|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Australia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20|
|Australia has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Geography. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as FA-Class.|
|This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)), 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.|
|Australia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 16, 2005.|
|Current status: Featured article|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 9, 2004 and July 9, 2005.|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|This subject is featured in the Outline of Australia, which is incomplete and needs further development.|
|Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines.|
|This talk page is automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. Any threads with no replies in 2 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived. An archive index is available here.|
Royal Anthem of Australia - God Save the Queen
Should God Save the Queen be referenced to as the Royal Anthem of Australia. This would put the Australia article in step with countries such as Canada and the other Commonwealth Realms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:4425:FE01:25BA:332E:65C:C031 (talk) 02:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- At the end of the Anthem entry in the Infobox there is a Note, linking to the bottom of the article, where the Royal Anthem is explained. HiLo48 (talk) 02:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
NO. Australia, though technically "ruled" by the Queen is barely affiliated with her. We sing our own national anthem. Wherever possible, dissimilarise and distance Australia from England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User 5643 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- Australia is a constitutional monarchy, sharing a monarch with the UK and several other countries. Your opinion on the merits of that arrangement cannot change the fact that we do have a monarch, currently a queen, so we do have a Royal Anthem, and it is God Save the Queen. If Australia holds another referendum on the matter of becoming a republic, and it succeeds, then all that will change. HiLo48 (talk) 04:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
When I search 'Australia's population' (or something like that) on Google, the results state 26.8 million. I know this is not in the given reference, but should I change the population stat to 27 million?
- There is a note attached to the population figure in the Infobox that tells you "....Australian Bureau of Statistics website...The population estimate shown is automatically calculated daily at 00:00 UTC and is based on data obtained from the population clock on the date shown in the citation." You can see the figure here. The Australian Bureau of Statistics is the government body charged with keeping track of these things. What you have found by Googling is wrong. HiLo48 (talk) 03:19, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- Adding to what HiLo48 has said, the two figures in the infobox are the census population (23.4 million) and the estimate provided by the official Australian population clock (25.6 million). That is automatically updated every day and these are the only two reliable sources for the Australian population. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:31, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
number of reptiles
"Australia has the greatest number of reptiles of any country, with 755 species" - I find this in error (or at least not supported). To me, "the greatest number of reptiles" means the greatest number of individuals, not species, genera, varieties or the like. Unless I get push-back, let's change this to a more accurate wording.Kdammers (talk) 07:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yes. That's sloppy language. Feel free to tidy it up. HiLo48 (talk) 07:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- I suggest "Australia has the greatest
numberof reptiles ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitch Ames (talk • contribs) 07:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- I'd suggest "Australia has <number> species of reptile, more than any other country in the world." The figure seems to be outdated as I've seen sources saying 1,078, based on the reptile database. Unfortunately, the best sources seem self-published. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Wow, it's like the United States of America doesn't even exist! Good job, anti-US Australians! You've managed to erase an Australian ally completely from existence (at least in one section of one article). --220.127.116.11 (talk) 03:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC) SchutteGod (not logged in)
- Article could probably do with a mention of Aus-US relations. If there's something you'd like to add, please do. Also some useful source material at Australia–United States relations. -- Euryalus (talk) 03:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Landmass vs total area
An editor recently changed the landmass area in the prose because it contradicted the total area in the infobox. The prose figure is cited to Geoscience Australia which says "At 7617930 km2", which I assume is the total area. The figure in the infobox, 7,692,024 is larger, but is not cited. Template:Data Australia shows 7,682,300 for the landmass and 7,692,024 for total area. Obviously, there is some contradiction here. Can anyone find a source for both total and landmass? I will try later but I'm heading out right now. --AussieLegend (✉) 10:10, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- The reference for 7,617,930 km2 is an archived 2007 snapshot of the Geoscience Australia page "Australia's Size Compared" from 22 April 2005. The current version of the page on the GA website does show the higher value of 7,692,024 km2, but this figure also shows up as total land area including mainland area + island area on the 2005 page archive "Area of Australia - States and Territories". Strangely enough the current version of that page has the same total as a lower 7,688,287 km2. Note the 2005 figures were calculated using GEODATA 100K Coastline data from 1993, but the current pages are using GEODATA Coast 100K 2004. The ABS Year Book Australia seems to be where GA published their official estimate of area, but this publication was discontinued in 2012, with the last edition saying 7,692,024 km2. Interestingly, Geoscience Australia also refers readers to the CIA World Factbook, where the figures given are:
- total: 7,741,220 sq km
- land: 7,682,300 sq km
- water: 58,920 sq km
- I'll keep looking and see if GA have published a paper on the most recent estimate.
- --Canley (talk) 05:31, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Australia - earliest human occupation not 65,000 years.
The statement is made that Australia has been settled for 65,000 years, with one reference only and no indication that this age is strongly debated in the Archaeological and Geochronological community.
Although the original paper cited in this article (ref 15) was published in Nature, it is very weak through lacking verifiable evidence; no archaeology was dated at the sole site reported at 65,000 years, and the dating relies on dating the sand sheet containing the alleged ancient archaeology by one technique only - that of dating individual sand grains by the Optically Stimulated Luminescence method.
This method is unreliable if there are mixing processes affecting the soil, and at the sole site dated there is great annual rainfall and runoff and great disturbance by termites - the region has one of the highest termite densities on Earth. These effects cause stones to settle through unconsolidated sediment and fully explain the old ages attributed to the archaeology, which is entirely stones. No successful carbon dating of identifiable ancient human artefacts was performed.
The only unambiguous artefacts are worked stones, and their dates are only by assuming they are correctly in association with the sediment around them and have never moved since burial.
Peer-reviewed specialist journal articles disputing this age should also be cited, these include:
Williams MAJ, Spooner NA, McDonnell K, O'Connell JF. "Identifying disturbance in archaeological sites in tropical northern Australia: Implications for previously proposed 65,000‐year continental occupation date." Geoarchaeology. 2020;1–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.21822
Martin A.J. Williams. "Termites and stone lines - traps for the unwary archaeologist". Quaternary Science Reviews 226 (2019) 106028
James F. O’Connell, Jim Allen, Martin A. J. Williams, Alan N. Williams, Chris S. M. Turney, Nigel A. Spooner, Johan Kamminga, Graham Brown, and Alan Cooper. "When did Homo sapiens first reach Southeast Asia and Sahul?" 2018. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1808385115 PNAS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zimmo6677! (talk • contribs) 09:04, 23 November 2020 (UTC)