Jump to content


Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Restructured Infrastructure section, added Health section


Greetings, I have restructured the article a bit to bring it closer to the style used on the Sydney page.
Main reason is that I want to add a section on healthcare, but adding yet another major section of r a few lines of text seems weird. I believe that the page looks better with the new grouping now, and this style is also used for other Australian cities like Sydney. But feel free to disagree, I'm relatively new here on Wikipedia and not sure how much I may change without asking for consensus. LordPeterII (talk) 14:40, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hobart Name


Aboriginal names describing a region are not applicable when used in conjunction with hobart, which is a city. A city is: "an inhabited place of greater size, population, or importance than a town or village." notice the definition changes due to the amount of infrastructure/buildings/population etc when compared to a village or town. A city is not defined by a region name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC) [sock comments struck through. Drmies (talk) 02:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)][reply]

You seem to be mistaken. The name quite specifically refers to the city: See the Tasmanian Aboriginal Center's statement here.
If you'd like examples of usage in the wild
The Australian Youth Climate Coalition, School Strike 4 Climate and Australian Parents for Climate Action use nipaluna/Hobart as the name for their local committees/working groups.
Hobart & Beyond, the official tourism agency for the city, uses the term here. Ten Days on the Island 1, MONA 2 use the dual name. The Law Society of Tasmania and University of Tasmania both use nipaluna (Hobart) within their welcome to country LST, UTAS. JTdaleTalk~ 10:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the comment from JTdale (talk · contribs) above, please see the following which I have also replied with on another talk page you (unknown user) have edited:
You must be new here - Wikipedia has guidelines which allow for Alternative Names with specific reference to 'historical names, and significant names in other languages', the guidelines do not differentiate article naming conventions in the way you suggest - while that may be a relevant definition outside of Wikipedia, a population definition does not apply here. The names you are referring to are correct within Wikipedia's guidelines, not only are they formatted correctly as per Wikipedia's guidelines (eg. in parenthesis, specifying the known & cited historical language and no more than two alternate names), they also present a Neutral Point of View and satisfy Verifiability as they are sourced correctly with historical and reliable sources (literally journal entries from historical explorers). The Alternative Names should not be removed as they are correctly used under Wikipedia's guidelines. Edit warring is however against the policies, please refrain from doing so as there are penalties as listed on the Edit warring policy page. GadigalGuy (talk) 12:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It has come to my attention that the word 'nipaluna' refers to a location/region that differs greatly from the location of present-day Hobart. These two names (nipaluna and Hobart) should, therefore, not be used interchangeably. This error warrants being corrected. Simulaun (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:Hobart page states that "The city lies on country which (sic) was known by (sic) the local Mouheneener people as nipaluna, a name which (sic) includes surrounding features such as kunanyi/Mt. Wellington and timtumili minanya (River Derwent)". Nuennonne/Palawa kani: nipaluna is, therefore, not the same as the city Hobart and should hence not be presented as such (as is presently the case in the first sentence of the WP:Hobart page). Simulaun (talk) 12:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[sock comments removed: Drmies (talk) 02:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)][reply]

"Hobart Function & Conference Centre" listed at Redirects for discussion


An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Hobart Function & Conference Centre and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#Hobart Function & Conference Centre until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. A7V2 (talk) 07:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indigenous names


Starting section so that editors who wish to do so may present arguments for altering the WP:STATUSQUO in the article, specifically, removing the alternative name from the first sentence. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 02:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

this is already being discussed in the "Hobart Name" Section (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, but without you, because I'm blocking you for edit warring. Drmies (talk) 03:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you might want to block yourself for the same thing. I suggest providing arguments for the inclusion of information, particularly when consensus has not been reached, before engaging in edit warring. (talk) 04:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure you are not the same person as the IP I just blocked? Drmies (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ Says the one who started this whole shemozzle across multiple articles, has been switching IPs as fast as possible, and has now created a sockpuppet to evade a block. We were not born yesterday, and can tell very easily that all these "people" who are "supporting" you, are actually you switching IPs and making socks. Even considering every IP you've used as a single person, the number of users reverting you is still higher than the number "supporting" you (i.e. you and your socks). Yes, I am saying this directly, because the WP:AGF ran out a while ago. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 06:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mako001, are you saying there is an account now? Drmies (talk) 16:18, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies:John11888 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) seemed to find this page in a manner that can only be described as an improbable coincidence. Their other edits consist of minor copyediting, followed by suddenly showing up here to support the IP. Note that in addition to the improbable coincidence, both fail to capitalise "Simulaun", and both start their replies with lowercase letters. I wasn't going to bother with SPI, since I figured that dropping the hint that it wasn't fooling anyone would be enough to put a stop to it. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 23:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]