalents. But in Queensland, the Qld Govt's heritage database only records state heritage listings. The local governments etc record their local heritage in various ways, but not in the state heritage database. Thus there is no need to distinguish between the Qld Heritage Register (and no need for the term Queensland State Heritage Register) and the Qld Heritage Database as the state database only contains the state register. This is not the case in NSW. So, I think we need to sort this out, as I need to know precisely what designation, what template and what category I generate for NSW State Heritage Register entries. At some later time, we could go back and created designations/templates/categories for the various NSW LGAs (and any other heritage registers) and tidy up the articles like Glover's Cottage that whose heritage register status is a bit misleading with the current template, but none of that affect my article generation so it's not on the critical path for me for generating NSW SHR articles. Kerry (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: Template:Cite NSW HD has been established! YAY!! Sorry for the delay. Also requested the addition of a new designation for items of non-NSWSHR significance at WikiProject Historic sites. The ball is rolling. Rangasyd (talk) 12:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Great! Now with Template:Cite NSW SHR, can you add an optional parameter for the SHR Number, which we don't currently have a way to output in the citation, e.g. 01665 for Denison Bridge. I think it has to be optional at this point because of any existing uses of the template. I imagine over time we can go through the existing uses of the Cite NSW SHR can be inspected and either have their SHR Number added or be converted to use the Cite NSW HD as appropriate. Once that's done, we could change the template to make SHR Number mandatory. Once I know what that new field is and where it goes in the template use, I can generate that. I still have to pull in my new "try to spot the person name" code into the generator (it's only in a test harness at the moment). But with both of these things done, I think we can then start the process of rolling out some articles and tweak the generator (including the wikifier) as we go. Getting close I think! Kerry (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Done. Yeah, but how do I make the optional identifier "appear" at Template:Cite NSW SHR and/or Template:Cite NSW SHR/doc? Rangasyd (talk) 14:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "appear", but generally with templates, if your changes to a template don't seem to be working, it often means you have to purge the template to force Wikipedia to use the new version of the template. I purged the template and changed the generator to produce an "hr" field and you can see the results at User:Kerry Raymond/sandbox for Elizabeth Farm (which is entry number 1, but as the NSW SHR presents it as 00001, I've been consistent with that. So if you want to use that article in the sandbox to do any fine-tuning of the template representation, go ahead but remember you will probably have to change the template, purge the template and then purge the sandbox to force it to re-render using the updated template. Maybe you won't need all those purges, but I find you need to purge a lot when tinkering with templates. Next step for me is to get the new and improve author detection code into the generator. Also I probably need to tinker with the CC-attribution template at the bottom of the article to be more consistent with the style it's cited, but that can wait until you say you are happy with the cite NSW SHR presentation and then I'll tinker with the CC-attribute template to be consistent with what you do. Kerry (talk) 06:45, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: Now something I haven't talked about until now (because I completely forgot about it) is the need to add lists of the various heritage places into their suburb/locality article. There are a number of benefits to doing this before rolling out the articles themselves. Firstly, it means that when you do create the articles, they will not be orphans (as they will always be linked from their suburb). Secondly, it will be the time to decide whether or not the titles for the article are suitable. Now the good news is that I have another generator to make these lists. The bad news is that, unless told otherwise, the generator assumes that the article title and the lede title (the bold thing in the first sentence) will be the same as the official name in the heritage register. Unfortunately many names in the heritage register are entirely unsuitable for Wikipedia articles. To illustrate this, take a look at the list generated for Millers Point (note, this is one of the worst ones -- most aren't so bad). As you will see, it is awash with problem names, e.g. simple names like Shop, Building, Terraces (many of which are repeated even in this suburb) which are too common to use as article titles. Also even when the names seem more reasonable like Lord Nelson Hotel, we discover to our horror that this existing article is for a hotel in Canada, so we have false positive names to disambiguate. We also have false negative names like Garrison Anglican Church Precinct which is a redlink but alas there is an article about that church already called Garrison Church (Sydney). So, what do we do about this mess? Well, for the too-common names, you need to read the NSW SHR entry and see if you can see anything more specific that might make a better article title. For the first Shops at 1, 3, 5, 7 Argyle Place, maybe you might call them Federation-era Shops, Millers Point or given the number of heritage entries called Shops in this suburb, you might need to all it Federation-era Shops, Argyle Place, Millers Point. If you can't think of anything to call them, the option of last resort is just to use the address "1, 3, 5, 7 Argyle Place" as an article (I reached that desperation point with the QLD Heritage Register a few times). For the false positives like Lord Nelson Hotel, the solution is the usual Wikipedia disambiguation, e.g. Lord Nelson Hotel, Millers Point or Lord Nelson Hotel, Sydney to disambiguate. For the false negatives like Garrison Anglican Church Precint, you need to read the suburb article for any links to things that might potentially be heritage listed. In this case the Millers Point, New South Wales article already mentions Garrison Church which resolve that one. This exercise will also reveal that the Fort Street School mentioned in the Millers Point article is linked to the wrong school (it's in Parramatta) and even when you find the Fort Street Public School (which is in Millers Point), it doesn't appear in our list of heritage properties. Further investigation reveals that it is not individually heritage listed but is in fact part of the listing Millers Point & Dawes Point Village Precinct. While all of this is somewhat painful, it is an important to know these things before you roll out the articles in that suburb. (And as I say, Millers Point is one of the worst suburbs for this example, most of the suburbs are pretty straightforward). If it is not obvious, the list of heritage places that I generate for each suburb is sorted alphabetically by street name, then street number, then article title. This works fine if the NSW SHR entry has a straightforward addresses like "5 Main Street, Smallville" but will break on some of the weird stuff they put in the street addresses. If there's some weird stuff in the street address, you may want to reorder that entry in the list into a more appropriate spot and/or reorganise the way the street address information is presented. Millers Point doesn't have weird addresses but something like "Turn left off Little Creek Road, Smallville", will think the street name is "Turn ..." and sort it accordingly. The generator assumes the first uppercase letter is the start of the street name and the first number found before that is assumed to be the street number, so "right turn at 12.3 km along Little Creek Road, Smallville" will sort as if it had said "12 Little Creek Road, Smallville". These assumptions mostly produce an acceptable result in practice, but like anything produced by a generator, may need some tweaking based on human interpretation of what was being said. I would strong encourage the list of heritage places to be rolled out before any actual articles as it helps finalise the article titles. Note, the generator is happy to be instructed as to a better article name and to a better lede name (they can be different), just tell me what changes you want after rolling out the lists. (Aside, the citations in these lists do not currently include the file numbers, this is just for speed in development/testing as extracting the file numbers involves a lot of extra webscraping which massively slows down my development cycle) but I can do final versions with the file numbers. Kerry (talk) 03:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense. What would you like from me? The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

One thing I'm not clear on looking at Millers Point - are these actually all separately listed? The house articles all seem to contain relatively little information and all mention that they're in the Millers Point Conservation Area. We probably could get a stub out of these reworking everything that's there, but there's going to be no real possibility for expansion on these nameless houses. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, they appear to be all separately listed in the NSW SHR, but I think your comment about the content being a bit thin is valid. It may be that merging them into a single Millers Point Conversation Area is the way to go. But my sense is that we may do better to start work initially on some of the not-so-heritage-rich LGAs where the roll-out of the listings will be much more straightforward and have our learning curve on them. If we leave the awful ones (and Millers Point seems to be a highpoint for problems) until later in the process, we will have built up a lot of experience before tackling them. My preferred sequence for the roll out is:

• roll out the heritage listings into the suburb/locality articles one LGA at a time, starting with the easier ones
• roll out the articles one LGA at a time, starting with the smaller ones

That approach let's us build up experience in ourselves and the tweaks needed in the generators, before moving into the heritage-rich areas in inner Sydney, Parramatta, etc. I was thinking in terms of everyone who is interested to be involved to be working on one LGA at a time (to avoid tripping over each other if we all just pick articles at random). I'll probably break up my spreadsheet that tracks work in progress into smaller spreadsheets, one per LGA, which I will give to the person doing that LGA. That way they can update the spreadsheet on any changes to article title, lede name, and various status fields (done nothing, uploaded as new article, existing article no action, merged with existing article, uploaded as 2nd article) and send that back to me from time to time, so that I can update the master spreadsheet so we know where we are at.

Aside, should we be moving this conversation to some more appropriate place, such as WikiProject Australia or WikiProject New South Wales, particularly if we hope to recruit more people. Kerry (talk) 06:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

This article has been moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian historic places for ongoing maintenance and input. Please do not add any further content to this article. With thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Royal Naval College, Osborne

On 29 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Royal Naval College, Osborne, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the spymaster and cricketer J. C. Masterman trained at the Royal Naval College, Osborne? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Royal Naval College, Osborne. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Royal Naval College, Osborne), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

• Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

• While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

• The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Michael Loch McGurk

FYI. Ron Mecich found guilty! Updated here. 220 of ^Borg 07:32, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

@220 of Borg: Thanks. Just some minor tweaks to lede and close. It's taken forever. Can't see why the first jury did not succeed! Should Ron Medich now get his own article, given links here and also at Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald? Rangasyd (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

'Tis done @ Ron Medich. Rangasyd (talk) 11:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Yay! But, it has already been 'vandalised'! See here
Maybe Michael Loch McGurk should now be moved to Murder of Michael McGurk? How notable was he 'outside' his murder? 220 of ^Borg 07:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree re McGurk. He was not notable before, unlike Donald McKay, John Newman (politician), etc. I will get to it later. His infobox should then be "event" and not "person". Rangasyd (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Further discussion to take place at Talk:Murder of Michael McGurk.

late night editing

I have looked close at the diffs - I didnt see the edit actually removed anything... JarrahTree 15:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

but hey - I have looked at diffs sometimes and they have tricks... JarrahTree 15:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Bed time for me. Thanks. Zzzzzzz. Rangasyd (talk) 15:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

safely - there's a jungle out there JarrahTree 15:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Never use a preposition to end a sentence with

Re this edit summary, there is absolutely no such rule in English. MaxBrowne (talk) 02:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi there MaxBrowne. You're correct, there is no rule in Modern English regarding the placement of prepositions at the end of sentences; and neither did I directly say that earlier edits were in contrevention of any rule. However, there is always the opportunity to improve both grammar and phrasing. I feel that my edit achieved that effect. If you feel otherwise, please let me know or feel free to constuctively edit. With warm regards and thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Disappearance of the Beaumont children

Hi. Thank you for your work on Roger East. Could you clean up and tighten up Disappearance of the Beaumont children, please? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 11:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin: Thanks. Done re Disappearance of the Beaumont children. 13:37, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

• WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

• Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

• A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

• There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

• Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

• The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

• Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
• The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

buckleys

no one goes there, it is very rough ground around it - and my aerial material from 2000 didnt catch it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lake_Beatrice&oldid=843010487 bit like a certain editor who put req phots on south west tas rocks out to sea... but you never know - but then buckley might be made a saint JarrahTree 07:32, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

You just never know. Some enthusiastic Hydro Tasmania worker or camper may have the pic we're looking for somewhere. I've not checked Flickr yet. I'm concentrating on improving content for all the Tassie lakes. Rangasyd (talk) 07:37, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

You are doing very well, if you dont mind me saying.

As for the Hydro - workers in the region - that is about 30 years late - the whole operation is one small computer room in the east. When I was wandering Lake Margaret are in 2006 - they were generally never there or part time, and it was down to less than what one might call less than skeleton presence. When I was doing my geological fieldwork assistant job on the south side of Sedgwick, youd never hear or see anything human in the whole valley in over a year, apart from the scintrex contracter illegaly burning plastic lined cabling near the old comstock mine . If there is a flickr shot of on the ground of beatrice, then I owe you either a coffee or beer in real life... I would not believe it - closer to saint buckley I'd say JarrahTree 07:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

We may have had this conversation some years ago, I was sure Bonzie maps had been blacklisted JarrahTree 09:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. We did have the conversation some years ago. I've not been able to locate any discussion re Bonzle being blacklisted. Please provide link to discussion of same. Many thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 14:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

There should be wikimedia made maps - or open street map - something ... JarrahTree 11:00, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Huh? Rangasyd (talk) 11:03, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

I would have thought that there is an open source style mapping system that has western tasmania covered, rather than just bonzie JarrahTree 12:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

buckleys cousin to boot

	The Tasmanian Barnstar of Merit
	for persisent improvement of Tamsnaian material
	this WikiAward was given to Rangasyd by JarrahTree on 00:24, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

considering how somnolent the old project is, the Tasmanian project wouldnt be the same without your efforts, thanks JarrahTree 00:24, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

• As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
• Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
• Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

North Head Quarantine Station

This could really use a good copyedit - it isn't really in the shape to be left as is. There's plenty of language like "A diagrammatic description of this curtilage, and the context of the Quarantine Station study area within North Head, is provided at Section 1 above. In order to allow description and analysis of this study curtilage, five precincts have been delineated within the study curtilage as follows: the Quarantine Station [core] Precinct the Park Hill Precinct the Spring Cove Precinct the Quarantine [South] Precinct, and the Marine Precinct" that...really isn't useful here in this form. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:20, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I hear you. Will get to it. It's a real mess. Perhaps one of the worst SHR articles. Rangasyd (talk) 12:20, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: Any further feedback... or come back to it later? Rangasyd (talk) 06:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

So, I think (at least at some point) we need to take a serious axe to the archaeological stuff. Unlike other articles, the entire conservation management plan has effectively been dumped into the SHR entry, so the weight given to archaeology is wildly out of whack with the importance of it for our purposes (making the whole article less useful to a casual reader). I think if there are two ways we could possibly deal with it: either create something like Archaeology and natural history of the North Head Quarantine Station or just savagely cut at it until it's in perspective: for example, it has five long paragraphs discussing the condition of the archaeological sites, whereas usually the SHR would deal with that in about five sentences. Doesn't necessarily need to be done now, but we'll definitely need to come back to it.

The alternate idea I've just had is that maybe we shouldn't use the SHR content at all here, but rather use the National Heritage List entry, which is vastly, vastly better written, still solid in depth - and is also the more important heritage listing in this case. If you were up for this, a simple fix might be to leave the history, cut nearly all of the description, and come back to it when Kerry's worked out a way to generate wikitext out of the AHDB. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: I like the concept of using the ANHL content; it's much more succinct. Do you know what the copyright status is of this content? I'm less in favour of regurginating the archeological NSW SHR content, because it's still not of great interest to the average Wikipedia user. Rangasyd (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

CC-BY 3.0, so absolutely usable for our purposes. It's rare that we don't have the ANHL at least fairly well covered, but I'd love to see us do the CHL as the next project after this one. The Drover's Wife (talk) 14:07, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree re the CHL. There's ~600 entries in the CHL, and some of those would already be covered by the NSWSHR and the QHR, so it would cut the numbers down a bit. Re WA, a user has entered using the National Trust register as the source, which is a non-statory register. The ANHL only has ~480 entries. Rangasyd (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Re Saumarez - plenty of SHR articles could do with some tightening of phrasing. I'll heavily edit/rewrite it where there are serious problems (and god knows I've done a few of those), but Saumarez was of pretty solid quality so not the highest priority. I use the SHR references - if someone wants to reformat them they're very welcome, but I've done enough fussing with reference formatting at uni for one lifetime - and I generally leave templates for people who are better than me with these things. The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:12, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Murder of Heather Rich

Hi. Can you give Murder of Heather Rich a look over for grammar, spelling, inconsistences etc.? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 16:28, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin: Reviewed. Rangasyd (talk) 07:45, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mobile Cook's Galley, Museum of the Riverina

Hello Rangasyd,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mobile Cook's Galley, Museum of the Riverina for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:08, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied to this bot. Please, STOP. See "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Moama Historic Precinct

Hello Rangasyd,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Moama Historic Precinct for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied to this bot. Please, STOP. See "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tooleybuc Bridge

Hello Rangasyd,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Tooleybuc Bridge for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:16, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied to this bot. Please, STOP. See "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 12:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Swan Hill-Murray River Road Bridge

Hello Rangasyd,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Swan Hill-Murray River Road Bridge for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:18, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Replied to this bot. Please, STOP. See "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 12:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Captain Thunderbolt sites

Not sure the merge of these into one article works - although that odd joint listing exists, they seem to be listed separately as well, and they're still four distinct sites even if relevant to one person. I've been working through the Ben Hall Sites (which the SHR has basically done the same with) by linking them all in the lead (e.g. Escort Rock, Cliefden, Mandurama). This also allows for better linkage with local articles than one big group article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 16:43, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

OK. I'll review and revert. I like the way they Ben Hall sites are linked in the lead. BTW, I was about to start Upper Lachlan Shire and I recall seeing a Ben Hall site in that LGA. Rangasyd (talk) 22:15, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Already did it last night - figured I'd just complete the set! The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:48, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Table issue

Hi there, when you have time, would you mind taking a look at the administration table you recently added to List of Griffith University people? It has several blank lines and missing dates that I can't quite figure out. Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jessicapierce: Hi there. I'm not too sure what you mean by "....missing dates I can't quite figure out." Based on the references, a review of GU website, and Google searches, I was unable to identify a clear line of succession of GU Chancellors. The first couple were clear and the most current is clear. But there are gaps in between that could be just one Chancellor, or could be two. Do you have access to alternate sources? Thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 05:18, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that makes perfect sense, thanks. I thought I was perhaps looking at a formatting error in the table - I didn't realize the available information itself is incomplete. Would you consider putting a hidden editorial note in the text at that spot, and/or starting a Talk page discussion, so that other editors could fill in the missing info, or at least be aware that that's the situation? Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 19:03, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Is this better? Rangasyd (talk) 19:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Convert order flip

Try not to WP:Units Dave Rave (talk) 10:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I take your point, yet note the last special consideration in that section (with my emphasis), as follows... "Special considerations: Where the article's primary units differ from the units given in the source, the {{convert}} template's |order=flip flag can be used; this causes the original unit to be shown as secondary in the article, and the converted unit to be shown as primary..." In other words, I'm only using |order=flip where the source has a non-metric unit (eg ft, and converting to metres). If the source had metres, there would be no need to do the flip. Thoughts? Rangasyd (talk) 11:04, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

if the source had meters I'd find an earlier source that correctly quoted the correct imperial figures, metric conversion is not accuracy. Dave Rave (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

But then you would possibly have an article that has a mix of primary imperial and primary metric units. As the articles are 'domiciled' in Australia, I've used metric as the primary unit and flipped all imperial units to make them secondary measures. I believe that this approach is within the context of using {{convert}} and maintains consistency. Rangasyd (talk) 12:58, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for your impressive work on Australian history S Philbrick(Talk) 14:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. ()

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

• New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
• Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
• Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

• Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

• The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

---

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Fernleigh

There should be no links to disambiguation pages, so now that you made Fernleigh a dab page, would you please follow up and fix all the incoming links? (Dabsolver is helpful.) Thanks. — Gorthian (talk) 06:23, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

@Gorthian: Thanks. Corrected! Rangasyd (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 21:52, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Murder of Kylie Maybury

Hi. Can you be a good person and look at Murder of Kylie Maybury to see if it needs any tweaks at all? If possible? Thank you. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 11:10, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin: Have a look now. Added some more content; tightened lede; tidied up references; added more references including a video of the sentencing by Justice Lasry; added some more sections for ease of reading; the order did not make sense re past criminal history of Davies, so placed it at end as only came to light once charges were laid and he was sentenced. Keith Moor seems a little bit too fixated on the case. Rangasyd (talk) 13:47, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Rangasyd, thank you profusely. I'm sorry i work so much on girls and women that have died (Bridgette Andersen might be worth a poofread/grammar check by you) or have disappeared (Sheila Fox), but someone has to care about them once they've become faded memories or chapters in true crime books. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 13:52, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin: No worries. Happy to help. I'd prefer to keep my focus on Australian articles, otherwise I loose focus. Trust you understand. Rangasyd (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wentworth Mausoleum

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wentworth Mausoleum requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5045532. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kleuske (talk) 16:41, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kleuske: Please, STOP. See Talk:Wentworth Mausoleum: "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 17:02, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wentworth Memorial Church

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wentworth Memorial Church requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5056283. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kleuske (talk) 16:54, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kleuske: Please, STOP. See Talk:Wentworth Memorial Church: "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Salisbury Court (Rose Bay)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Salisbury Court (Rose Bay) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5045223. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kleuske (talk) 16:55, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Kleuske: Please, STOP. See Talk:Salisbury Court (Rose Bay): "This page should not be speedily deleted because it's copyright has been duly acknowledged under the {{NSW-SHR-CC}} licence and, it is WP:NOTABLE due to its listing on the New South Wales State Heritage Register (NSW SHR). I draw readers attention to the project to generate articles for all items listed on the NSW SHR, of which this article is just one of several hundred in progress. On the basis of the above, the speedy deletion tag should be removed." Rangasyd (talk) 17:03, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Supreme Court of New South Wales

Thanks for adding the Supreme Court of NSW to the Category:Francis Greenway buildings. Unfortunately the current article makes no reference to the old Building designed by Greenway & the only image is of the concrete brutalist tower. In order for the category to be useful to readers you would need to add something about the Greenway building or at least a photo - there are a few to choose from at commons:Category:Supreme Court of New South Wales - I suspect the brick building on King St is the Greenway part and the connected building on Elizabeth St is the later Barnet addition, but I am not sure Find bruce (talk) 02:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes. it did require some work. Thanks for the pick up. Please visit Supreme Court buildings for a brief overview thus far. It still needs some more.... the Supreme Court's occupation of the Darlinghurst Courthouse is but one example. e.g. NSW SHR: The (Darlinghurst) courthouse has been associated with the provision of law and justice in New South Wales since its opening in 1844 and has served variously as a Supreme Court, District Court and High Court over its history. Rangasyd (talk) 11:55, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

*sob*

What does this mean for the other 149 divisions...? Can you please go over them? Timeshift (talk) 06:56, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Sydney meetup

There will be a meetup in Sydney on the 12 of September. More info at Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/September 2018. Bidgee (talk) 05:07, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Bathurst

I think these are all the heritage sites in Bathurst without any photos:

• Bathurst Showground
• Bentinck Street Elm Trees
• 67 and 71 Bentinck Street
• Georges Plains railway station
• 194, 196, 198, 200 and 202 Howick Street
• Macquarie River railway bridge, Bathurst
• Miss Traill's House
• Merembra Homestead
• Old Government Cottages (16 Stanley Street and 1 George Street)
• Raglan railway station, New South Wales

But also if you could get out there:

• Golden Gully and Archway
• Quartz Roasting Pits Complex
• Bridge over Turon River at Wallaby Rocks

Thanks again for doing this! The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. will try to get as many done as posssible. Rangasyd (talk) 03:25, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Not quite all. But a good stab at them.

pic update Dave Rave (talk) 09:20, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Rave: Thanks. It's a bit of a construction site at present due to the duplication of the track/passing loop. The house is currently unoccupied. Rangasyd (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

North Sydney Post Office

Nice page! Just a heads up that I've uploaded a couple of photos of the post office taken today. The first is almost identical to the current pic used but at least it's contemporary, if that helps?? Cabrils (talk) 00:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

@Cabrils: The images have been added to WP:Commons and can be located here. Cheers Rangasyd (talk) 11:36, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Rangasyd: Thank you! Cabrils (talk) 06:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Murders of Margaret and Seana Tapp

Sorry for troubling you, but can you give Murders of Margaret and Seana Tapp a look through, please. It's an Australian article so you should be OK. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 23:31, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin: Done. Didn't add any content; just revised layout. Added to my watch list so will come back to it later. Rangasyd (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

• The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

• There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

• A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

• Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
• If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
• Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
• The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
• The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget. In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions. MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues. User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page) User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50). User:Primefac/revdel.js(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you. User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link. User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion. User:Evad37/rater.js(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I used to

Dine out on the comment that the Sydney project was the most under-developed of the Australian city projects - now what with yours, Drovers wife and Kerry's hard work - I cannot any longer do that... well done!!! JarrahTree 10:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Paragon Cafe, Katoomba

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Paragon Cafe, Katoomba requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?ID=5051727. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Leschnei (talk) 13:47, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

New South Wales State Heritage Register

Hi Rangasyd, I noticed that you have been using New South Wales State Heritage Register as a source for many new articles. I wanted to point out that the material on this site is copyrighted and shouldn't be copied without permission. At least a few of the articles that you created have significant chunks of text that match the Heritage site verbatim, like Paragon Cafe, Katoomba. If you want your articles to 'stick', it would be wise to do some editing and re-phrasing. Leschnei (talk) 18:25, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Leschnei: Hi there. Thanks for your feedback. I draw your attention to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian historic places#New South Wales state heritage items - article generator where there is a broader discussion of copyright isssues and the project to list all items on the NSW SHR on Wikipedia. Happy to consider your views once you've digested the contemt in that link. Rangasyd (talk) 03:26, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry you're having to deal with yet another user who doesn't understand Wikipedia's copyright policies and tries to throw their weight around. I've requested the article's undeletion and warned Leschnei not to do it again. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:44, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Wish

Hello. Help copy edit, improvements, add archive link for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. 125.214.50.24 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:27, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/125.214.50.24 Sorry. I am unable to assist. This is outside my area of interest. Please sign your entries using 4 tildes. Rangasyd (talk) 11:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Missing reference in Jarvisfield, Picton

Hi Rangasyd and thanks for creating the Jarvisfield, Picton article. I've been trying to help with it a bit, but I'm a bit stuck with the citation error "Cite error: The named reference nswshr-305-738 was invoked but never defined" that appears on the page. There are five instances of the tag <ref name=nswshr-305-738/> but the article does not state what external source this name refers to. I've tried searching the web but cannot find a suitable target. Do you have details of the source you were trying to cite? — Hebrides (talk) 19:35, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Hebrides: Thanks. Yes, I needed to finished off a few matters and I quickly saved prior to fully reviewing. Thanks again; all fixed now. Rangasyd (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Links in headers

It's more than just your pet hate. It is contrary to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#General points on linking style (2nd bullet point). I realise you were talking about the Wallerawang power station, but if you do see links in headers in anything generated, do let me know. The generator has various rules about creating wikilinks and various rules about creating headers, but the generator knows not to create links in headers, but there's always a possibility I have overlooked some scenario that makes that occur. Keep us the great work on the NSW SHR! Well over half way now! Kerry (talk) 04:09, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you remove the auto generator that links to Today (Australian television program)? Today generally means just that, today and not tomorrow or yesterday. Rangasyd (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I have removed it from the wikifier. It will take a while to rebuild the articles though. I'll let you know when it's done. Kerry (talk) 00:59, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife:I have uploaded a bunch of new drafts to both of your Google Drive folders for the NSW SHR. These new drafts have plain old "Today" instead of the wikilink to Today (Australian television program). I am not sure if it will show you just the latest version of the draft or both versions (I see both versions but the documentation suggests you will only see the latest). But if you do see two drafts for a heritage site, then take the new one which will be dated 8 October. Kerry (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I've been leaving you to do a lot of this closing stretch - Hawkesbury as it turns out has been one of the most difficult yet, with over half of the (large!) number of articles needing serious work before being able to be included, and it's been easy to get distracted from it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:59, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Did the issue of multiple copies of the drafts eventually resolve for you? @The Drover's Wife: I have not replicated the process for Rangasyd until I know if it worked for you, for fear of making matters worse. Kerry (talk) 05:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Just checked, and no - still seeing three copies of each in the newly-shared one. Sorry it's taken a few days - in addition to Hawkesbury being painful, my house has been enthralled in a new PS4 game for a few days. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:24, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife and Rangasyd: OK, I have deleted your "article draft" folders on Google Drive and re-populated them, so hopefully you will see only one version of the files now. You will see fewer articles than before as I didn't regenerate articles noted in my master spreadsheet which have already been uploaded and hence you don't need any more. Note, that my master spreadsheet probably isn't completely up-to-date so you may still see some files that you know you have dealt with. Feel free to ignore them. Kerry (talk) 00:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Brilliant - all good. Thanks for all your effort on that one. The Drover's Wife (talk) 00:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

TDW, I always thought that Hawkesbury woulld be tough, given its heritage (pun intended). I will go over and review the articles for you, if you want. Well done for tackling....

Kerry, I was trying to work out why so many duplicates when doing Campbelltown. Now I understand why. So, not resolved. How do we work out what drafts are the most recent?

I think the only solution is to delete the draft article folder entirely and re-upload. I am in the middle of doing TDW's and will do yours next RS. Watch this space for announcement it is done. Kerry (talk) 23:42, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking re Sydney, to divide up into suburbs, eg The Rocks, Paddington, Surry Hills, Woolloomooloo, Millers Point, etc. And create a list for each suburb so that we can assign responsibillity and remove any duplication. I'm happy to do the suburb list, it that helps. 05:43, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I had basically the same idea for Sydney. I think we should do up a suburb list and divide it up as with the LGAs for every suburb except Sydney CBD (big and interesting) and Millers Point (big and a giant pain in the arse), and work out some other way to split those. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:24, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for doing up the table. What are your thoughts on the CBD, Millers Point and The Rocks? We'll probably whip through all the rest between us in a couple of days. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:57, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Ta. I've not had a look at the draft articles yet. I think that there will be lots of draft articles that we can merge in both Millers Point and The Rocks. In the Sydney CBD, it may be very different. We should try and group MP & The Rocks by street. I live in Sydney, not far from the CBD, so I can have a look at the articles and the subject properties and make a judgement call based on each article. BTW, did you remove the **See also** in the drafts? I just noticed that they were missing on a few as I finished off Leeton Shire. Rangasyd (talk) 05:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

That'd be helpful, I think - ta! Not sure what you mean about the see also - haven't removed anything in that par of the articles. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:36, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Might be a couple that "fell off". Not to worry. Rangasyd (talk) 05:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Any chance you could give me a hand with some of these last few Hawkesbury ones? Still finding it a big of a slog and I was so looking forward to doing Sydney. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Got through a few this evening. i did not complete the Excel/CSV file. Would you please update? Many thanks. Rangasyd (talk)|

eastern orthodoxy

is worse than finding youre in a dark shed not realising that youre standing in a box with rusty old detonators... I thought I had some parts worked out but at times the battlefield is such you gotta duck with flack jackets over all parts of the anatomy. JarrahTree 12:19, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Surely there is an heritage-listed Eastern Orthodox church in WA (or SA)? None listed in Wikipedia.... ? Yes, There are three or maybe four in Surry Hills / Paddington, Sydney, all within 2km of each other. Rangasyd (talk) 12:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

there is one greek orthodox close to the cbd - not sure if it is heritage listed - its adjacent to Russell Square, Perth - and i have photos of it somewhere on my old mac, but... JarrahTree 12:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Rangasyd, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Hawkesbury

Sorry I haven't been around much - about due for a good long wikibreak, but would also like to get this done. I think I might leave Hawkesbury and come back to it at the end - the problem is that the SHR text for the remaining entries I hadn't done was basically unusable, so probably shouldn't be directly copied - it's either copy/paste text about regional history that says nothing about the actual property or it needs serious editing to be put into actual reasonable prose. These properties really need text that's actually relevant from other state or federal listings to be used instead. But as I said, I might come back to it later just so we can get Sydney done.

I particularly want to do Darlinghurst/Kings Cross/Potts Point and Redfern, so I might get started on one of those today if that's okay with you. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:50, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Started on Potts Point for now - won't do the one listed as King's Cross because mashing their disorganised content with our article looks like a nightmare. The Drover's Wife (talk)`

@The Drover's Wife: All good. I understand and agree that some of the content was more focused on the history of the suburb/area as opposed to the history of the heritage-listed site. Perhaps someone at Hawkesbury City Council, that no doubt had input in the writing of the articles, could amend at some stage (I digress). Please feel free to start on the above suburbs and update the City of Sydney list here, and can you please contact me directly offline about these suburbs. Many thanks. Keep up the great work. Not long to go now.... Rangasyd (talk) 07:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I had a thought about The Rocks and Millers Point - how would you feel about putting up the suburb lists for both and then just picking them off one-by-one as we go? If the other large suburbs I've done has been anything to go, I suspect there's going to be quite a few with minimal/no information in the SHR where we'll have to raid the rest of the NSWHD to get useful content, and I'd like to make a start on trying to get decent articles on the named places before tackling the umpteen "House" and "Terrace" articles which'll probably be merger candidates. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:49, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Alternatively, considering the amount of necessary mergers, maybe we create the suburb lists in project-space, work from that, and move the final lists live once we've worked them out as we go? The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

I like the idea of a project space before we go live. Do you feel like doing Singleton LGA? You were doing other stuff in the Hunter and I thought there may be some synergy.... Rangasyd (talk) 06:26, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I hadn't realised there were still any that we hadn't done outside of Sydney - I'd skipped over Singleton because it's got a few dud articles. I'm about done with the Sydney-outside-of-the-CBD-Rocks-and-Millers-Point ones I'm interested in once I've moved through the last two I've claimed, so I might cycle back and do Singleton tomorrow and then start looking at The Rocks and Millers Point. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

And I'm reminded why I left Singleton until last - no less than six towns needing articles first. Eeesh. This might take a while! The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:26, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Just list them in the Singleton LGA article for the time being. If the towns are so important, someone can come back to the towns and add the heritage listings in the towns later. I've been adopting an approach from the outset of adding all heritage-listed sites to both the towns and the LGAs. Where there are no towns/settlements, they appear just in the LGAs. Rangasyd (talk) 10:41, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I really don't appreciate the comment here. You've left a lot of articles with absolutely garbled lead sentences and left content that really shouldn't have gone in without serious editing, and I've tried not to make a big deal out of in the interests of getting the project completed and just fixed it where I've seen it. This is the second time in a week you've left snarky comments about not editing in line with your particular stylistic preferences, and it really bugs me that you'll demand that I fuss over things like using templates to reformat text so that it looks slightly prettier or which particular map you prefer but won't edit even the most basic content so that it makes sense. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:29, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

No offence meant. If you have suggestions, please let me know. I'm happy to reconsider and try and edit better. Please feel free to send me some examples. Rangasyd (talk) 11:32, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay, sorry for reacting so strongly - it was unwarranted. I'm referring to things like this - there's no plausible reason for introducing a significant historic church as "former garage, storage area, graveyard" before one gets to the fact that it is actually a church. Having a field in a database noting that it once also had a garage or a storage area doesn't make these things significant to be in the lead sentence before what it actually is just because the wikigenerator throws all the fields in the draft lead sentence. Another example (though I purged all these a while back) was a bunch of places where the acknowledgment of indigenous pre-settlement history had led to a field of "Aboriginal community" being used, and so a whole bunch of random buildings were labelled as Aboriginal communities (and tipped into the NSW category). The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Apology accepted :-) Yeah. I agree. MY SLOPPING EDITING! On reviewing some of your edits I noticed that you put what it is now; followed by what it was after. That's a good call and I'm happy to revise. I'm a little like you, I think... I just want to get them done. It's a pity it was just the two of us and we didn't enlist more help. :-) Rangasyd (talk) 11:47, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For keeping on trucking with the New South Wales State Heritage Register rollout! Kerry (talk) 19:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Ownership of The Rocks

Just thought I'd point out that the ownership of basically every property in The Rocks is outdated because the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority has been gone for a couple of years. I've just been changing the links to government of New South Wales because I've found it difficult to make sense of where in the bureaucracy these cases have gone when we've come across them before (I never did definitively locate exactly where the properties whose ownership was listed in the SHR as "Land and Property Management Authority" actually went), but looking around this morning it seems it might be worth creating an article on the SHFA's replacement, Property NSW. Thoughts? The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:06, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that you'd put it back in to several articles - I'd taken it out because it doesn't exist anymore. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:30, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Also - same issue arises re: Millers Point public housing. Appears that it's not with the agency listed in the database, damned if I know where it is now. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:00, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Oh, really. Sorry about that. I didn't know that the SHFA was abolished (in September 2015). Doh! Property NSW is now responsible for all NSW government properties in The Rocks and surrounding areas. It is part of the Department of Finance, Services and Innovation (New South Wales). I'll create an article on Property NSW; and go back and correct my errors! Rangasyd (talk) 07:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch - will go through and change all of mine now. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:04, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Rangasyd,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

• Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

New South Wales SHR sub cats

Will you be removing the other categories too ? Dave Rave (talk) 22:22, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Yup. Unless you want to help? Rangasyd (talk) 06:30, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Rave: And so it is done! Would you please have look at Long's Lane Precinct and provide feedback? Many thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

I want to boldly go and undo everything you just did. Why remove the sub cats to help confuse the separate list of things into one huge list of things ? Dave Rave (talk) 17:43, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion of this topic is continued at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian historic places#WP:SUBCAT. Rangasyd (talk) 06:19, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rangasyd. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Duplicate of Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre

Hi Rangasyd. I'm mystified why you created a new page Cronulla Fisheries Centre when there was already a page titled Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre, created in 2012. I would argue that the information you have provided on your page is a subset of the the original page, and therefore should be merged into it. Regards. --Very trivial (talk) 08:00, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Very trivial: Thanks. A good pick up. I wasn't aware of the earlier article that seemed very focused around the political controversy to close the centre (18months - 2 years over its 110-year history); as opposed to the more broader implications of site in indigenous, Colonial and 20th-century history. My input came from a larger project that is drawing to a close to add every item of state significance on the New South Wales State Heritage Register into Wikipedia. As the heritage register had the title Cronulla Fisheries Centre as opposed to Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre, the auto-generator did not pick up the similarity. Anyway, now fixed. Your input into the revised page would be valued. Cheers. Thanks again for the heads up. :-) Rangasyd (talk) 09:28, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Both articles contained good information, so quite a complete article now exists. Thanks for your contribution - it is quite a lot of work to merge! Cheers. :-) --Very trivial (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Millers Point

Sorry to drop off and not be much use on most of The Rocks - had some stuff come up IRL which has limited my Wikipedia energy lately. I'm mostly back now - any chance you feel like working out names and potential mergers for the Millers Point ones? The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: I wondered why you dropped off. Not to worry. The Rocks are done. I've had a first pass at Millers Point here. So, let's go it! Rangasyd (talk) 12:23, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

I think I raised this a while ago, but in my opinion we really should take out the "owned by Department of Housing" bits entirely out of these articles - so many of these have been sold in the Liberals' public housing sales and it's so difficult to confirm exactly which ones (unless the press explicitly covered the sale of that particular property) that it's just better to leave it out I think. As one example - 84 Windmill St was sold in November 2017 after being passed in at auction in April 2017. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:31, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I also had a crack at sorting out the odd issue with Munn Street that you tagged - from a thorough Google but no local knowledge, as far as I can tell the warehouses (despite being alternatively known as the Munn Street warehouses) have a bunch of street frontages and may have a modern address in Hickson Road. However, since the local listing just refers to it as "Munn Street" without a number, I figured that was the easiest way to put it - I'm assuming the specific numbers in the SHR were not right given the overlap with the terraces down the road. Thought I'd raise it with you anyway given that you're the one with the local knowledge. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:17, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Sydney School of Arts building

Another one I'm not sure what to do with - I just started on Sydney School of Arts only to realise half-way through that we already have Sydney Mechanics' School of Arts. Normally I'd just split the building from the organisation, especially since they've relocated out of the building, but that article is well-researched and well-written and covers their old building in enough detail that I'm not sure there's a point in a separate article. Any thoughts? The Drover's Wife (talk) 21:52, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@The Drover's Wife: I recommend a seperate article on the building for two reasons:

1. The building they currently occupy is across the street. If there was a history of being in the same building, I can see an argument for the same article, but not when they sold the building and moved elsewhere; and
2. The existing article of Sydney Mechanics' School of Arts contains some good content that can be used in the article that I suggest be called Sydney School of Arts building.

There should also possibly by a redirect on Art House Hotel to Sydney School of Arts building. The Sydney Mechanics' School of Arts article should then primarily be focused on the organisation. Does all that make sense? Rangasyd (talk) 06:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I mean, I'm fine with the idea of that (it's what I was planning on doing before I noticed the detailed article), but I'm not keen on trying to disentangle the two. Don't suppose you're up for it? The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:20, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

OK. I'm working through Royal Botanic Garden, Sydney and The Domain, Sydney that are, rightly, two seperate articles in Wikipedia. However, they are listed as one article in the NSW SHR. And, given their importance, it's a huge mess in the NSW SHR. Once I finish that, I'll get to the Art House/School of Arts articles. Leave it with me. Rangasyd (talk) 08:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Brilliant - thanks! (And thanks for taking on RBG/TD too - those ones that are merged in the SHR but not here are a bastard to do.) The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:21, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Rangasyd,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

See also the list of top 100 reviewers.

Less good news, and an appeal for some help

The backlog is now approaching 5,000, and still rising. There are around 640 holders of the NPR flag, most of whom appear to be inactive. The 10% of the reviewers who do 90% of the work could do with some support especially as some of them are now taking a well deserved break.

Really good news - NPR wins the Community Wishlist Survey 2019

At #1 position, the Community Wishlist poll closed on 3 December with a resounding success for NPP, reminding the WMF and the volunteer communities just how critical NPP is to maintaining a clean encyclopedia and the need for improved tools to do it. A big 'thank you' to everyone who supported the NPP proposals. See the results.

Training video

Due to a number of changes having been made to the feed since this three-minute video was created, we have been asked by the WMF for feedback on the video with a view to getting it brought up to date to reflect the new features of the system. Please leave your comments here, particularly mentioning how helpful you find it for new reviewers.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:William Wardell has been nominated for discussion

Category:William Wardell, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

the season

trust it is a safe one for you and you are not subserviant to things that can be a problem in the festive season - whatever they may be... JarrahTree 09:26, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

strange one.... trust yours is joyous, merry and that you get to enjoy quality time with loved ones. Rangasyd (talk) 09:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

AFC submission:Your sandbox

I have moved your sandbox to template space under the appropriate title. From the next time please create the templates in template space itself. Regards. — fr ^❄ 10:08, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

@FR30799386: Thanks and noted. Rangasyd (talk) 10:36, 29 December 2018 (UTC)