This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wellington article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in New Zealand English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse, centre, fiord) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
With currently five paragraphs, the lead is too long. Whilst some of the paragraphs may be joined, the bigger problem is that the lead contains material that is not present in the body of the article. Those items should be moved out of the lead. This includes:
Aubernas has just removed the "Lead too long" tag with the rationale that there isn't a talk page discussion. So here's the talk page discussion as requested and I have reverted the tag removal. Also of relevance is that I have warned this user on several occasions to not start adding content to article leads that isn't in the article itself. This has happened so many times that it can be considered disruptive behaviour. To therefore remove this tag is also straying into the disruptive behaviour territory. If I were to check who bloated up the current lead, I wonder what I would find? Schwede 66 01:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I removed the tag with a reason- this discussion was non existent. You have decided that was unnecessary, but believe me, I wouldn’t just delete it without a rationale; I believed enough time had surpassed without discussion to remove it. You initiating a discussion now also doesn’t mean it’s ongoing- we are only now talking about the use of the tag. You have made a good point that the lede is overlong, and I respect that. As for adding content to the lead without it being in the body, I stopped doing that months ago and genuinely understand that it was an error to have ever done so. Also, my last edit to the lead was a few months ago to remove the “coolest little capital of the world” quote, which I discussed on the Talk page first as being too touristy and outdated. Nobody responded so I removed it (and there was no objection raised), but I can’t see how that was disruptive. Aubernas ( talk) 08:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I have done a brief search for sources that might back up the claim that the highest temperature recorded in Wellington is 31.1 C (as stated in the article), and that the date was 20 February 1896. The temperature record is stated on the Metservice website, but without a date. [1] So far, I have found this quote from the Dominion of 30 December 1930: "The hottest day in Wellington was recorded 35 years ago on February 28, when the temperature rose to 88 degrees". [2]. I will keep looking for other confirmation of the date, but the figure of 88 degrees F does support the 31.1 degrees C record. Marshelec ( talk) 19:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
The UV index of 11 seems a bit hard to believe for a site at 41°S. — Soap — 18:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
The article probably needs an update to include these other modes. There's big plans for improved cycle infrastructure, and cycle trip counts are rapidly increasing. I've just randomly read the article on Milwaukee and figured that might be a good template. Thoughts? 2401:7000:DAD7:2900:B879:EA9F:2030:CAD6 ( talk) 16:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
This edit [5] introduced content about Malaysian influence in Wellington. The difficulty I have with this is that as it stands, it creates an unbalanced impression. The influence of people from other cultural backgrounds is not currently mentioned, yet there is great cultural diversity in the city. The demographic data already in the article in the Culture and identity section indicates that the top 5 countries of origin of overseas-born people in Wellington are UK, India, China, Australia and Philipines (in that order). There is no data at present about the proportion of people in Wellington who would claim Malaysian ethnicity. There are certainly many Malaysian restaurants, (and this is supported by the sources quoted). However, the article now seems unbalanced. The options appear to be: (a) seek reliable sources that describe cultural diversity in Wellington, and broaden the coverage - perhaps including sub-headings (b) remove the specific content about Malaysian influence. Marshelec ( talk) 00:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
The climate section now has a table for Wellington, a table for Pararaparaumu, a table for Wellington airport, and a graph illustrating long term trends. I think this is excessive and that only the table for Kelburn (in Wellington) is necessary. The additional data has added in good faith, but it now seems unbalanced. The Wellington airport climate table could be moved to Wellington Airport, and the Paraparaumu climate table could be moved to Kapiti Coast - noting that neither of these articles have a climate section at present. If there are no contrary views, I will relocate this content in a few days time. Marshelec ( talk) 05:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)