Talk:Australia, history

To do. Please write a brief definition or description of this article at Australia, history/Definition.

Metadata here

I've categorised this as a stub, given that it's really just a copy and paste from the main Australia article. (And if that's a bit naughty, please let me know and I'll set about fixing it!)

There's heaps of work to be done on this, obviously, but I felt it was probably a good idea to get something in here that others (and I) can work on.

Come on Aussies and Aussie-philes! Let's get stuck in!

David H. Barrett 16:36, 22 August 2008 (CDT)

It should be classed as a developing article: stubs are very very short. If it is already included in the Australia article, why do we need a separate article? I would be more inclined to cut the substantial text from the Australia article (replacing it with a synopsis) and put a subpage History in the cluster there. It is better to avoid titles like "X. history" or "Y, geography" although they are permitted on CZ.Martin Baldwin-Edwards 00:51, 20 August 2008 (CDT)

I believe it is better to have articles as X, history etc. There is no general agreement on this, but it has been the general practise by the people who do most of the history articles around here. Denis Cavanagh 13:54, 20 August 2008 (CDT)

I don't have a strong view on this, but I do feel that we are not using clusters sufficiently. As the history of Australia is clearly a subset of Australia, (as with all other country histories) it seems to make more sense to link the articles together in one cluster. Anyway, I will leave it to the authors of such articles to decide. My only strong comment is that we shoujld not have replicated content, so the detailed history in the article "Australia" needs to be deleted and summarised there. Martin Baldwin-Edwards 14:47, 20 August 2008 (CDT)

Thanks for the comments, Martin and Denis. I am working on summarising, shortening and rewording the history material within the body of the Australia article, so that it doesn't merely reproduce the separate history page (although in reality, the history page grew out of the "History" section of the Australia page, when it became very clear that it was growing to large to be contained therein). I realised immediately that replication was not a good thing (hence my "naughty" reference, above), and will, in time, rectify the situation. (Indeed, I'll probably shorten the "History" section of Australia significantly more than I'm already doing.) I'm also happy to include "History, Australia" as a subpage if that's to be preferred. I set it up as a separate article simply because a number of countries already had history pages along the same lines, and without realising that wasn't necessarily a good thing. If you wish to make this a subpage, I'm happy for you to do so, or if you want me to do it, could you please give me some idea of how to go about it. Thanks for the feedback. It all helps! David H. Barrett 16:36, 22 August 2008 (CDT)

Speaking as a Computers editor, I want an article about the platypus. It is my contention that Australians, growing up with an emotional acceptance of this set of biological spare parts in close formation, are better equipped than anyone else in the world to build functioning multivendor computer networks.

Alas, while I know a few koala stories, none meet the CZ family-friendliness policy. There is, however, a story, too good to worry about its absolute truth, from the Australian Army, involving kangaroos, helicopters, flight simulators, and both soldiers and programmers making assumptions. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:01, 22 August 2008 (CDT)

Your wish is my command. Behold the platypus! David H. Barrett 20:45, 22 August 2008 (CDT)