Talk:Sydney, protesters reach agreement with police

Please combine articles on Australia protests edit

We seem to have multiple articles on essentially the same story, please combine them all into one. StuRat 09:56, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To which articles are you referring? There are currently seven articles relating to the 30A protests, written over the last week (or so). Each article refers to distinct events that have occurred at different times. Which articles do you think should be merged? - Borofkin 09:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All seven. Change the date to the current date. This one conference shouldn't completely dominate the news. Right now 3 of 3 stories today are on this conference. StuRat 10:04, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reason it completely dominates the news is because no-one else is writing articles. None of them are small, two-paragraph jobs, and as stated above, they each report on a distinct event that has occurred (at different times) in the leadup to the protest. I write articles as the event occurs, and readers need to see headlines. Writing one comprehensive article on the conference/protest is the job of Wikipedia. - Borofkin 10:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I disagree. Let me give an example of a recent event in my hometown of Detroit, USA. There was an explosion of a chemical plant. I COULD have written the following articles over many days:

  • Explosion at chemical plant near Detroit, US
  • Fire still burning next day at chemical plant near Detroit, US
  • Fire finally extinguished at chemical plant near Detroit, US
  • Casualties of explosion and fire at chemical plant near Detroit, US
  • Revelations of previous fines against chemical plant over explosion and fire near Detroit, US
  • EPA investigates toxins as a result of explosion and fire at chemical plant near Detroit, US
  • Law firm files suit against chemical plant over explosion and fire near Detroit, US
  • Additional law firm files suit against chemical plant over explosion and fire near Detroit, US

Now maybe you see what I mean, would you really want to see a continuous barrage of headlines over essentially the same story ? We combined this all into one article, instead. StuRat 10:35, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All of those except "Fire still burning" and possibly "Additional law firm" would be valid stories. Having to many stories on a topic is never a problem, if you think it is to many the solution is to write more stories, not try to kill the ones we have. --Cspurrier 12:03, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Amen, Borofkin has done a great job with all of these articles. ~The bellman | Smile 13:44, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't say kill them. I said combine them into one. It's not the same thing at all. StuRat 17:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This shows one of the differences between Wikipedia and Wikinews. There might be one article at Wikipedia about the CEO conference in Sidney, Australia, which gives detailed background information about the history of the conference and the protests against it. At Wikinews several articles can be published about this conference. All articles reflect special aspects of this event. BTW many of these articles imply great parts of original reporting. --SonicR 18:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please include country names in articles for international audience edit

StuRat 09:56, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The inclusion of country name is rarely needed, and should only be included if it is likely to cause confusion or the story is so localized that you need to use the country name as a warning that people from outside that country are unlikely to care. Turning Sydney into Sydney, Australia is a ridiculous move. Sydney, Australia is by far the most common Sydney in the world, and is known by most people to be in Australia. --Cspurrier 12:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps most, but not all. Do we just ignore those people who are geographically deficient ? I would say Sydney was a borderline case, but not NSW, which few outside Australia would have recognized as meaning New South Wales, Australia. StuRat 17:46, 29 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sydney is borderline??????????? If someone didnt know Sydney (which i really truely doubt - ive spoken with uneducated, poor, rural people from Brasil and they knew where Sydney was (as in that it was in AUS, not where in AUS)), i think it is safe to say they wouldnt know any other Australian city, which would mean they don't know any city in an ENTIRE continent. I strongly believe that if such a person does exist somewhere, they do not deserve to be taken into account. Can i suggest that something be added to the style manual listing which cities we should have to say where they are and which we shouldn't. ~The bellman | Smile 09:07, 30 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree Bell, i'll move the page. This is bullshit - everyone knows where Sydney is - and if they don't then they can look it up on 'pedia! → CGorman (Talk) 09:24, 30 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is well-intentioned but slightly ridiculous. Even us Americans know which country Sydney is part of. -- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 11:26, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Police requirements edit

Have the protesters reached agreement on what conditions would cause them to depart, so police are available for duties elsewhere? For example, the recent London bombings required a suddent rearrangement of police resources. (SEWilco 18:22, 29 August 2005 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Return to "Sydney, protesters reach agreement with police" page.