Talk:Tasmania Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

I moved this extlink from the page, but I figured it'd probably be useful, so here it is: http://www.accommodationintasmania.com/ -> Accommodation in Tasmania. --(WT-en) Evan 10:37, 8 Jun 2004 (EDT)

The link is no longer valid. (WT-en) Jamboo 09:08, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

Watching the South Island New Zealand discussion on regions, it is obvious if I am possibly the only contributer on this issue here it would be best to leave explanations of why and how the various articles and regions link. I have made a few mistakes already, but hope the final result is better than what I found. Almost all the Tasmanian articles are outlines, and of fairly sketchy quality. Once I have checked a few things I will put up my suggestion for ammendment of the current Tasmania/regions/cities/etc structure... it may take a few days or more to come up with the proposal. sats (talk) 04:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The regions as listed are the standard regions and correspond to how Tasmanians divide up the state (with one exception, there is is no "North", there is only "North-east" and "North-west" - I'll be altering this shortly). You'd need a pretty good reason to change from that, particularly as it would no longer correspond to how the tourism services in the state approach things. Manning Bartlett (talk) 23:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

which is exactly why i did the above message 0 just in case there was another editor interested - I am not sure your assertions are based in fact having been a tasmanian and also having done the regions article on wp en - feel free to change stuff, but as I had said I am in no rush to change anything, as it is, the lack of anything of substance about the southwest is a major issue, and the southeast and hobart things are a mess sats (talk) 23:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK so in one sense there is according to some versions no 'northern tasmania' (it is used widely in a range of tourism and other publications) - a good guide is the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_government_areas_of_Tasmania - and their groupings. Conflating the regions into 5 seems a bit much, perhaps a conversation raher than assertions and change could help negotiate a better outcome sats (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

http://www.discovertasmania.com/launceston_tamar_and_north for something current, and also my copy of treasure islander for june 1989 also has it - so I really think it is a point of conversation or discussion, rather than a single editors assertion sats (talk) 02:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

No probs. I've been a Tasmanian all my life and seriously, I have yet to hear anyone ever refer to "the North", only the North-west, North-east and Tamar Valley. Even that link you gave has a map which only shows the North-east region (despite calling it "The North"). The body text also only ever refers to the "North-east'. If any tourist starts asking locals about "The North" they'll get a strange look as well. Still I'm not bothered by it - I just find it pretty odd.

as far as how many groups there should be, five seems like a decent number, and corresponds to how Tasmanians generally view the state (it's also how the Discover Tasmania site approaches it). Whether the Central Highlands gets grouped on its own, under Northwest coast or under the West Coast is all a bit arbitrary. The argument for listing along with the NW Coast is that Devonport is the primary access point to the Cradle area. The argument for the West Coast is it ties in with the "Wilderness heritage" aspect (which is what the Discover Tasmania site does). Grouping on its own seems a little pointless IMO. Manning Bartlett (talk) 05:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

The problem with this strange thing called wikivoyage - its not our personal experience (I was a west coaster, and regular commuter throuh the central highlands to hobart - which in itself was looked upon by the locals as odd as the west coast orientation was always to the north west or even melbourne rather than hobart) - but the requirements of wikivoyage format -you might think grouping is pointless - after having changed it to your preferred clumping, ther preferred format is for the visitor traveller (aka mainlander) - where if you see the requirements as espoused by this project is quite different from wp en or other sites.So arbitrary or pointless is not what I am seeking - more - if the traveller goes to tassie fromthe mainland - how do they organise their visit - with most ofthe articles for tasmania to date being atrocious quality - it is embarassing to say the least to even be editing the mess that is there, so just to get articles to tie into the 5 regions (as long as no one else comes in and insists on another variation)- it is a case of a consensus of the 5 main regions and then cleaning up the mess... like trying to get some reasonable quality information into the outline articles once they in the correct region... sats (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

So the problem of claims for areas regions and their priority within a heirarchy for tassie regions is that it depends who you are and where you are looking from - west coasters - as I have mentioned are oriented to the north west coast historically it was their 'way out' by emu bay, ship or otherwise - the road to hobrt came quite late in time and was a killer until our lifetimes (relatively speaking)... so your comments about the 'the north' means either youve been istanbul too long :), or somehow you are related literally or metaphorically to the pollies who wanted to move parliament house to lonnie :) , in general the regional rivalries and the ramifications in politics go back to my old home town of queenie was in a region that was politcally and demographically equal to lonnie and hobart and was trying to flex its muscle - just before the zeehan silver mines failed or about that time - pre first world war. (all this could go into an understand section about tasmania - this is not wp en and the regional rivalries thing is quite unique compared to bloated over sized states on the mainland. )

so I do hope you get my drift - there aspects of this that could go into 'understand' about tassie - and the need for groupings and explaining the connections is an important part of editing and improving the article - is very very 'un' wp en - but a vital part of wikivoyaga imho. sats (talk) 09:25, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

I've worked extensively updating the Tasmania article on WT. I've been having issues with them and only just found out what when on with IB. So I've only just discovered WV and will be migrating some of my articles over. So a heads-up that I'm not just cutting and paste work that isn't mine. Dukenemesis (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Completely understood, and welcome! However, there is another consideration: Search engines tend to penalize pages on different sites that are substantially similar to preexisting pages. So you might consider doing some paraphrasing, if possible, although you do have the right under the Creative Commons license to use your work in any way you like, as I understand. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'll create an overall map to compliment the regions. The one here is just the outline that I'll work on this week. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

The Central Highlands seem to be missing in regions. It is a off the beaten path area with a few small fishing towns but it is getting attention of travellers with its lakes and scenic beauty. Gizza ^(roam) 23:05, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

I think the Tasmania regions needs some attention overall. Probably the least well defined in our Australia articles. Just go forth and fix :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:15, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

well worth checking out the way the regions are descibed in english wikipedia JarrahTree (talk) 10:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

like between current 3 and 4 in the map - central highlands can include derwent bridge cradle and the lakes JarrahTree (talk) 10:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

I can't see how Wikipedia does it, can you please link?

I found w:Local_government_areas_of_Tasmania with this image. Andrewssi2 (talk) 19:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

now that the southern beaches has it's article and it's its own region, where does this go? I think it should get it's own box but I'm going to ask your opinion here. Especially from User:JTdale. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 10:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've added it for now. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Given that now all Tasmania articles are at least usable or higher, would that mean that after brushups to this article, would this now be a guide article? SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:48, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

This article looks pretty good, and is close to guide status. I see Hobart is at guide status, which is good news, but we might need a couple more important tourist destinations at guide status to justify the move. I would take a look at Tasmania#Cities. A minor point would be to make sure that list includes only nine cities, per the 7+2 policy. I think this is close to guide status, though, which would be a big step forward I hope can happen soon. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 17:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Here's a list of all the cities mentioned here:

• -42.880556147.3251 Hobart – the state capital and largest city located in the south of the island
• -41.866667148.2833332 Bicheno – beach town on the east coast
• -41.063611145.8752783 Burnie – the fourth largest city in Tasmania
• -41.180556146.3463894 Devonport – home to the Spirit of Tasmania ferry, third largest city
• -43.033333147.0333335 Huonville – gateway to southern Tasmania
• -41.441944147.1456 Launceston – the second largest city
• -42.080556145.5555567 Queenstown – historic mining town on the west coast
• -42.733333147.4333338 Richmond – home to many old buildings dating back to the 19th century as well as the oldest bridge in use in Australia
• -41.166667147.5166679 Scottsdale
• -42.15145.31666710 Strahan

I personally think the last two should be removed, only because I've never heard of them. Given I've never visited the island, I'd prefer if someone who has at least visited to comment. (pinging @The dog2, Vaticidalprophet, LivelyRatification:, as you may have a much better knowledge of Tassie than myself) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Never ever been to Tasmania, sorry. --LivelyRatification (talk) 09:05, 30 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I would remove Scottsdale, as I have never heard of it, but have heard of Strahan. It is 20 years since I visited Tasmania, and so my knowledge is vague. AlasdairW (talk)

Done (btw, having visited Tas 20 years ago is much better than both LivelyRatification and myself who've never visited it ;-)) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

I like the current banner, but it's also being used on Australian Convict Sites, and the mountains are more a highlight of Tassie than the convict sites in Port Arthur. I've cropped some other ones though. Keeping in mind, that I, just like most mainlanders, have never been to Tasmania. If anyone has visited Tassie to give in some input on which place is more representative, it'd be greatly appreciated.

Alternatively, there are some banners also on Talk:Hartz Mountains National Park which may also suit the Tasmania article. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:56, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

2, 4 and 6. We commonly use natural sceneries for states and regions, in particular for those known for their nature. /Yvwv (talk) 11:56, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

4, then 3 if that kind of hat is reasonably representative of Tasmania. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Added a seventh banner. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 07:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

My new order is 4, 7, 3. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 30 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I like #7, but is the aurora seen often in Tasmania, being a more northern location in the Antarctic region? --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 03:08, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Banner 4. Ground Zero (talk) 04:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Have added an eight banner, this time of the iconic Tasmanian devil. It looks nice though, but maybe not as a banner. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:07, 1 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

My picks: #1: 3 (because it's unique compared with other banners), #2: 7 and #3: 6. Current banner is not bad, but doesn't convince me. 1 doesn't tell very much, and could be any place on Earth. 2 looks good, but we should reserve it for the park article to have a nice banner. The same with 4. 5 is a lesser version of 6. While 8 and 9 are depicting local fauna of the place, the focus of the animal is not good for a banner. --Onwa (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

It seems there's really a lot of mixed responses here.

• Banner 1 – 0
• Banner 2 – 6
• Banner 3 – 10
• Banner 4 – 17 (+6 my own vote) so 23
• Banner 5 – 0
• Banner 6 – 4
• Banner 7 – 16
• Banner 8 – 0
• Banner 9 – 0

So it seems banner 4. Drop me a message on my talk to know how this grading system works. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:19, 5 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

List of pages under Tasmania with banner discussions.

• Talk:Ben Lomond National Park
• Talk:Bicheno
• Talk:Bruny Island
• Talk:Franklin-Gordon Wild Rivers National Park
• Talk:Freycinet National Park
• Talk:Hartz Mountains National Park (made the switch already, although with only two votes)
• Talk:Maria Island
• Talk:Southwest National Park

--SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:15, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I must say that the region structure is an absolute mess. Why does a national park get its whole entire region? What's the benefit of that? North West Coast needs a massive cleanup, something that requires a lot of time to do, which I don't have much this month, and have abstained from doing that because of the region mess. I've come up with a new region list at User:SHB2000/Tas regions, which in a nutshell:

• SE Tasmania is renamed as Southern Tasmania
• North West Coast and West Coast are merged
• Eastern Tasmania is basically just East Coast (Tasmania) and Northeast Tasmania combined
• Southwest Nat Park, which seems to come under both Western and Southern (which was likely why it was a region of its own) is just going to be under southern for simplicity. Plus, the only road (B68) leading into SW Nat Park comes from the rest of Southern Tasmania
• The two Bass Strait islands will remain as it is, along with the currently uncreated Kent Group National Park
• Macquarie Island will remain where it is and not be breadcrumbed under Tasmania (or Australia for that matter)
• The 7 regions are cut down to four, with only three having region articles

Does that work out? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 01:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

After 1.5 months - Done. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 08:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed that Western Tasmania has gotten quite long. If it becomes unmanagable, then we can always subdivide that article so the Tasmania article is never more unreadable again. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 09:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Should the West Coast Wilderness Railway be mentioned in its region article (Western Tasmania), or should it be mentioned in Queenstown (Tasmania)? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:34, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Common sense would indicate that NZ is way too far away from anywhere in Aus (even Macquarie Island or Norfolk Island) to justify a ferry service. Is it really necessary to have this line, or can it be removed outright? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 12:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

About 50 years ago there were ferries from Australia to New Zealand. The line can be removed as it is covered by "There are no international ferry services operating." in Australia#By_boat. AlasdairW (talk) 21:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Maybe this isn't a milestone, and even if it were to be considered one, it's very niche (as I stated in the title), but hear me out on this (I even thought twice before sharing this).

On Feb 25, 2023, I made a list that kept track of every single Tasmanian article that contained a routebox – it was manually updated every time I added a routebox to the bottom of every article. After 1.5 months, I finally finished adding a routebox to every single Tasmanian article (destinations that have roads, obviously).

It wasn't until recently that I came to the realisation how everything becomes way more easily navigable without having to use the breadcrumb hierarchy. Now, for the first time, I can jump between every town between Burnie and Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area, per se, without having to go back to the region article (Western Tasmania), while also getting an insight on what's along the way.

So, what's my point, you ask? For content creators (or anyone, really), if you can add a routebox, please do so. It might not seem like a useful addition at first glance, but the more routeboxes added to nearby destinations, the more it'll feel in place. These are way more helpful for travellers than a geoline marking each hiking trail on Tombstone Territorial Park, per se.

--SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 06:33, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations on your milestone. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply