This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
AussieLegend, just a note I was pleasantly surprised to see that when I fixed the {{
error}} in
Alpine National Park, the infobox map auto-magically changed from the whole of Australia to zoom in on Victoria. Nice! Though with
Capoompeta National Park, I needed to get the numbers from the coordinates
parameter {{Coord|29|23|34|S|152|00|32|E|type:landmark_region:AU-NSW|display=inline,title}}
and populate the separate parameters:
| latd = 29 | latm = 23 | lats = 34 | longd = 152 | longm = 00 | longs = 32
to make the magic happen. Not sure whether there is anything else to do before it's safe to remove the deprecated coordinates
parameter?
BTW, I guess no response at Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes is a good response? Seems everyone is happy with how I implemented that split. Regards, wbm1058 ( talk) 16:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
|coordinates=
is still used by a lot of articles (I have no idea how many). I'd love to see it gone but it's a big job replacing it in all the articles, and some articles, mostly LGA articles, use an image of the state with the LGA highlighted so they don't use the locator map.This update generated a lot of {{ error}}s that I've been fixing. Note that there were
where the type was either "headland" or "peninsula" – concentrated in South Australia – and I changed them all to "other". I don't suppose that this is the only place on the continent that has headlands ;)
Also I changed one "wine region" to simply "region". wbm1058 ( talk) 22:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=locality
to |type=other
. These would in general be better converted to |type=town
out of that set. Most of them once had a railway station, church and/or post office and a concentration of settlement if not a recognisable town, maybe even a gazetted town or a sheep station, and all are legal addresses now. I wonder if the "headland" type also came directly from a government gazetteer (I haven't checked them). --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
village
→ town
as some categories are for "villages and towns", but didn't feel comfortable doing that for all the "localities" - seemed like too vague a description, as even a simple road junction could be called a "locality".This discussion is a mess. Localities are clearly defined in each state and territory, and form a clear, easy, verifiable basis under which to cover geographical content. Cadastral divisions have minimal relevance outside of South Australia (where they only dragged their geographical gazettal scheme into the twentieth century this century), and while I wouldn't vote to delete other ones, they're basically unimportant for all Wikipedia purposes and anyone who isn't a property lawyer or real estate agent has basically no need to even know they exist.
This is not complicated: there is no gazetted locality of Houston, "parish" is such a minor and insignificant level of cadastral division that it'd need an exceptionally good argument to warrant not being nominated for deletion, and it needs to be redirected to the relevant locality (I'm not digging out their resources at 4am, but one would assume Alectown). The American analogy doesn't work in any way a) because their system is completely different (the American concept of "county" and the Australian concept of "county" have absolutely nothing in common besides using the same word), and b) because unlike theirs, ours is uniform. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 19:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
"parish" is such a minor and insignificant level of cadastral division that it'd need an exceptionally good argument to warrant not being nominated for deletion- I was kind of getting at that; nice to see someone more local and knowledgeable confirm that. Right, I figured that one of these systems was redundant, and I assume you're saying that local government areas function more like American counties. So cadastral divisions are relevant for property lawyers and real estate agents; I see we have Public Land Survey System which is probably just as obscure to most Americans as your cadastral divisions. Interesting. I understand your rationale for redirecting Houston, which I'm guessing may have been created because of this "Houston" – and because the observatory is there. wbm1058 ( talk) 21:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I guess the summary of all this is that we may need to provide some clearer guidance about using this template with bounded and unbounded localities (that seems to be the greatest area of confusion). And I would not mind if we updated some of the "blank" templates to reflect this town/suburb duality (and added a few minor things like pop_year and pop_footnotes which are widely used). But I think the template itself is actually in pretty good shape. I use it a lot and am not aware of any showstopper problems with it. Kerry ( talk) 22:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=town
, or apparently |type=locality
if there is no extant centre, for rural LOCBs. For the scale of some of these,
Wbm1058 might be interested to see the size of
Anna Creek.
Property Location Browser is a good source for seeing how boundaries and locations line up. Turn on the "Suburbs and Localities" and "Place names (gazetteer)" layers and zoom in. --
Scott Davis
Talk 22:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)|type=suburb
. In the early 2000s the NSW government tried to get LGAs to clean up their suburb lists. Some LGAs separated bounded areas into localities and suburbs, while others did not. As a result, we have places like
Bobs Farm, which is mostly rural with no central shopping district, registered as a suburb and not a locality.
[2]For the ones that merit their own article (usually ones with lots of history and the name is still in active use), I don't usually include this template at all (largely because I am uncertain what the type would be - I guess "other") but use a chunk of Open Street map, e.g. Stones Corner, Queensland.
|type=other
was added because of the number of invalid types that were being used. I noticed people using the infobox for Australian places that weren't one of the valid types, but still could use an infobox, so "other" was a way of retaining the infobox in the article. At
Stones Corner, Queensland, other would be the appropriate type and both the image and the map can be used in the infobox. Not all fields have to be used, only those that are useful. The only real limit to the infobes use in articles is that they have to be Australian places, although I did find an article about a beach in
Aruba ithat had been using it since 2008.
[3] The two are used interchangeably.|type=town
, as most of the ones I have done so far have a road intersection or point on a closed railway line that works as the town site, but some are more diffuse, kind of like very sparsely populated suburbs. Many of the Hundreds declared in the later part of the 19th century were surveyed with a town near the centre (small commercial and residential blocks < 1 acre), parkland/reserve ring around that, "suburban" farm blocks < 10 acres each surrounding that, and larger farm blocks further out. Some of these towns have survived, some never got going and a competing town survived, some have faded out as transport has improved. It feels somewhat arbitrary to decide that some should be "town", some "suburb" and some "other" without clear objective criteria that endure as the population waxes and wanes.|type=
is used for the following:
|type=protected
certain parameters associated with protected areas are enabled|type=cadastral
certain parameters associated with cadastrals are enabled|type=suburb
and |type=town
? It feels really dumb to try to describe
Bundey as a suburb.
Dowlingville and
Australia Plains and
Tooligie are or were towns, and probably would still be identified as such by most people, but not as "suburbs". If colour is the only difference, I'd say any LOCB that is not clearly "part of" a larger town should be identified as a town in its own right, not a suburb of no particular urban area. --
Scott Davis
Talk 11:46, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
The reference list you provided has "SUBURB/LOCALITY" as the column heading. The map I usually use is the
property location browser also provided by the South Australian Government. The map layer with boundaries is called "Suburbs and Localities", with entities of types SUB and LOCB (bounded locality) partitioning the state. The places I listed are all LOCB, not SUB. The list you referenced contains SUB and LOCB but not LOCU (unbounded localities). I read that as saying they are correctly described as Localities, and colloquially as towns, but nobody would think of rural areas nowhere near a major town or city as "suburbs". The coordinates in the gazetteer for a LOCB are the location of the town/concentration of settlement/subsumed Government Town, not the geometric centre of the boundary. Do you really want to try arguing that
Anna Creek is a suburb (it's in the list)? Perhaps the |type=town
needs to have a new synonym of |type=locality
that would be more accurate for most places with defined boundaries set to partition a state. Would this work? --
Scott Davis
Talk 14:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=locality
was a synonym for |type=suburb
as far as the template goes? I still don't feel this properly meets the needs, but is a better compromise than describing rural and remote areas as "suburbs" of no centre. Neither
Suburbs and localities (Australia) nor
Suburb#Australia and New Zealand attempt to claim that Australians would use the word "suburb" to refer to entirely rural areas or small rural towns or former towns. There are no objective criteria I can think of that would say "this place used to be a town but now it is a suburb" because the people left (e.g.
Dowlingville or
Australia Plains. Towns turn into suburbs because commuters come to it (e.g.
Smithfield or earlier,
Dulwich). I'm finding historic evidence of "ordinary shops" and commercial activity quite difficult to find. Churches, railway stations, post offices, hotels are much easier to find. --
Scott Davis
Talk 00:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
locality
an alias for suburb
, this would be an error is some states where locality does not specifically mean suburb. Many editors think LOCB=locality, but, as I've already mentioned, the the Gazetteer of Australia and some states use LOCB when referring to towns, village, other populated places, local government towns and town sites that have no population. None of these are suburbs. The error checking in the infobox code specifically aims to ensure editors pick the correct type. If you have a place area that is obviously not a suburb, "other" is really the way to go until you can find a source that resolves the problem. The issue can be explained in the prose. Perhaps contacting the relevant SA authority might clear up the actual status of the problem SA locations.There are no objective criteria I can think of that would say "this place used to be a town but now it is a suburb" because the people left- It's unfortunate that other states have not followed the lead of NSW by producing a publicly available Glossary of Designation Values that expands on the basic definitions. Glen Oak is one of those places where the status has changed "because the people left". It is now registered as a suburb, [5] although it was once a small town. That is explained in the prose. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=suburb
, LOCB -> |type=town
and LOCU->|type=other
in those cases where it does not just get a mention in a LOCB or SUB article? --
Scott Davis
Talk 11:11, 5 March 2016 (UTC)What is the point of specifying suburb here?- Suburb has always been one of the default types and is used in thousands of articles
why is "suburb" necessarily worth having an entire field in this infobox for as distinct from " towns, village, other populated places, local government towns and town sites"- "other populated places, local government towns and town sites" have never been catered for in the infobox. Villages generally use
|type=town
. The infobox originally covered just "city", "suburb", "town", "lga" and "region", but over time editors have been adding the infobox to all sorts of articles that don't fall into those categories. "Other populated places" are now covered by |type=other
, as are all of the uses for which the infobox not designed. "Town sites" are generally covered by one of the orginal types and "local government towns" - well, to be honest I have no idea what they are.a functionally meaningless one (leading to absurd results like Anna Creek)- Anna Creek doesn't use this infobox, but if it did, it fits into the "other" category since it isn't one of the types for which the infobox was designed.
in that state at least, you're getting into original research and creating category systems that literally do not exist.- Are you saying that SA doesn't have cities, towns, suburbs, local government areas, regions or places that don't fall under those types?
Who cares which synonym for "gazetted bounded locality" a particular person calls Glen Oak when the Australian Bureau of Statistics, like everyone else, just calls it a gazetted locality- It's not a particular person, it's the Geographical Names Board of New South Wales, which is the official NSW authority for place names, so it has authority. The ABS calls the portion of Glen Oak in Port Stephens Council a suburb. [6] The "gazetted locality" is just a variant of the suburb data showing the entire suburb, including the portion in Dungog Shire, which it includes in the data for Clarence Town, along with a couple of other places. [7] Note that the Clarence Town data excludes some of Clarence Town. The ABS uses "gazetted locality" only as a convenience term for "the officially recognised boundaries of suburbs (in cities and larger towns) and localities (outside cities and larger towns)". [8]
a suburb needs to be associated with an urban area of some kind- I can't really disagree with that. In fact I've sent an email off to the appropriate person/people in New South Wales Land and Property Information asking why places like Glen Oak and Bobs Farm are registered as suburbs when they are clearly localities per the official definitions. [9] Unfortunately, that's the situation that exists here in NSW as well as in Queensland, and I suspect elsewhere.
There was no "problem" to need clearing up until this week.- There was, but you didn't know it because the problem was undetected, often for years, at least since before I first edited this template in September 2007. For example, the infobox was added to Kudla, South Australia on 1 July 2008 with
|type=locality
.
[10] Since this wasn't a valid type, it was the same as not defining the type at all, as you can see in the
testcases that I've added to the
testcases page, using the version of the infobox from February 2016. On the left is the infobox as it existed then. In the middle is the infobox with "locality" removed from |type=
. As you can see, the two infoboxes are identical. On the right is the same infobox with |type=other
. Other than the lack of colour in the third, the three infoboxes are identical. Between us,
Wbm1058 and I fixed about 700 articles where type was specified incorrectly, resulting in the same undetected errors.There is nothing in the SA gazetteer of type "TOWN".- But there is in other states, and I notice that Category:Towns in South Australia and its subcats include 727 articles.
|type=locality
never worked in the past and it still doesn't. Nothing has changed. if we were to add support for locality, it would just be giving it a colour. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 15:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=suburb
must have a corresponding value for |city=
, and we otherwise use |type=town
for LOCB entities, we'd be doing OK. I don't think I have found a LOCB yet that has never had at least one of railway station, school or post office at some time in its history, so they probably counted as at least "villages" (type=town) at that time. Does NSW gazette places as "TOWN" that are contained in larger LOCBs with the same name, and Wikipedia (could) have separate articles for each, or is TOWN part of the partition along with SUB and LOCB? --
Scott Davis
Talk 21:32, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|city=Port Stephens Council
in the infobox, nor |city=Newcastle
, even for the southern ones that are closer to Newcastle than Raymond Terrace. At least one is also in
category:Towns in New South Wales. I think that is possibly a similar level of uncertainty as to whether to identify
Gawler as a town with its own suburbs, or to describe Gawler and nearby suburbs as suburbs of Adelaide. It is commuting distance and part of the Adelaide Metro rail system, so lots of people do commute, but a lot of people rarely go in to Adelaide, as well. It often depends how distant the audience is, Gawler is separate to Adelaide up to perhaps 100-200km away, but to you, "I live in Adelaide" is probably more help than "I live in Gawler". Elizabeth (now
City of Playford) and
City of Salisbury are even more uncertain about whether we should identify them as separate urban areas with their own suburbs, or they are just suburbs of Adelaide. In rural South Australia, the LOCB is their address, and there is generally little distinction needed between living in the town/village or on a farm out of town. Maybe some of the lesser-known LOCBs in the marginal areas could be seen as suburbs of a larger town, but most have or had a village or town centre of their own with a school, church, railway station, post office, hotel or similar. --
Scott Davis
Talk 12:05, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
|city=Port Stephens Council
is not in the infobox because Port Stephens Council is not a city. None are in Newcastle so |city=Newcastle
would be quite wrong. The distance from Raymond Terrace is irrelevant. What is relevant in NSW is the LGA boundaries as, in this state, they determine city boundaries. I don't know how this relates to SA."I live in Adelaide" is probably more help than "I live in Gawler".- This is a discussion I've had plenty of times recently. As you may or may not know, the NSW government has proposed multiple mergers of LGAs and the proposal to merge Port Stephens and Newcastle came out of nowhere. My alternative proposal is to merge Newcastle and Lake Macquarie. A lot of Lake Macquarie residents don't even realise that they don't live in Newcastle. A photo of Redhead Beach was recently featured in "My Newcastle", but Redhead is not in Newcastle. How does SA define a city? In NSW Sydney contains several cities in their own right. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 13:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I agree that would be bizarre. I'm slightly stumped that Virginia and Angle Vale are SUB but One Tree Hill is a LOCB on the other side of the City of Playford. The Playford Council considers all three to be rural townships, although Angle Vale will be urban in the state government's 20 year land release plan, and Virginia is next to Buckland Park, which is also proposed for major urban development, but currently entirely rural, which might explain the distinction. There are possibly similar oddities on the east and south of the urban area, but I am not so familiar with those. -- Scott Davis Talk 09:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
It would be excellent to add a parameter to this template allowing for the addition of the indigenous name for a particular place. Such parameters exist on other infobox templates (such as the island infobox template). I would add this myself but I don't have the necessary know-how to do so. Ljgua124 ( talk) 03:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I propose removing the colour for the type of place (suburb, town, city, etc.) from the infobox. Doing this will not only keep continuity with other infoboxes in use for similar places on Wikipedia (e.g. Template:Infobox settlement, Template:Infobox Australia state or territory, Template:Infobox UK place, Template:Infobox German location, etc.) but, I believe that it will make the article appear "cleaner" with less unnecessary colour. This type of colour coding is not used anywhere else on Wikipedia for locations and I'm not entirely sure why this was implemented in the first place. – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 12:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to capture former names in the infobox? FOr example, there are quite a few places in List of Australian place names changed from German names that have had other names. I have also found towns that were established next to railway stations with different names, then later renamed to match the station. -- Scott Davis Talk 14:18, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
|other_name=
that could be used for this purpose, but I don't feel inclined to convert to a different infobox template just for that. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
other_name
could be used to capture indigenous names as well as former names. Neither former or indigenous names are widely used, but together they might justify the addition of another parameter. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
other_name
for "former or more common name[s]". --
AussieLegend (
✉) 15:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Currently the pop parameter (population) has the instructions "number. should be plain, either with or without a comma. i.e. 12345 or 12,345". Can we change this to "number. should be plain. Please use commas for larger values i.e. 12,345 as it makes it easier to understand for visually-impaired people using a screen reader." Thanks to User:Graham87 for pointing this issue out to me; I am currently AWB-ing my way through them updating those population values over 999 with commas. Graham, are there other parameters in this template that are a problem if not written with commas? Kerry ( talk) 08:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Please see these two stories:
for an interesting case where this template may have violated the principle of least surprise regarding the Melbourne article. Jason Quinn ( talk) 14:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
|lat_dir=S
and |lon_dir=E
to be passed to {{
Location map}} so that editors don't have to input it manually in the 10,000+ articles that use the infobox. If there was a problem with the infobox, the whole country would have been upside down in the northern hemisphere, and west of Greenwich. The fact that it was a single location, and that location was only north of where it was and not 10,000 km west of where it's supposed to be, indicates that it wasn't Wikipedia. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 14:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)I've only just realised that there was never a formal notification of this matter here so, better late than never, the purpose of WP:IAP, which currently redirects here, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 14#Wikipedia:IAP. All editors are invited, and encouraged, to comment at the discussion. The discussion has been underway for 30 days now, so interested editors should comment soon, or you may miss out. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 19:26, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Run to the hills! ( talk) 05:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Raymond Terrace New South Wales |
---|
I like the look of this: the amount of text options is a bit of visual overkill in the infobox but the maps are much more useful than the single maps, and it's helpful to have the choice. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 14:33, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
To be clear, the changes to the infobox are secondary to the maps.No, not at all. The infobox changes are far more important than the maps. We should not be getting any errors in the case that a map file does not exist. The default display also needs to be the state, not the country, as that is the convention we have been using for many years. We normally only select the entire country for the capital cities, and locations that span two or more states. The default image sizes in the infobox have been chosen based on the states, to avoid excessively large images, especially in the case of WA, where a 270px wide image is far too tall, resulting in concerns similar to those expressed above by Kerry Raymond, specifically
The downside though is the increase in the size of the infobox, which then pushes photos (which default to the right-hand-side) even further off-screen far away from the associated text (which is already a problem with the current infobox).The maps, so far, look OK and I don't see an issue with using them, but we have to make sure viewability, especially on mobile devices, is not adversely affected. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 05:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
|alternative_location_map=Australia Greater Adelaide
(like
Davoren Park, South Australia). --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)|coordinates=
rather than individual parameters for each coordinate. That project will eventually reach this infobox too. This work should at best not hinder that work, and even better if they can go together somehow. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
type
, coord_type
, state
and coordinates_display
in order to build the string correctly. Many articles have had |coordinates=
removed entirely. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 10:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
|coordinates=
. I suspect there's a lot more that use |latd=
etc. I think the current content of
Category:Pages using deprecated coordinates format shows it will be a while before they get to us. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for my delayed responses. I'm about to go away on holiday and so I wanted some responses to consider before I went away; but also being about to leave means I haven't had much time to reply. I also haven't had as much time as I'd hoped to make changes in response to concerns which have been raised or which I have noticed. It might be a week before I have the time.
ScottDavis, the colors for Embleton are coming out that way because Embleton/Bayswater is wholly within an urban area. I don't entirely like the way it comes out either. I wonder if I should ignore the coloring for these metropolitan places. The contrast is better at the Embleton/Perth level because I've slightly tweaked the theme.
Regarding the concerns raised by AussieLegend and Kerry Raymond about the size, I don't know what control I have over the radio buttons. They're provided by the Template:Location map. I've never seen them in actual use yet tho, so maybe I can work with them over there to improve it. Can you somehow illustrate an alternatives? I can't see how "Australia Western Australia Perth Bayswater" could ever fit in a single line. Maybe small iconic representations? Replacement by just "zoom in" and "zoom out" with dynamic interpretation?) I certainly appreciate your concern; it frustrates me when I have to scroll past a massive infobox containing largely irrelevant information on my phone or computer (because they take up "text space" even on computer screens) — but I hadn't noticed the WA controls take up as much space as the national map in the first place! And I find it unfortunate that it loads all four images first, then hides the other three.
AussieLegend, regarding the default view, I've used national because most people who visit Wikipedia aren't from Australia. I think it's more polite to give extra information to a majority who are legitimately ignorant, than to assume everyone already knows about Australian states. By defaulting to Australia, we can also have a consistent experience with regard to the size of the infobox without unnecessarily constraining the detail of the map in the case of WA or Adelaide and other log skinny places. "We've been doing it that way for years" isn't an argument that I find particularly persuasive; but there's no technical reason I can't change it (I would just pay attention to the existing parameter). Of course, I have no independent power to implement this — I would like to hear other people's opinions so we can come up with a common understanding.
Regarding the error, I want to re-emphasise that what is in my user space is not something I'm submitting for inclusion into the template right now; it's just an early proof-of-concept for feedback. I want to release bugs into production rather less than you want to see them, because they're not just annoying, they're also embarrassing. However, my plan for ensuring that kind of error does not exist is this:
There's more I want to say, but I have to leave now and I don't want to make you wait for a week for me to say it.
Run to the hills! ( talk) 22:13, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
It is possible that, after I have finished this project, some state will rename, create or merge their councils into larger ones.That is happening now in NSW.
I'm not aware of any particular way to check whether a file or template existsThat's a problem. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
That's a problem.but what's the solution? The current template exhibits exactly the same behavior (and potential bug) as I've proposed?—it switches over the state abbreviations and turns them into template parameters no less fragile than my suggestion. The current implementation was the basis for my proposal. I would inherit its bugs, but nothing prevents me from making it better to the extent that it's possible. Do you know if something is possible?
Is there a "correct" way of providing a reference for the timezone of a place? See this edit for an example of failing to properly fix a formatting error. -- Scott Davis Talk 11:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
footnotes
is provided as a general purpose field for parameters that don't have a unique footnotes field. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 12:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Any references should be placed within the respective "_footnotes" field and not within the field reserved solely for a numeric value. For example, place the reference used for the area of City X in the parameter {{{area_footnotes}}} and not in the {{{area}}} parameter. Otherwise, an error may result.in the documentation as applying to every unformatted field. -- Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
I notice that there are a number of articles with the "near" parameter in the infobox but without a value. The effect of this is to put an apostrophe in the centre of the "adjacent suburbs" matrix, e.g. see West Rockhampton, Queensland. If one removes the "near" parameter, the suburb name appears in the centre of the "adjacent suburbs" matrix, which is what I expect to see. Is there some good reason for this apostrophe appearing or is this a bug? Kerry ( talk) 21:14, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
AussieLegend, just a note I was pleasantly surprised to see that when I fixed the {{
error}} in
Alpine National Park, the infobox map auto-magically changed from the whole of Australia to zoom in on Victoria. Nice! Though with
Capoompeta National Park, I needed to get the numbers from the coordinates
parameter {{Coord|29|23|34|S|152|00|32|E|type:landmark_region:AU-NSW|display=inline,title}}
and populate the separate parameters:
| latd = 29 | latm = 23 | lats = 34 | longd = 152 | longm = 00 | longs = 32
to make the magic happen. Not sure whether there is anything else to do before it's safe to remove the deprecated coordinates
parameter?
BTW, I guess no response at Talk:List of The Simpsons episodes is a good response? Seems everyone is happy with how I implemented that split. Regards, wbm1058 ( talk) 16:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
|coordinates=
is still used by a lot of articles (I have no idea how many). I'd love to see it gone but it's a big job replacing it in all the articles, and some articles, mostly LGA articles, use an image of the state with the LGA highlighted so they don't use the locator map.This update generated a lot of {{ error}}s that I've been fixing. Note that there were
where the type was either "headland" or "peninsula" – concentrated in South Australia – and I changed them all to "other". I don't suppose that this is the only place on the continent that has headlands ;)
Also I changed one "wine region" to simply "region". wbm1058 ( talk) 22:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=locality
to |type=other
. These would in general be better converted to |type=town
out of that set. Most of them once had a railway station, church and/or post office and a concentration of settlement if not a recognisable town, maybe even a gazetted town or a sheep station, and all are legal addresses now. I wonder if the "headland" type also came directly from a government gazetteer (I haven't checked them). --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
village
→ town
as some categories are for "villages and towns", but didn't feel comfortable doing that for all the "localities" - seemed like too vague a description, as even a simple road junction could be called a "locality".This discussion is a mess. Localities are clearly defined in each state and territory, and form a clear, easy, verifiable basis under which to cover geographical content. Cadastral divisions have minimal relevance outside of South Australia (where they only dragged their geographical gazettal scheme into the twentieth century this century), and while I wouldn't vote to delete other ones, they're basically unimportant for all Wikipedia purposes and anyone who isn't a property lawyer or real estate agent has basically no need to even know they exist.
This is not complicated: there is no gazetted locality of Houston, "parish" is such a minor and insignificant level of cadastral division that it'd need an exceptionally good argument to warrant not being nominated for deletion, and it needs to be redirected to the relevant locality (I'm not digging out their resources at 4am, but one would assume Alectown). The American analogy doesn't work in any way a) because their system is completely different (the American concept of "county" and the Australian concept of "county" have absolutely nothing in common besides using the same word), and b) because unlike theirs, ours is uniform. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 19:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
"parish" is such a minor and insignificant level of cadastral division that it'd need an exceptionally good argument to warrant not being nominated for deletion- I was kind of getting at that; nice to see someone more local and knowledgeable confirm that. Right, I figured that one of these systems was redundant, and I assume you're saying that local government areas function more like American counties. So cadastral divisions are relevant for property lawyers and real estate agents; I see we have Public Land Survey System which is probably just as obscure to most Americans as your cadastral divisions. Interesting. I understand your rationale for redirecting Houston, which I'm guessing may have been created because of this "Houston" – and because the observatory is there. wbm1058 ( talk) 21:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
I guess the summary of all this is that we may need to provide some clearer guidance about using this template with bounded and unbounded localities (that seems to be the greatest area of confusion). And I would not mind if we updated some of the "blank" templates to reflect this town/suburb duality (and added a few minor things like pop_year and pop_footnotes which are widely used). But I think the template itself is actually in pretty good shape. I use it a lot and am not aware of any showstopper problems with it. Kerry ( talk) 22:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=town
, or apparently |type=locality
if there is no extant centre, for rural LOCBs. For the scale of some of these,
Wbm1058 might be interested to see the size of
Anna Creek.
Property Location Browser is a good source for seeing how boundaries and locations line up. Turn on the "Suburbs and Localities" and "Place names (gazetteer)" layers and zoom in. --
Scott Davis
Talk 22:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)|type=suburb
. In the early 2000s the NSW government tried to get LGAs to clean up their suburb lists. Some LGAs separated bounded areas into localities and suburbs, while others did not. As a result, we have places like
Bobs Farm, which is mostly rural with no central shopping district, registered as a suburb and not a locality.
[2]For the ones that merit their own article (usually ones with lots of history and the name is still in active use), I don't usually include this template at all (largely because I am uncertain what the type would be - I guess "other") but use a chunk of Open Street map, e.g. Stones Corner, Queensland.
|type=other
was added because of the number of invalid types that were being used. I noticed people using the infobox for Australian places that weren't one of the valid types, but still could use an infobox, so "other" was a way of retaining the infobox in the article. At
Stones Corner, Queensland, other would be the appropriate type and both the image and the map can be used in the infobox. Not all fields have to be used, only those that are useful. The only real limit to the infobes use in articles is that they have to be Australian places, although I did find an article about a beach in
Aruba ithat had been using it since 2008.
[3] The two are used interchangeably.|type=town
, as most of the ones I have done so far have a road intersection or point on a closed railway line that works as the town site, but some are more diffuse, kind of like very sparsely populated suburbs. Many of the Hundreds declared in the later part of the 19th century were surveyed with a town near the centre (small commercial and residential blocks < 1 acre), parkland/reserve ring around that, "suburban" farm blocks < 10 acres each surrounding that, and larger farm blocks further out. Some of these towns have survived, some never got going and a competing town survived, some have faded out as transport has improved. It feels somewhat arbitrary to decide that some should be "town", some "suburb" and some "other" without clear objective criteria that endure as the population waxes and wanes.|type=
is used for the following:
|type=protected
certain parameters associated with protected areas are enabled|type=cadastral
certain parameters associated with cadastrals are enabled|type=suburb
and |type=town
? It feels really dumb to try to describe
Bundey as a suburb.
Dowlingville and
Australia Plains and
Tooligie are or were towns, and probably would still be identified as such by most people, but not as "suburbs". If colour is the only difference, I'd say any LOCB that is not clearly "part of" a larger town should be identified as a town in its own right, not a suburb of no particular urban area. --
Scott Davis
Talk 11:46, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
The reference list you provided has "SUBURB/LOCALITY" as the column heading. The map I usually use is the
property location browser also provided by the South Australian Government. The map layer with boundaries is called "Suburbs and Localities", with entities of types SUB and LOCB (bounded locality) partitioning the state. The places I listed are all LOCB, not SUB. The list you referenced contains SUB and LOCB but not LOCU (unbounded localities). I read that as saying they are correctly described as Localities, and colloquially as towns, but nobody would think of rural areas nowhere near a major town or city as "suburbs". The coordinates in the gazetteer for a LOCB are the location of the town/concentration of settlement/subsumed Government Town, not the geometric centre of the boundary. Do you really want to try arguing that
Anna Creek is a suburb (it's in the list)? Perhaps the |type=town
needs to have a new synonym of |type=locality
that would be more accurate for most places with defined boundaries set to partition a state. Would this work? --
Scott Davis
Talk 14:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=locality
was a synonym for |type=suburb
as far as the template goes? I still don't feel this properly meets the needs, but is a better compromise than describing rural and remote areas as "suburbs" of no centre. Neither
Suburbs and localities (Australia) nor
Suburb#Australia and New Zealand attempt to claim that Australians would use the word "suburb" to refer to entirely rural areas or small rural towns or former towns. There are no objective criteria I can think of that would say "this place used to be a town but now it is a suburb" because the people left (e.g.
Dowlingville or
Australia Plains. Towns turn into suburbs because commuters come to it (e.g.
Smithfield or earlier,
Dulwich). I'm finding historic evidence of "ordinary shops" and commercial activity quite difficult to find. Churches, railway stations, post offices, hotels are much easier to find. --
Scott Davis
Talk 00:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
locality
an alias for suburb
, this would be an error is some states where locality does not specifically mean suburb. Many editors think LOCB=locality, but, as I've already mentioned, the the Gazetteer of Australia and some states use LOCB when referring to towns, village, other populated places, local government towns and town sites that have no population. None of these are suburbs. The error checking in the infobox code specifically aims to ensure editors pick the correct type. If you have a place area that is obviously not a suburb, "other" is really the way to go until you can find a source that resolves the problem. The issue can be explained in the prose. Perhaps contacting the relevant SA authority might clear up the actual status of the problem SA locations.There are no objective criteria I can think of that would say "this place used to be a town but now it is a suburb" because the people left- It's unfortunate that other states have not followed the lead of NSW by producing a publicly available Glossary of Designation Values that expands on the basic definitions. Glen Oak is one of those places where the status has changed "because the people left". It is now registered as a suburb, [5] although it was once a small town. That is explained in the prose. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=suburb
, LOCB -> |type=town
and LOCU->|type=other
in those cases where it does not just get a mention in a LOCB or SUB article? --
Scott Davis
Talk 11:11, 5 March 2016 (UTC)What is the point of specifying suburb here?- Suburb has always been one of the default types and is used in thousands of articles
why is "suburb" necessarily worth having an entire field in this infobox for as distinct from " towns, village, other populated places, local government towns and town sites"- "other populated places, local government towns and town sites" have never been catered for in the infobox. Villages generally use
|type=town
. The infobox originally covered just "city", "suburb", "town", "lga" and "region", but over time editors have been adding the infobox to all sorts of articles that don't fall into those categories. "Other populated places" are now covered by |type=other
, as are all of the uses for which the infobox not designed. "Town sites" are generally covered by one of the orginal types and "local government towns" - well, to be honest I have no idea what they are.a functionally meaningless one (leading to absurd results like Anna Creek)- Anna Creek doesn't use this infobox, but if it did, it fits into the "other" category since it isn't one of the types for which the infobox was designed.
in that state at least, you're getting into original research and creating category systems that literally do not exist.- Are you saying that SA doesn't have cities, towns, suburbs, local government areas, regions or places that don't fall under those types?
Who cares which synonym for "gazetted bounded locality" a particular person calls Glen Oak when the Australian Bureau of Statistics, like everyone else, just calls it a gazetted locality- It's not a particular person, it's the Geographical Names Board of New South Wales, which is the official NSW authority for place names, so it has authority. The ABS calls the portion of Glen Oak in Port Stephens Council a suburb. [6] The "gazetted locality" is just a variant of the suburb data showing the entire suburb, including the portion in Dungog Shire, which it includes in the data for Clarence Town, along with a couple of other places. [7] Note that the Clarence Town data excludes some of Clarence Town. The ABS uses "gazetted locality" only as a convenience term for "the officially recognised boundaries of suburbs (in cities and larger towns) and localities (outside cities and larger towns)". [8]
a suburb needs to be associated with an urban area of some kind- I can't really disagree with that. In fact I've sent an email off to the appropriate person/people in New South Wales Land and Property Information asking why places like Glen Oak and Bobs Farm are registered as suburbs when they are clearly localities per the official definitions. [9] Unfortunately, that's the situation that exists here in NSW as well as in Queensland, and I suspect elsewhere.
There was no "problem" to need clearing up until this week.- There was, but you didn't know it because the problem was undetected, often for years, at least since before I first edited this template in September 2007. For example, the infobox was added to Kudla, South Australia on 1 July 2008 with
|type=locality
.
[10] Since this wasn't a valid type, it was the same as not defining the type at all, as you can see in the
testcases that I've added to the
testcases page, using the version of the infobox from February 2016. On the left is the infobox as it existed then. In the middle is the infobox with "locality" removed from |type=
. As you can see, the two infoboxes are identical. On the right is the same infobox with |type=other
. Other than the lack of colour in the third, the three infoboxes are identical. Between us,
Wbm1058 and I fixed about 700 articles where type was specified incorrectly, resulting in the same undetected errors.There is nothing in the SA gazetteer of type "TOWN".- But there is in other states, and I notice that Category:Towns in South Australia and its subcats include 727 articles.
|type=locality
never worked in the past and it still doesn't. Nothing has changed. if we were to add support for locality, it would just be giving it a colour. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 15:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|type=suburb
must have a corresponding value for |city=
, and we otherwise use |type=town
for LOCB entities, we'd be doing OK. I don't think I have found a LOCB yet that has never had at least one of railway station, school or post office at some time in its history, so they probably counted as at least "villages" (type=town) at that time. Does NSW gazette places as "TOWN" that are contained in larger LOCBs with the same name, and Wikipedia (could) have separate articles for each, or is TOWN part of the partition along with SUB and LOCB? --
Scott Davis
Talk 21:32, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
|city=Port Stephens Council
in the infobox, nor |city=Newcastle
, even for the southern ones that are closer to Newcastle than Raymond Terrace. At least one is also in
category:Towns in New South Wales. I think that is possibly a similar level of uncertainty as to whether to identify
Gawler as a town with its own suburbs, or to describe Gawler and nearby suburbs as suburbs of Adelaide. It is commuting distance and part of the Adelaide Metro rail system, so lots of people do commute, but a lot of people rarely go in to Adelaide, as well. It often depends how distant the audience is, Gawler is separate to Adelaide up to perhaps 100-200km away, but to you, "I live in Adelaide" is probably more help than "I live in Gawler". Elizabeth (now
City of Playford) and
City of Salisbury are even more uncertain about whether we should identify them as separate urban areas with their own suburbs, or they are just suburbs of Adelaide. In rural South Australia, the LOCB is their address, and there is generally little distinction needed between living in the town/village or on a farm out of town. Maybe some of the lesser-known LOCBs in the marginal areas could be seen as suburbs of a larger town, but most have or had a village or town centre of their own with a school, church, railway station, post office, hotel or similar. --
Scott Davis
Talk 12:05, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
|city=Port Stephens Council
is not in the infobox because Port Stephens Council is not a city. None are in Newcastle so |city=Newcastle
would be quite wrong. The distance from Raymond Terrace is irrelevant. What is relevant in NSW is the LGA boundaries as, in this state, they determine city boundaries. I don't know how this relates to SA."I live in Adelaide" is probably more help than "I live in Gawler".- This is a discussion I've had plenty of times recently. As you may or may not know, the NSW government has proposed multiple mergers of LGAs and the proposal to merge Port Stephens and Newcastle came out of nowhere. My alternative proposal is to merge Newcastle and Lake Macquarie. A lot of Lake Macquarie residents don't even realise that they don't live in Newcastle. A photo of Redhead Beach was recently featured in "My Newcastle", but Redhead is not in Newcastle. How does SA define a city? In NSW Sydney contains several cities in their own right. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 13:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
I agree that would be bizarre. I'm slightly stumped that Virginia and Angle Vale are SUB but One Tree Hill is a LOCB on the other side of the City of Playford. The Playford Council considers all three to be rural townships, although Angle Vale will be urban in the state government's 20 year land release plan, and Virginia is next to Buckland Park, which is also proposed for major urban development, but currently entirely rural, which might explain the distinction. There are possibly similar oddities on the east and south of the urban area, but I am not so familiar with those. -- Scott Davis Talk 09:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
It would be excellent to add a parameter to this template allowing for the addition of the indigenous name for a particular place. Such parameters exist on other infobox templates (such as the island infobox template). I would add this myself but I don't have the necessary know-how to do so. Ljgua124 ( talk) 03:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I propose removing the colour for the type of place (suburb, town, city, etc.) from the infobox. Doing this will not only keep continuity with other infoboxes in use for similar places on Wikipedia (e.g. Template:Infobox settlement, Template:Infobox Australia state or territory, Template:Infobox UK place, Template:Infobox German location, etc.) but, I believe that it will make the article appear "cleaner" with less unnecessary colour. This type of colour coding is not used anywhere else on Wikipedia for locations and I'm not entirely sure why this was implemented in the first place. – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 12:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to capture former names in the infobox? FOr example, there are quite a few places in List of Australian place names changed from German names that have had other names. I have also found towns that were established next to railway stations with different names, then later renamed to match the station. -- Scott Davis Talk 14:18, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
|other_name=
that could be used for this purpose, but I don't feel inclined to convert to a different infobox template just for that. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
other_name
could be used to capture indigenous names as well as former names. Neither former or indigenous names are widely used, but together they might justify the addition of another parameter. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 14:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
other_name
for "former or more common name[s]". --
AussieLegend (
✉) 15:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Currently the pop parameter (population) has the instructions "number. should be plain, either with or without a comma. i.e. 12345 or 12,345". Can we change this to "number. should be plain. Please use commas for larger values i.e. 12,345 as it makes it easier to understand for visually-impaired people using a screen reader." Thanks to User:Graham87 for pointing this issue out to me; I am currently AWB-ing my way through them updating those population values over 999 with commas. Graham, are there other parameters in this template that are a problem if not written with commas? Kerry ( talk) 08:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Please see these two stories:
for an interesting case where this template may have violated the principle of least surprise regarding the Melbourne article. Jason Quinn ( talk) 14:22, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
|lat_dir=S
and |lon_dir=E
to be passed to {{
Location map}} so that editors don't have to input it manually in the 10,000+ articles that use the infobox. If there was a problem with the infobox, the whole country would have been upside down in the northern hemisphere, and west of Greenwich. The fact that it was a single location, and that location was only north of where it was and not 10,000 km west of where it's supposed to be, indicates that it wasn't Wikipedia. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 14:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)I've only just realised that there was never a formal notification of this matter here so, better late than never, the purpose of WP:IAP, which currently redirects here, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 14#Wikipedia:IAP. All editors are invited, and encouraged, to comment at the discussion. The discussion has been underway for 30 days now, so interested editors should comment soon, or you may miss out. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 19:26, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Run to the hills! ( talk) 05:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Raymond Terrace New South Wales |
---|
I like the look of this: the amount of text options is a bit of visual overkill in the infobox but the maps are much more useful than the single maps, and it's helpful to have the choice. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 14:33, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
To be clear, the changes to the infobox are secondary to the maps.No, not at all. The infobox changes are far more important than the maps. We should not be getting any errors in the case that a map file does not exist. The default display also needs to be the state, not the country, as that is the convention we have been using for many years. We normally only select the entire country for the capital cities, and locations that span two or more states. The default image sizes in the infobox have been chosen based on the states, to avoid excessively large images, especially in the case of WA, where a 270px wide image is far too tall, resulting in concerns similar to those expressed above by Kerry Raymond, specifically
The downside though is the increase in the size of the infobox, which then pushes photos (which default to the right-hand-side) even further off-screen far away from the associated text (which is already a problem with the current infobox).The maps, so far, look OK and I don't see an issue with using them, but we have to make sure viewability, especially on mobile devices, is not adversely affected. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 05:04, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
|alternative_location_map=Australia Greater Adelaide
(like
Davoren Park, South Australia). --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)|coordinates=
rather than individual parameters for each coordinate. That project will eventually reach this infobox too. This work should at best not hinder that work, and even better if they can go together somehow. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
type
, coord_type
, state
and coordinates_display
in order to build the string correctly. Many articles have had |coordinates=
removed entirely. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 10:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
|coordinates=
. I suspect there's a lot more that use |latd=
etc. I think the current content of
Category:Pages using deprecated coordinates format shows it will be a while before they get to us. --
Scott Davis
Talk 13:07, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for my delayed responses. I'm about to go away on holiday and so I wanted some responses to consider before I went away; but also being about to leave means I haven't had much time to reply. I also haven't had as much time as I'd hoped to make changes in response to concerns which have been raised or which I have noticed. It might be a week before I have the time.
ScottDavis, the colors for Embleton are coming out that way because Embleton/Bayswater is wholly within an urban area. I don't entirely like the way it comes out either. I wonder if I should ignore the coloring for these metropolitan places. The contrast is better at the Embleton/Perth level because I've slightly tweaked the theme.
Regarding the concerns raised by AussieLegend and Kerry Raymond about the size, I don't know what control I have over the radio buttons. They're provided by the Template:Location map. I've never seen them in actual use yet tho, so maybe I can work with them over there to improve it. Can you somehow illustrate an alternatives? I can't see how "Australia Western Australia Perth Bayswater" could ever fit in a single line. Maybe small iconic representations? Replacement by just "zoom in" and "zoom out" with dynamic interpretation?) I certainly appreciate your concern; it frustrates me when I have to scroll past a massive infobox containing largely irrelevant information on my phone or computer (because they take up "text space" even on computer screens) — but I hadn't noticed the WA controls take up as much space as the national map in the first place! And I find it unfortunate that it loads all four images first, then hides the other three.
AussieLegend, regarding the default view, I've used national because most people who visit Wikipedia aren't from Australia. I think it's more polite to give extra information to a majority who are legitimately ignorant, than to assume everyone already knows about Australian states. By defaulting to Australia, we can also have a consistent experience with regard to the size of the infobox without unnecessarily constraining the detail of the map in the case of WA or Adelaide and other log skinny places. "We've been doing it that way for years" isn't an argument that I find particularly persuasive; but there's no technical reason I can't change it (I would just pay attention to the existing parameter). Of course, I have no independent power to implement this — I would like to hear other people's opinions so we can come up with a common understanding.
Regarding the error, I want to re-emphasise that what is in my user space is not something I'm submitting for inclusion into the template right now; it's just an early proof-of-concept for feedback. I want to release bugs into production rather less than you want to see them, because they're not just annoying, they're also embarrassing. However, my plan for ensuring that kind of error does not exist is this:
There's more I want to say, but I have to leave now and I don't want to make you wait for a week for me to say it.
Run to the hills! ( talk) 22:13, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
It is possible that, after I have finished this project, some state will rename, create or merge their councils into larger ones.That is happening now in NSW.
I'm not aware of any particular way to check whether a file or template existsThat's a problem. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 10:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
That's a problem.but what's the solution? The current template exhibits exactly the same behavior (and potential bug) as I've proposed?—it switches over the state abbreviations and turns them into template parameters no less fragile than my suggestion. The current implementation was the basis for my proposal. I would inherit its bugs, but nothing prevents me from making it better to the extent that it's possible. Do you know if something is possible?
Is there a "correct" way of providing a reference for the timezone of a place? See this edit for an example of failing to properly fix a formatting error. -- Scott Davis Talk 11:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
footnotes
is provided as a general purpose field for parameters that don't have a unique footnotes field. --
AussieLegend (
✉) 12:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Any references should be placed within the respective "_footnotes" field and not within the field reserved solely for a numeric value. For example, place the reference used for the area of City X in the parameter {{{area_footnotes}}} and not in the {{{area}}} parameter. Otherwise, an error may result.in the documentation as applying to every unformatted field. -- Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
I notice that there are a number of articles with the "near" parameter in the infobox but without a value. The effect of this is to put an apostrophe in the centre of the "adjacent suburbs" matrix, e.g. see West Rockhampton, Queensland. If one removes the "near" parameter, the suburb name appears in the centre of the "adjacent suburbs" matrix, which is what I expect to see. Is there some good reason for this apostrophe appearing or is this a bug? Kerry ( talk) 21:14, 23 November 2016 (UTC)