Talk:Canberra/Hall

Star nomination

Canberra/Hall

Time for another Childs-like star nomination. It's essentially complete, has a static map and has everything needed for a star article. It doesn't have an understand section, but city-districts don't usually have understand sections but I'm willing to add one if deemed necessary. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support - my kind of article; short and sweet, and focusing on a small town. I don't think it needs an 'Understand', unless there's some interesting history that couldn't fit elsewhere.

Small niggles can be dealt with in the coming days: I'm not in love with the end of the lede, which repeats the word "hidden" quite a lot, but I can't at the moment think of better wording. The 1882 eat listing will need to be updated after Wednesday 3rd August, because they're renovating, getting a new menu, and changing opening hours.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:20, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Darn what a coincidence! I really should've checked what was going on with 1882 Hall when I was there last month. It really does bother me given I was at Kynefin Cafe for my afternoon snack after descending down from One Tree Hill which was just a few steps away from the town's only restaurant :-(. I'll try and do a quick checkup (and may stop there for dinner) when I do my annual summit walk up Mount Kosciuszko this November. But anyway, thanks for the copyedits. Really appreciated. :-) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:17, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Another small thing: is Hall a village or a town? I don't consider those interchangeable, though maybe they are in the context of Australia.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

In Australia (at least, this is true in all the states) the definitions are quite simple. Any settlement with over 200 inhabitants is (officially) considered a town, and anything over 10,000 is a city. Settlements with fewer than 200 inhabitants is up to interpretation; most Australians would call it a township, some might still call it a town, others would call it a settlement. "Village" is not usually used in Australian English, but Uriarra Village also in the ACT has earned the title of "community village" (no other settlement in Aus has this title), and the ACT government does (overly) promote Hall as a village. This sign in Hall claims that Hall is a heritage village, but the encyclopedia claims it's a township. Per official definitions, Hall, with a population of 271, would technically be considered a town, so I'm really undecided now, though I slightly favour following the encyclopedia and using "township". SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:16, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

They probably can be used interchangeably here, then.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

August 3 now, and it seems their new menu is out. However, there doesn't seem to be any major changes that would require a significant change to the description. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

• Let's wait a bit; I think the copy can be tweaked somewhat. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:32, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
• Indeed, some copy editing is needed. I checked the first page and the language doesn't strike me as "stylistically superior and effective". –LPfi (talk) 05:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Are we talking about copyedits (as in spelling and grammar fixes), or just general improvements in quality? If the former, there shouldn't be many, but please go ahead regardless. If the latter, some examples of text that stands to be improved would be helpful.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

---

Outcome: 3 weeks now, given that all issues have been fixed, per the notice on the top of this page, I'm going to upgrade this so this doesn't get lost in the pile for another few years to come. So essentially promoted. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

This inappropriate, irregular attempt to self-promote this nomination hastily while I'm on vacation is hereby reverted with prejudice. Let no-one ever do this kind of thing again. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't care if you're on vacation and it wasn't my intention to deliberately promote the article while you were on vacation, but whether you like it or not, it was promoted per policy from the top which I will paste below.

After three weeks of discussion, if a consensus is reached, then that article becomes a star, and the discussion should be archived. A consensus means that all outstanding objections should have been addressed and dropped; if issues remain then the discussion should be left open for two months to allow time to fix the article and reach a consensus.

Was there consensus? Yes there was – it doesn't matter how many users participated the nomination, but in this case, there was no opposition (apart from you and you're only opposing because you don't agree with how this was promoted). Were all the objections addressed and dropped? Yes, it was – the lede and the entire article was copyedited. Were there any outstanding objections before it was promoted? Nope. That meant it could be promoted per the policy. If you want to change the policy, wait till your proposal gets consensus but that will only affect future nominations, not this one.

So, really, maybe you should be the one to reconsider your actions when I followed the policy before calling my promotion as "unilateral", "arbitrary", "hasty", "[the policy] was abused". In this case, you were the one who didn't follow policy by instantly reverting instead of listing this article at Wikivoyage:Star nominations#Nominations to remove Star status, unarchiving a closed threads when archived, closed threads aren't supposed to be edited afterwards they've been archived. And no, I repeat that it was NOT my intention to deliberately take advantage of your vacation to promote this article so maybe reconsider what you type before making assumptions; that does even make me wonder why I should argue with you when you decided to not follow policy when you won't show me basic courtesy. I don't care whether it's your intention to follow policy (and IAR doesn't apply here), but I'm going to follow the policy and rearchive this. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Note the phrase you quoted: "A consensus means that all outstanding objections should have been addressed and dropped". What about "Let's wait a bit; I think the copy can be tweaked somewhat." I am also chocked that you don't respect the protest. "I am right so I will do it" is not the wiki way. Why can't we wait a week for IK to return from his vacation? You plunged forward, and that's OK (although plunging forward may be met by astonishment, like now, and that's also OK). But you were reverted, and then you should wait until the discussion has settled, or let somebody else make the judgement call. –LPfi (talk) 09:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I get that I might've gone overboard with this, but it really isn't my problem that Ikan did not follow policy. The only edit I made that could be said to go against policy was the consensus bit, but consensus can be interpreted differently by person, so I repeat, I didn't break policy, Ikan did. I should probably stop rambling on now. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I get that you're upset, but promoting the article without a consensus was the only edit that was against policy. It wasn't a major infraction, in my opinion, despite the controversy that's been generated. Ikan reverting back to the status quo was within policy, because your promotion was premature and we have a Status quo bias. As I already implied, he should have assumed good faith instead of reacting angrily to your actions. Wikivoyage is important to those of us who care about it, but let's remember we're only arguing over a few lines of code on a computer. Passion is good, but it's not worth falling out over. And, sorry, I'm not trying to patronise anyone, but I'm British, so... yeahhh.-ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Resuming the discussion of the article

OK, considering that star articles should be as close to perfect as possible, do we want to start the article with a question:

"Have you ever wondered whether there were any settlements in/around Canberra before the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) was established?"

Or should we start with what's currently the second sentence?

"Hall is one of the last few remnants of what was New South Wales (NSW) bushland before the capital was established."

I'd suggest the following as the first sentence:

"Hall is one of the last few remnants of what was New South Wales (NSW) bushland before Canberra and the Australian Capital Territory were established."

I'd slightly tweak the next sentence, too:

"The historic village of 271 (2016) has a distinct identity and resembles a classic Australian rural town, but is in fact only separated from the Canberra suburbs by about a kilometre of countryside."

I'd suggest:

"The historic village of 271 (2016) has a distinct identity and resembles a classic Australian rural town although it is separated from the Canberra suburbs by only about a kilometre of countryside."

If you all are OK with this kind of copy editing, I will try to go through the entire article and see if I can edit it to my and everyone else's satisfaction, hopefully with help from some of you. I'm a busy man, what with school restarting soon and various things to deal with when I get home, but this article is brief. Give me time to copy edit and do not rush anything. I'd much prefer for starnoms to be met with unanimous support, even if it takes months, and don't really agree that legitimate objections of a lack of perfection in any respect should be brushed aside in these kinds of nominations, ever. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I am a bit puzzled by a rural town being an example of bushland. I thought bushland was where you get when leaving the towns and villages behind. I try to tweak some other wordings. –LPfi (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

"The bush" is a colloquial term that simply means anywhere that has an urban feeling. In an Australian context, it seldom refers to the literal sense of bushland used elsewhere. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you mean "that does not have an urban feeling"? –LPfi (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh yes, I meant that. Apologies for that. I should stop multitasking... SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

[Edit conflict] Another thing that puzzles me is "The first thing you will need to realise is that Hall is not on the beaten track". Is it important to realise? Why? Please tell what I need to do to prepare. Or is this just some flavouring, which in fact means "Bus service is sparse"? –LPfi (talk) 06:20, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

The latter (i.e. some added flowery language). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:26, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. My thoughts on your proposed wordings as follows:

1. I don't see why not? Not every article has to begin with an inspiring but non-rhetorical question
2. The land that makes up the ACT was transferred from NSW to the Commonwealth in 1911, while Canberra was established 2 years later. I don't think two years is a whole lot to merit saying two different terms that essentially mean the same thing from a traveller's POV
3. Not sure. I like both your's and tt!'s (who wrote/copyedited that sentence) equally

For 2, I suppose we don't need to mention Canberra, i.e. "Hall is one of the last few remnants of what was New South Wales (NSW) bushland before the Australian Capital Territory was established." primarily because some would argue that Hall is not a part of Canberra (even though Canberra = ACT in the eyes of the ACT govt.) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 07:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I quite like starting the lede with a question, though I'd get rid of the "in/around" and just pick one.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:10, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Alternatively, for point 1, how about "Have you ever wondered whether there were any settlements in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) before it was established?" SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

• Not yet This is a good article, which fully satisfies being a Guide. However I don't think that it has quite reached the Star quality.

1. I think it should have an Understand section. There are two paragraphs in the lede, but I think we should have more - eg do most of the resident commute to Canberra, or do they work in rural industies? Is the population stable at 271, or has it been much larger or smaller?
2. There is no mention of horses but the Mapnik map shows a horse paddock and Hall Showground Equestrian Park (where the market marker is).
3. For an article about a place with so little to see or do, it really has to be complete to be a star. For example, describe what is in Hall Park - the picnic tables, community playground and Well Monument. Maybe Hops and Vine should have a listing.
4. Some of the text reads like a blog rather than a travel guide.
5. As the bus service is so poor, is there somewhere nearby to get a bus to and then walk or taxi?

I am not convinced that this is the best guide to Hall available - if I was going there I would prefer to read How to spend a day in Hall from Eat Canberra, and take a copy of this National Trust Hall Village Heritage Walk. AlasdairW (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback + additions. Really appreciated :-). For your points:

1. City districts don't usually have understand sections as I mentioned above and adding one would be very short (unlike Canberra/Civic), though I did think about adding one. I couldn't find any information on where most of the town's residents commute to, but I wouldn't add that as that's way too encyclopedic for a travel guide. Population-wise, again, would be too encyclopedic and can go out-of-date.
2. https://actsportsgrounds.act.gov.au/sportsgrounds/Hall%201 says the equestrian centre can only be used by certain equestrian groups, not passer-by travellers. Likewise, I don't think the horse paddock is for public use; in fact, I don't remember seeing a horse paddock, nor did I even know there was one before making the static map. Looking at GSV, it appears that it's someone's private property.
3. Bit of background here: I've objected to ordinary municipal parks with nothing so remarkable (like a botanic garden) to go into detail, and have removed such listings before from many Quebec articles merely because they're wv:boring for most. Even though it's not policy, the same principles apply. Regarding Hops and Vine, I wasn't sure if it was in scope, but if it is, then I'll add it.
4. Part of that can be explained by my personal writing style – that is, writing in a journalistic form. Are there specific sections that look more like a blog than a travel guide?
5. Not that I'm aware of. It really shouldn't be surprising though – it's almost impossible to find good public transport in regional areas.
6. I'm aware of the Hall Heritage Walk, but I deliberately didn't include it because it reads more like a personal itinerary – IIRC, I don't remember the wall being signposted on the ground, and adding it would be against our personal itineraries policy. The article contains all the listings mentioned in How to spend a day in Hall FWIW.

I'll implement some of your suggestions, particularly the third one. Not sure where the horses should be mentioned, but for now, I'll mention it in the Hall Showground listing. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 04:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the updates.

1. Ok - as Hall is described as a rural town, I forgot that it is a city district. As we don't have an ACT state article, it would be a big change to make it a city.
2. Ok - Equestrian park now mentionned.
3. Whilst ordinary parks are boring for sightseeing, they are useful.
4. e.g. "Just next to the trail is a small carpark, which doesn't have many spaces available but few actually use that carpark in the first place." rather than "Small carpark which often has free spaces.".
5. The bus only works as a day trip if you are coming from Yass, not Canberra. But I think you could get a bus to Gold Creek in Gungahlin and then it is a 3km walk - is this workable?
6. I thought the National Trust was a respected heritage body and if they have been actively involved in the village they would be a primary source, but maybe there isn't that much to see on the walk.

Thanks AlasdairW (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

We usually don't have Understand sections for district articles, but I think this town is so much different in character than the rest of Canberra that an Understand is warranted. I don't think it is "too encyclopedic" to tell whether the inhabitants get their living here or whether they commute and whether the population has been stable or seen drastic changes. It may not be essential, but would certainly be worth mentioning. –LPfi (talk) 04:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@AlasdairW, LPfi: Coming back to this, now that we've finally come to a conclusion on Wikivoyage talk:Listings#Entries for individual historic buildings and sites, I think I'd want to avoid listing every building of the Hall Heritage Walk so we don't have a second Sopron. In saying that, I'm going to place the link somewhere in "Canberra/Hall#Do" for the minority of visitors who are interested in visiting every site. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 22:22, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Done. Also, does anyone know why the listing for Hops and Vine has a MULTIPLE-EMAIL problem? Is there something with the error highlighter gadget that prevents more than one email (frankly, I don't see the problem with multiple emails, which is leading me to think that I've incorrectly formatted something)? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 00:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

The email field takes just one address and probably doesn't take comments (if it does, it probably includes them in the To: header of the e-mail). Perhaps one could consider making the field more like the phone one. Usually, though, the username parts of e-mail addresses are descriptive enough not to need comments. Should the hampers be moved to the content (saying such can be ordered) and the admin address skipped? –LPfi (talk) 10:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not too sure, but I think I'd support moving the hampers email to the content section. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I thought about moving the info on hampers, not the address. "admin" is usually for technical issues, while "orders" sounds like being read by somebody ready to help also in more practical matters; administration is more often outsourced than sales, but I don't know the place. –LPfi (talk) 11:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Done I removed the customised hampers email. From the website, it seems the admin@ email was for all other enquiries (and the email for customised hampers is still available on the website). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I've also added a link to File:Gold Creek Village to Hall, ACT walking directions.png, which has the walking directions from Gold Creek Village (where ACTION bus route 24 stops) to Hall via the Bicentennial Trail. Should anything else be added to the map, or should that suffice? (this was a cheap sketch using geojson.io using OSM as the background) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 02:45, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

This long later, what needs to be done before we slap a star on the article? I believe I've done everything that was suggested here, and have proofread the article a few times over. I'd prefer to put the star on by Jan 5, which is six days from now (as I'll be interstate from Jan 6 for two weeks, give or take a few days). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 03:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't guarantee my input before 6 Jan, as am tied up with the Belgian coast by tram nomination. However, you may not need anything more from me on Hall, as I did already contribute and vote support ages ago.

Happy New Year, by the way :-) What's it like living in the future? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Not a problem. I think the only major differences in the article are AlasdairW's suggestions that I implemented plus a link to File:Gold Creek Village to Hall, ACT walking directions.png.

Oh, and to living in the future? Just watched the Dubai fireworks (which were more impressive than the fireworks I watched at 00:00 this morning) and am waiting till 10:00 and 11:00 to watch the celebrations in Paris and London, respectively, but watching every major city with a good fireworks show (so not LA) after our's seems kinda quirky and unusual, but that's the beauty of time zones. Happy new year to you too :-). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 22:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I've waited for five months since I made that comment. Can I slap the star back on? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 10:35, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Ping the people with outstanding objections (possibly just AlasdairW?) and see if they've been satisfied.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

I have re-read the article and now support it being a star. Most points have been addressed, and the article is now nearly a year old so there has been a chance for the article to be used. AlasdairW (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

And most of all, thank you for the additions and improvements that you've made, AlasdairW! SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 21:35, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

But to my second question, can I slap the star back on June 1, 08:00 UTC if there are no further objections (if you're wondering why the time is overly specific, that's when I get home on Thursday). SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 08:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

June 1, 11:46 (UTC) as of writing this. I'm going to slap the star back on soon since there were no further objections since. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 11:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)