Talk:Nobbys Head

Lighthouse information
I made some changes to the data in the lighthouse template which were reverted.
 * I had a typo in my first edit. The height is 32ft not 23. The number used to correct me was 10 m which is also incorrect. I hope the way I did it now is acceptable, these are the numbers from LoL.
 * The coordinates now used are in the sea, not at the exact position of the lighthouse. If this is taken from a chart or the LoL it is very common - they use inaccurate data. Common practice is to use a geolocating tool which I did. I did not revert this to avoid an edit war.

Also a note: I am going to split this to the light article which I am now creating. I hope there is no objection. --Muhandes (talk) 17:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I created Nobbys Head Light, moved the template there, and linked here. This was not done to avoid the discussion, but was originally planned. As far as I can tell the only things I changed, apart from cosmetic, were the coordinates, which as stated above I geolocated, and the units, which are imperial in almost all lighthouses due to list of lights using imperial. Again, I hope there is no objection, and if there is, lets reach consensus here (or on the lighthouse's talk page if it is more appropriate). --Muhandes (talk) 18:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Since this is an Australian lighthouse, I'm more confident of the Lighthouses of NSW figures since they're sourced from Australian data and appear to be accurate. The coordinates were obtained from Lighthouses of NSW and confirmed with known accurate measured points from a military GPS. I live in the area so the data is easy for me to confirm as I have around 400,000 measured points from the Newcastle area alone in my GPS software. Strangely though, the Geographical Names Register of NSW shows the coordinates as -32.915°N, 151.78444°W, which doesn't seem to match other figures. I'm not sure why that is. It's clearly incorrect. Interestingly, Lighthouses of NSW and LoL show almost exactly the same coordinates. I'm not sure what tool you used to find the coordinates but they match Google Maps, which is somewhat inaccurate here at the best of times, something I confirmed long ago with those 400,000 points.


 * I don't really see the point of a separate article on the lighthouse. It is located on top of Nobbys Head and both share a common history so they really should be in the one article, as it was originally created. It makes more sense for a redirect to this article than to unnecessarily duplicate information across two articles. As for the units used, WP:UNITS applies and, accordingly, metric units should be first. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I use gelocator which I believe is based on google maps, and if you say it is inaccurate in this area I'll take your word for it. My previous experience is that people just copy coordinates from sources without checking, which is why I correct them to the best of my capabilities. I'm glad that you are different, and I suggest that when you have a measure which you personally verified by foot (can one enter the head? I guess the source I used is wrong about that) you add an invisible remark (something like "personally verified by GPS"), so unaware editors like myself don't "correct" it. In this specific case the coordinates were suspiciously close to what LoL states, and we all know LoL is very inaccurate, so I felt gelocator was better than nothing, and the least it help people who just want a satellite view.


 * For units I'm fine with using either. I believe WP:UNITS allows both since navigational aid information is usually given in imperial (even where I come from where the person in the street doesn't even know what it means). I wont change it in existing articles, but when I create a new one I use what I'm used to. If you feel strongly about this, my page should include a list of lighthouse articles in Australia I created/recreated which you might want to change to metrics-first, and I will not object. You can be certain that all my information is sourced, so I suggest caution, using  32 ft and not   10 m.


 * As for the split, you can see that the current articles duplicate very little information. Nobbys Head includes details of the geography, while Nobbys Head Light includes details of the structure. Both are notable and well cited, though I'd agree neither will win any prizes. I guess it is personal preference again. As I'm more interested in the lighthouse my preference is to have a separate article for the lighthouse whenever possible. If you feel strongly about this too, I wouldn't object if you merge back, but please don't remove information I added, and I'd also prefer if it was kept in a separate section, so a redirect to section can be made in case someone is interested only in the lighthouse. --Muhandes (talk) 07:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)