Talk:List of power stations in Australia

Created page for a better organizing
Hello. I created this page only for the reason that so many articles of the same subject (List of power stations in Australia) are in existence. I wish all those articles could be merged into this... Regards. Rehman(+) 12:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * . Actually, on second thought, that looks like a bad idea. I have now rearranged it, probably it is better now. Regards. Rehman(+) 11:33, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merge (with wind farms)
Hello. Suggest we redirect the following pages as follows: The target pages already contains the information in the proposed redirect pages. Number-5 also duplicates all the info from 1 to 4. The reason for this proposal is that doing so will create a central point of concern, rather than an editor/reader accessing multiple pages to get the same info. Another reason for proposal is that only few wind farms exist in the relevant states, which goes well into the parent power stations page. Please do pop in your views. Regards. Rehman(+) 01:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: As per nomination. Rehman(+) 01:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose: These wind farm lists stand fine on their own, and don't need to be merged or redirected. Each country deserves its own "List of wind farms in [country]" article, and (where there are a lot of wind farms, such as in Australia) lists at the state level are fine too. If there was a need to somehow consolidate them (and I don't think there is) then the content should go into the respective "Wind power in xxxx" articles. A short summary list of operational (active) wind farms could be included in the "List of power stations in xxxx" articles; certainly no need for the full list of proposed and under construction wind farms there. Johnfos (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Well the thing is, due to the economics of wind power, only an handful of countries (say, 20) are actually able to build higher number of wind farms (India, US, etc). The rest sticks will a smaller number. So if we are to create lists (List of wind farms in xx), we would need to create nearly 200 of such lists (including already existing lists), and sometimes 200×2 for offshore ones, all with just a few entries. On top of all that, another user may also say "Each country deserves its own 'List of solar farms in [country]' article" (no offense, just example), thus creating a ton of more stub lists, (see types eligible). Although, i do agree for a separate list only if its too large to merge. Merging also helps in further expansion, etc (explained in nomination). Anyways, this is just a comment, lets wait for some time and see what other users think. Regards. Rehman(+) 01:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Let's not speculate about "solar farms" and "200x2" articles. Let's just deal with the wind farm articles you have listed above and the other "List of wind farms in xxxx" articles (such as List of wind farms in Canada and List of wind farms in Sweden) which have already been merged or moved. Wind farms are quite notable and countries like Australia, Canada and Sweden each need to have their own "List of wind farms..." articles. Johnfos (talk) 02:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment. Organizing the power stations' lists more systematic way is very good and timely idea. However, in some cases they will be a megasize-lists which is not so easy to navigate. If there are already existing and well-developed lists of power stations-by-type lists, I don't think we should necessarily to merge these lists. So, I think that most practical would be to decide on the case-by-case bases.Beagel (talk) 12:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment. I don't lean too strongly either way (separate lists or combined power station lists), but I think it would be better to focus first on creating and expanding the many needed (or still-stubby) articles about power stations of all types. We don't have Wind power in Japan yet, for example. Japan ranked 13th in the world for wind power in 2008. List of wind turbine manufacturers has many red links too. Wind farms and solar plants plants tend to be smaller than fossil and nuclear plants, so there can be many more of them, especially in the future as renewable energy expands. However, some parts of the world have poor wind resources and might never see any wind farms (the southeastern USA onshore region, for example). I don't know if that is an argument for or against combining their lists. One style of grouping will not satisfy everyone. What you really want is probably a Web site that specializes in presenting this data in different views, for example see Interactive Map of Renewable and Alternative Energy Projects in the UK. It would be great if we had those display options on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 00:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been moved here.

Proposed merge (with proposed power stations)
I suggest we move the data from List of proposed power stations in Australia to the relevant topic within the List of power stations in Australia article (this article). It would increase the chances of users being able find the information, and also the chances of further expansion. Regards. Rehman(+) 13:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: As per nomination. Rehman(+) 01:34, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Loy Yang the largest power station in Australia?
I want to challenge the statement that Loy Yang is largest power station in Australia. Yes they share the name, but Loy Yang A and B Power Stations are just geographically adjacent projects, nothing more. In keeping with this, I recommend that we split the Loy Yang into two separate articles.--Graham Proud (talk) 07:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)