Template talk:Riverina

Map of the Riverina
So as to inform other editors as to why I am including certain villages, towns, and communities into Template:Riverina I have posted below a part of a conversation at Talk:Riverina which suggested a boundary within which the Riverina area lay (conversation has been adjusted following important input by Mattinbgn, Astrokey and Golden Wattle).

It is not meant to be the definitive view but it appear to be gaining consensus amongst editors interested in Riverina articles. Of course there may be different views as to the stretch of the boundaries which we would be pleased to see along with appropriate references to clear up any point you wish to make.

For those that are wondering why then certain places are included in the template and others are not - IMHO they are and should continue to be places that conventional maps display as towns, villages or communities (and not homesteads).

Boundaries of the map at this stage
Northern & Western Boundary of the Riverina. The Riverina article ( I think quite correctly) draws the northern boundary of the Riverina as it becomes the Central West at the catchment area of the Lachlan River. On that basis this reference with this accompanying diagram  provides a good indication of where that catchment area starts and clearly removes West Wyalong from the Riverina area. Importantly the Lachlan River and its catchment (as detailed in the Wiki Article) show a distinct flow and catchment difference between that river and the Murray and Murrumbidgee Rivers - hence IMHO showing why the areas of the Murray and Murrumbidgee are the Riverina. I would say then that the northern boundaries (in straight lines) are from just under Yass to Young to Cootamundra to Illabo to Temora to Rankin Springs to Hillston to about 50 km north east of Balranald (where the confluence of the Murrumbidgee and Lachlan occurs) to Penarie (above Balranald) to Euston.

Southern Boundary Put simply the Riverina is in New South Wales so the southern border of NSW which of course is the direction of the Murray River should be the guide for what is in the Riverina and it should continue to the point that it reaches the western side of Kosciusko National Park.

Eastern Boundary Finally the Riverina is defined as being west of the Great Dividing Range and including the catchment area of the Murrumbidgee. From that perspective IMHO the eastern boundary should follow the western side of the Kosciusko National Park north up to and including Tumut and then veer off to the north east to include Wee Jasper to Cavan and to our starting point of just under Yass. V i  r  tual  Steve  07:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Riverina template
The following has been copied and pasted from User talk:VirtualSteve as a record of the editors thinking into template inclusion/exclusion....

Hi VS, I was having a good look through the template and can advise a little about some localities in the Berrigan area. Coree and Tuppal are purely rural localities based on a previously existing sheep station, lacking a school, hall, church and I can't recall seeing an RFS shed. Osborne Wells was a village that never quite took off, it is still shown as subdivided on cadastral maps but since the school closed in the 70s I believe you can drive through the "town" and not see any sign of it at all. The town site is fenced off and used for grazing. While I am comfortable keeping them in the template and giving them articles, what would you consider the minimum needed to comply with WP:N. Once again, great work ploughing through the red links--Mattinbgn/talk 02:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comments Matt. Good question.  Sorry for the lengthy response but it will help to keep track of this question if we are asked by other editors.  Naturally I agree with keeping our eye on WP:N and my way of doing that is to look for (as by the guidelines) that the location has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject itself and each other.  The trouble with this is of course the/our definitions of multiple and non-trivial.


 * IMHO I think that any locality is a place that is worthy of being noted or attracting notice again as per the guidelines - but of course for some localities the article we create on Wiki is probably the biggest thing ever written on the Web about that location. (Also just because a place doesn't have much evidence of existence shouldn't mean it doesn't get an article eg: Methul was nothing more than a sign (image is on page) but gosh does that area produce some grain etc).  To some extent then we document history and for some locations it should (and does say) that the location etc is almost a ghost town, or nothing more than a couple of dilapidated old buildings etc.


 * To commence an article on any location I always use a minimum of five check points for each, asking the questions, (1) is the location/village etc detailed at the Geographical Names Board of NSW, (2) is it detailed at www.fallingrain's Directory of Cities and Towns in State of New South Wales, Australia, (3) can I find it in on the Australian Government's Geoscience Australia website, (4) does the location have a postcode through Australia Post, and (5)can I find the location on travelmate.com.au. If I get a yes on at least two (ie multiple) of these sites then IMHO it passes WP:N.  If it doesn't then I delete it from the Riverina template (as I did for Allaway, Wemby and Wallundry in the past few days).  The only accurate way of doing this is to go through the five tests with any given redlink.  For example then for Coree and Tuppal I can answer yes to two or more of the above questions - and for Osborne Wells (because of your prompt just now) there is nothing and it should be deleted. Your thoughts (and if you are reading this GW yours?) please? -- VS  talk...images 02:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the very thorough reply. It sounds very reasonable to me and I have no concerns with that process. Do you think this should be copied to the talk page of the template as well.--Mattinbgn/talk 02:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes good idea. I have copied the lot over now.-- VS  talk...images


 * I concur with the testing approach adopted by VirtualSteve, it allows for independant sources to provide citations.--Golden Wattle talk 19:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Locations/Distances
Greetings. In keeping with our use of this page as a record of some of the logical steps that we are taking with regards places included on the template - I include the following information:- I am currently going through the process of ensuring that there are four location and distance markers in the info box of each locality using the following logic. Location 1 = nearest locality and distance to place being edited (which is also on our template); Location 2 = next nearest locality and distance to place being edited; Location 3 = nearest city within the Riverina region (ie: Wagga Wagga, Albury or Griffith; and Location 4 = distance to Sydney. IMHO this gives the reader an immediate link to other articles on the template (either side of the locality being perused) and keeps the other two locations within the Riv template and within the state of NSW (which of course the Riverina exists within completely).  I appreciate that in some cases towns have a close affiliation with Victoria and may be closer to Melbourne and perhaps in the future we can add a 5th location box to show that but for now (unless anyone strenuously objects) my intention is to plough through on this logical line of attack for all 250 or so places over the next week or two. I have completed from Adelong to Balranald at the time of this notice. PS I am also adding a reference link in each case. I would appreciate any thoughts? -- VS talk...images 07:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * This approach seems reasonable to me. The most important thing that the distance fields in the info box tell a reader is how isolated or otherwise a locality  is.  I think it is very relevant that Balranald is 854km from Sydney. I do think that a fifth field could be added for the distance to Melbourne (or Canberra where appropriate) where this is closer to demonstrate this more clearly but of course this does not have to happen now.--Mattinbgn/talk 08:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The approach seems fine except I would like to modify it a little. My concerns relate particularly to those towns near the border and I think it is important to list that Moama is near Echuca, Corowa near Wahgunyah ...  Showing the distance from Barham to Kerang (Vic) is correct in my view, and it should be high up the order of location boxes - probably they should be ordered in terms of closeness of distance -ie number 1 is closest whether or not it is a Vic or NSW town - thus I think Barooga, New South Wales is ordered incorrectly. I don't think it is important whether or not the number 1 town is within the NSW Riverina region or not - closest is probably more significant.--Golden Wattle  talk 20:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for these comments - sorry I may not have communicated part of my intention clearly. (My comments regarding Victoria only related to Melbourne as the nearest capital city) My intention would be always to look at the town/place in terms of what road (or sometimes rail line) it is on (or just off) and then to link location 1 and location 2 as the two towns either side of the town/place being considered. Sometimes this is not possible because the town/place is at the end of the road/line and then I look closely at a map and pick the nearest two places. However in terms of Victorian border towns - I agree with Golden Wattle - using the same approach as above in some cases location 1 or location 2 will be Victoria. To that point then (having so far only got to Balranald at this stage) I agree with the point being made regarding Barham except, with respect, the nearest location for Victoria is not Kerang but should Koondrook, and along those lines, Corowa should be near Rutherglen (Moama nearest town is Echuca)... -- VS talk...images 21:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a slight quibble with the order of the distance fields. To my mind, as a reader looking at an article on an unfamilar place, the first thing I would want to do is fix its location relative to a known reference point.  For most readers, especially those outside the region, that would be the the large capital cities.  I would suggest ordering the distance fields not in order of distance but in order of size starting with the largest at the top.--Mattinbgn/talk 23:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I missed this one today in amongst the various dispatches. I will be happy to follow your slightly altered layout for locations/distances. I will go through from Adelong et al as soon as time allows. -- VS talk...images 05:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Various templates
Can I please put in a plea for the commons to be added in the external links section. Unless the page is named something different, you don't need to put in a parameter. I think also the map link template should come before the Riverina template as it is much more in the form of a link to web pages - see for example my change to Holbrook - now of course have to put something in the Commons page :-).  Also with the commons page, I think the instructions as to how to add to the gallery should be commented out - ie they will appear when someone goes to edit and also the page should have a link back to the wikipedia article.--Golden Wattle  talk 21:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

For the commons pages I have managed to generate the more generic format to link to the wikipedia page - ie: This page is a part of the larger project Towns of the Riverina, New South Wales. For information on the town see the wikipedia article.

See the Holbrook commons page for an example that the link works :-) --Golden Wattle talk 21:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I like all three ideas. I have noted the commons tag and had already prepared my sandbox page to help with that task in the near future.  Am I reading that you will be commenting out the how to upload section on the commons images pages - or do you want any and all to help? -- VS  talk...images 22:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I will only be substituting the above as I come to them - haven't got the capacity to be systematic about all 251 at this stage - sorry --Golden Wattle talk 22:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely no probs. I didn't want to butt in if you had your mind set on the task. I have started - all the A's are done. I have set up a little private system and will get to them in amongst the (smile) never-ending (but enjoyable) set of tasks. Nice to speak with you. -- VS talk...images 22:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Great ideas. I am fairly busy at the moment and will be for a few days but will pitch in and help where I can.--Mattinbgn/talk 23:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I had better get back to being busy, but in the mean time please see my comments at commons:Talk:Towns of the Riverina, New South Wales about page layout for the commons page - I am happy to do the conversion if others agree. About time we had a project page as we are getting off the track of discussing this template!--Golden Wattle  talk 23:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * My response posted on commons:Talk:Towns of the Riverina, New South Wales. -- VS talk...images 02:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Draft wikiproject
See WikiProject Riverina - you know you are a wikinerd when ... on the other hand it is sensible to have a centralised discussion point - we don't need to have much of the other paraphernalia if not useful.--Golden Wattle talk 23:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Template size
I've taken a look at a few articles with this template on them, and it seems a bit big. I see that there is a Hide button on it, but maybe you should consider making Hide the default, like on Template:Australian Senators? Blarneytherinosaur talk 01:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry can't agree with this suggestion. The template is large in terms of inclusions but has reached a final (or very close to final) stage and being at the bottom of each article does not detract the viewer.  Being on the page (seen) also provides the reader with and immediate view of all of the various locations within Riverina New South Wales allowing the traversing from one location to another and probably acting as a catalyst for that to occur. -- VS  talk 01:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. I just thought I should suggest it, and let you decide. It's great to see people putting in the effort to cover topics outside the capitals. Keep up the good work. Blarneytherinosaur talk 07:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I've updated it to bring it into line with the new navbox standard, there is two options - one can have either · or | as the separating character. If you don't like the dots, just change the · to | (I usually do changes of this type by pasting out to Notepad, doing a search replace, then pasting back). Keep up the great work (you should note your hard work was the inspiration for us over at WA, per Template talk:Towns Wheatbelt South WA :) Orderinchaos 14:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The sheer number of towns makes it look hard to navigate. So I tried a column format, but the excessive height is not a good compromise, and it won't look good on all resolutions. –Pomte 14:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The new format looks great. I am not so sure about the column format. I can see what you are trying to do but I dont think that quite works. Now to replace the other boxes I created!--Mattinbgn/talk 21:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Towns etc
And where is Wallenbeen? 202.55.158.136 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 13:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)