Talk:Waterfall Gully, South Australia

Tomas Semire Artaniun Gatton
Who is "Tomas Semire Artaniun Gatton", and how is he notable? I was born in Adelaide and have lived here for about 34 of 36 years and never heard of the guy. Why is his living in Waterfall Gully significant and how is he notable? Sounds like a vanity entry.

Greenhill Spring Water
"Greenhill Spring Water is from these very springs, and can readily purchased throughout Adelaide." Deleted, because myself and a number of people I've asked have never heard of it. 203.61.6.131 09:38, 21 August 2005 (UTC)


 * It'll be added in again somewhat when I find some pictures of the business itself, and a photo of one of their water containers in a local business ;) G 08:17, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

This is exactly the kind of uninformed comment you can expect from wikipedia. It doesn't take much effort to look up the company in the phone book and give them a call, you can argue to the company directly that they dont exist as much as you like if you want to take that attitude.

Politics
I'd suggest a lot of what is presently in the politics section should be moved to the respective electorate articles instead - otherwise almost the same info would need to eventually be added to every suburb in the electorate,, and updated for each election. --Scott Davis Talk 13:16, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The politics section is quite comprehensive, im well aware - but it does add to the article and is relevant. Maybe a politics template to be used in all the corresponding articles (Bragg Electorate Suburb Politics) so there is only one thing to update? - G 13:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

This read that "progressive parties such as the Australian Labor Party and Australian Democrats also poll well in the area." A primary vote of 10% may be a good showing for the Dems, but the usual 20-25% primary for the ALP makes this place one of the weakest from the ALP's perspective. I've modified this, because it is misleading to suggest the ALP "polls well" here; indeed, there are few places in the state where they would poll worse. seanie 09:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

After changing this, someone has changed it back, claiming NPOV. It's nothing to do with NPOV. To claim Labor polls well in this area is patently wrong and shows a amazing ignorance of Australian politics. Since I don't want get stuck in a reversion battle, I will leave this, but I am interested in what others think. Admittedly there is room (and perhaps a need) for some explanation here for non-Australians, showing why 10% is good for the Dems, but 20-25% bad for ALP. Still, sort of peeved someone thought my edit wasn't NPOV! seanie

Radical suggestion to make article better
Add the dreaded &#123;{cleanup}} tag. This is on my watchlist now, so hopefully I'll be able to do some work on it in the future. One thing which really strikes me as bad: the second paragraph. At present it reads:
 * Waterfall Gully is rich in history, and has been a popular attraction since Adelaide's early colonists discovered the area in the 19th century. Recent developments around First Falls and the reopening of the Waterfall Gully Restaurant have contributed further to its reputation as a tourist attraction. The suburb's natural beauty attracts residents as well as tourists and could be categorised as upper-middle class.

We don't just want this to be a featured article, we want it to be a good article. Alphax &tau;&epsilon;&chi; 03:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice, but I think since you only mentioned one specific paragraph that it wouldn't be necessary. That said, if there are any other paragraphs that you want to change go for it - or - if you want, let me know which ones need attention, I'll tackle them. - michaelg 05:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)


 * The cleanup tag is generally not used for articles like this - it is used for devastatingly bad articles, which this is clearly not.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 05:49, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Native Vegetation Links
I've also got information on native vegetation here and here (Maybe another footnote or two to be added?). - michaelg 07:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Featured article on main page
That was wierd to go to the main page (which I don't usually do) and find an adelaide suburb article that is not only a featured article but on the main page itself! I did some taxi driving a while back and have heard of most of Adelaide's suburbs, but wasn't familiar with this one. Looks like people from the Burnside council area are are fairly active wikipedia-wise. - Diceman 17:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

2006 State Elections
The article needs to be revised to include results from the 2006 State Elections.
 * Well aware. But I think I'll wait until the results are confirmed first. michael talk 15:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Broken Link
the reference City of Burnside Electoral Areas gives a not found error. Rimmeraj 22:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Population
I don't think you can use these population statistics here. The article is about the suburb Waterfall Gully. The statistics are from a much larger census area that includes the suburbs of Waterfall Gully, Glen Osmond, Mount Osmond, and a section of Leawood Gardens according to the City of Burnside homepage. So most of the 2,285 inhabitants would be from Glen Osmond then. -- Harro 13:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

FAR
As part of the featured article review, I'm planning on going through this article and fixing up any issues that are raised. The major one is lack of citations, but others should arise. To start with, I've changed the referencing format: it was a mix of two different formats before, and I prefer the footnotes + references model. If there is an objection, though, I'm happy to change it back to references alone. I've also removed a couple of references as being to unreliable sources (signs), but they'll be easy enough to replace.

So far I've got five major sources to work with in fixing this up, but any all all other suggestions are extremely welcome. :) Specifically, the two pdfs that were already listed as refs, (especially Pamela's paper), The Nature of Cleland by Anne Hardy, which looks pretty good, The Five Creeks of the River Torrens by J. Warburton, and The Paddocks Beneath by Elizabeth Warburton. They should give a good start, all going well. - Bilby (talk) 13:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

History
I've been working down the article, extending, referencing and restructuring where appropriate. Mostly there have been no significant concerns - I've extended it where the sources I have provide extra information, and made a few changes where better sources gave a slightly different account, but mostly the article was already very good. (The major issue with differing account in the sources was the name of the mythical figure - I went with the name from the Smith paper, as it seemed the most reliable). However, some of the "Development" section was problematic. I've removed:

"With continued development of farms and orchards further up the catchment region, the water quality quickly deteriorated and was rendered useless. By this time however, Adelaide was supplied by newer reservoirs in other areas such as Happy Valley."

from the section on the weir, because while it feels accurate, and probably is, I can't find a source for it. Hopefully it can go back in later. I also culled the mining section, which read well but I couldn't source:

"A number of small-scale silver-lead mines were dug during the latter part of the 19th century and attracted the interest of Cornish settlers. The mines were of poor quality — especially compared to the richness of the nearby Wheal Watkins at Glen Osmond. The Victorian Gold Rush in the mid-1800s attracted many miners and young men from all over Australia and struck the final blow to the Waterfall Gully mines, where operations ceased shortly thereafter."

Again, better sources might fix that, but I think it unlikely that such sources will emerge during the review, so it has been trimmed to suit what I have available. I also restructured a bit, creating the "Protection" and "Natural disasters" sections. The content for "Natural disasters" was already well referenced, but I'll need to tackle "Protection" later. - Bilby (talk) 01:22, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Waterfall Gully, South Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161012010923/http://maps.sa.gov.au/plb/ to http://maps.sa.gov.au/plb/%23
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C10117%2C17176255-29282%2C00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Waterfall Gully, South Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090130055825/http://burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=796 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=796
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100531053415/http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=1332 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=1332
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100531053415/http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=1332 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=1332

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Waterfall Gully, South Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524140357/http://www.planning.sa.gov.au/index.cfm?objectID=F2D3709D-F203-0D46-AD813765BAD9B959&i=8418 to http://www.planning.sa.gov.au/index.cfm?objectID=F2D3709D-F203-0D46-AD813765BAD9B959&i=8418
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080815235226/http://www.users.bigpond.com/BurnsideCFS/community/community_history.htm to http://www.users.bigpond.com/burnsidecfs/community/community_history.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121127093840/http://www.seo.sa.gov.au/archive/2006//results/polling503.htm to http://www.seo.sa.gov.au/archive/2006//results/polling503.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716022531/http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=739 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=739
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080719164411/http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=797 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=797
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050720075037/https://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=762 to http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=762
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050923164737/http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/parks/cleland/ to http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/parks/cleland
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050925014744/http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/parks/yurrebilla/introduction.html to http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/parks/yurrebilla/introduction.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080815235226/http://www.users.bigpond.com/BurnsideCFS/community/community_history.htm to http://www.users.bigpond.com/burnsidecfs/community/community_history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Remove this articles’s FA status
Demote it. Doesn’t deserve it. The only reason why it even is a FA is because it was reviewed in the old ages. TigerScientist Chat > contribs 05:28, 13 June 2021 (UTC)