Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney/Strategy

In order to fill in the blanks about Sydney, we need some sort of cohesive strategy. Ta bu shi da yu proposes that our primary strategy should be as below (please note that Ta bu shi da yu is not the be all and end all of debate. Further strategy should be discussed and added!).

Initial strategy

See what we've got, make some cleanup templates and categories and work out exactly what standards and information we want in our articles. Sort of like I (Ta bu shi da yu) did for suburbs. Also need to work out what areas we'll be looking at and the structure (TPK made a new structure for Wikipedia:WikiProject Melbourne and we can use this.

Research

We want our articles to be factual and informative. This means doing research. For those who might think that research is difficult, it's actually not that hard! Sydney is a city that has been documenting things for a long while now. If you are researching, then here is what we suggest:

Locate your local library. The local librarians are usually very informative, and some libraries even have a dedicated research officer who knows about the history and demographics of their local area. There are also, surprisingly, many books to be found in these libraries.
Use the State Library for research. The State Library is split into 3 areas: the Mitchell Library (which is dedicated to material related to New South Wales), the main reference library (which has general material) and an archives division. The staff at the state library are extremely helpful and knowledgable and can help you find material if you get stuck. We only ask that you remain polite and courteous to the staff! (that should really go without saying... but, well, you know)
The Australian Museum also has plenty of material about natural history.
The Powerhouse Museum also has plenty of information and material we can use.
State Archives is extremely useful for tracking down any material used by the government.

Referencing

Our articles should follow the guidelines already established on Wikipedia. The most important thing here is that we strive for intellectual honesty! If you find a fact you want to insert into an article, please make a note where you found that information and cite the source in the "References" section. Apart from making the article look good, and yourself look very knowledgable and intelligent, this is a good way for us to verify information that's added to the articles.

Outsourcing

There are only x many people from sydney who are going to be interested in doing research on the suburbs, and every second they spend on a sydney suburb is a second they dont spend on something else (this is not in anyway to suggest that the writing of articles about sydney suburbs is not important), that is why i suggest outsourcing this one to the (semi-)professionals. I'd wager that every council area in sydney has a local history society, (mine - hurstville - certainly does). So all we have to do is create a stub for each council area, send an email (or even perhaps snail mail or phone call) to the local history society, and inform them that we are in the early stages of writing an article about their suburb and ask for any assistance they may want to offer. And then we hope that they take the bait, collaborate on the article, and then get addicted to the greatness that is wikipedia and write about the suburbs with in the council areas, and then hopefully stay on as wikipedians. One final clarifying statement I AM NOT ADVOCATING THE USE OF SPAM, they must be approached in a friendly and personal manner. I think there is a good chance this approach will work, and aim to try it this coming week with the hurstville local history society. Also, an ex-teacher (maths teacher of all things) of mine is the undisputed authority on aboriginal history and culture in southern sydney, so i plan on getting in contact with him too. Research is good, but getting people who have already done the research, and are interested in the topic involved is even better. The bellman 11:49, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This approach could work! I kind of like researching the Sydney suburbs however, so I'm going to keep working on the Strathfield article. However, any information on the article, and in fact anybody who have expertise in the area are most definitely welcome to contribute as much as they like to the articles! The only caveat here is to make sure they write from a NPOV. Good idea, bellman. - Ta bu shi da yu 12:23, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

naming conventions

Before i start moving things around, i would like to know anybody elses thoughts re: naming conventions. For example hurstville is both a suburb and a council area. And St. George (the region hurstville, kogarah, rockdale) obviously has other meanings. Also i am sure that many sydney suburbs are the name of english towns and suburbs (liverpool for example), other australian towns/suburbs, the names of famous people (benalong for example), or things (banskia for example). It would be nice if we used the same naming style for all sydney suburbs, and council regions. Maybe this will catch on to apply for all suburbs in wikipedia.

My proposal is:

en.wikipedia/wiki/SuburbName_AreaType_City_CountryCode

for example:

en.wikipedia/wiki/Hurstville_Suburb_Sydney_Au (hurstville the suburb)
en.wikipedia/wiki/Hurstville_Municipality_Sydney_Au (hurstville the region)
en.wikipedia/wiki/Sutherland_Shire_Sydney_Au (Sutherland the region)
en.wikipedia/wiki/StGeorge_Region_Sydney_Au (St George region)

The bellman 13:00, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why can't we just stick with "Suburb, New South Wales", and "City of/Shire of X, New South Wales" and "X Region, New South Wales"? Firstly, I defy anyone to pinpoint exactly where Sydney ends and the rest of the state begins (i.e., how does anyone decide whether a place has "X, Sydney" or "X, New South Wales"?) Secondly, LGAs should be at their proper names, which often are City of x, Shire of x, though they can be other things - point being they can't necessarily always follow the same format. Lastly, "Au" should either be "Australia", or it shouldn't be there at all. And it shouldn't - how many New South Wales' are there? I agree it looks nice having the same formula for every type of location, but I don't think it's necessary. T.P.K. 16:31, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Bureau of statistics Statistical Divison of Sydney is a possible definition of Sydney to use, but unfortunately it includes the Blue Mountains and Gosford-Wyong.Quaidy 03:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]