Talk:Mount Wellington (Tasmania)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mountains (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Australia / Tasmania (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Mount Wellington (Tasmania) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (marked as High-importance).
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to for other than editorial assistance.



Hobartians - is that really appropriate? SatuSuro 02:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Nearest permanent settlement[edit]

'It is not popularly known that the nearest permanent human settlement directly west of the very pinnacle of the mountain, is 11,000 kilometres away, in Chile'

What atlas are we using here? Has Argentina ceased to exist? This needs to be cited or deleted.

I've removed it - the best reference I could find was, which appeared to have come from Wikipedia anyway. --Scott Davis Talk 13:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
If it is true, it's referring to permanent settlements. Otherwise you're not just forgetting Argentina, but the rest of Tasmania west of the mountain as well!--Just James T/C 12:12, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Current cable car proposal[edit]

There have been a couple of single-purpose accounts recently adding emotive/biased content into the paragraph about the current cable car proposal. If people wish to introduce further changes to this paragraph please suggest them here on the talk page first. -- Chuq (talk) 13:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Dual naming[edit]

Do people think it is appropriate to rename this article to kunanyi / Mount Wellington? I notice signs (such as at the pinnacle) have been changed, but also the road sign such as when leaving the Southern Outlet has been modified (rather awkwardly - with giant brackets). All names have benefits:

  • kunanyi / Mount Wellington is the official name
  • Mount Wellington is the most common name
  • kunanyi doesn't require disambiguation

I'm not suggesting one name over the other but it is worth having the discussion. See also List of dual place names in New Zealand. -- Chuq (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

no, the only name is Mount Wellington, the other names no one will know. Kunanyi has had 3 hits in the last 3 months, whereas the curent name has 7150 hits in the same time. We often ignore official names as titles as they are not the WP:commonname as our policy requires.Redirects are OK. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:52, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the hit counts, are they from internal links or actual typed search teams (from Google or WP?) given the redirect from kunanyi didn't exist until yesterday, I'm not surprised. WP:COMMONNAME does make sense though, for now. Maybe in the future. (I notice Uluru is at the aboriginal name, rather than Uluru / Ayers Rock). -- Chuq (talk) 03:48, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Hobart City Council calls it "kunanyi / Mount Wellington", following the capitalization rules of palawa kani. Still, WP:commonname would appear to apply, in my opinion. Maybe the article could do with a "name" section or subsection? With references, of course. Pete "Moonah Hooner" AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:08, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
It may at least deserve a mention. I'll re-word the intro! -- Chuq (talk) 12:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect Elevation[edit]

Maybe the official elevation has changed, but my understanding is that the elevation of Mount Wellington is 1,271m rather than 1,269m. 1,271 is quoted on Tasmap maps and publications, and on the Wellington Park site (, and even in the weblink referenced in the article (although older versions of the site may have had a different figure). (talk) 00:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Mountain renamed by gazette on 19 Dec 2013[edit]

Mount Wellington was renamed kunanyi on 19 Dec 2013 by the Tasmanian Nomenclature Board: Confirmation Notice No 111. As a consequence the wikipedia page has been moved to kunanyi / Mount Wellington to reflect the gazetted name change

Under Dual Naming policy the accepted name for the mountain is is kunanyi / Mount Wellington. Palawa Kani placenames are conventionally spelt without a capital but Wikipedia defaults to a capital in the title.

The Gazetting of the mountain as kunanyi with the dual naming of kunanyi / Mount Wellington can be viewed at the Nomenclature Board of Tasmania. Sean Parker (talk) 11:34, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the name in common use, rather than official names. It is OK to mention the official name in the text however. If the official name becomes widespread in use, then it can be renamed. But due to your blanking of the redirect, it will not be possible without admin assistance. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:11, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

The mountain's name is not Mt Wellington it is kunanyi / Mt Wellington and this page will be referred to Wikipedia administrators for adjudication.Sean Parker (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

What wikipedia is WP:ABOUT probably needs to be read very carefully... as well as WP:AGF and WP:NOT

If you bothered to look User Graeme Bartlett is an administrator for a start.. and also, please take note an experienced editor on Tasmanian subjects...
Wikipedia is not about creating a list 'exact' by legal proscription every items as proscribed by legal or other means - there are a wide range of options which are used for naming people, things and places - and it is not a pleasant experience in some cases - there are some policies well established which are not there to accept exact legal definitions and names - but in fact those which are found as common, and accepted names - as Graeme has very specifically indicated that Wikipedia uses the name in common use, rather than official names - take a look around wikipedia - this is the case. Being determined to make a fuss about an exact name will waste yours and others time - the cases of where 'exact' names have failed to move the wikipedia community is a long litany of exasperated editors who have tried to hijack policy or precedent - it does not work, try to learn from it and move on, rather than be stuck with it, is a suggestion.
Tasmanian topics and subjects are 'under-watched' - and as a consequence followup or 'other eyes' may be long in coming along. (I once waited a year for a reply) - if you really have the projects aims at heart - not your own particular agenda, it might be better to have arguments about others things in other places - it gets very quiet in Tasmanian project space. JarrahTree 12:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
Also look a item 5 - this ha all been through before, sigh... with WP:AGF JarrahTree 12:49, 27 May 2017 (UTC)