Talk:National War Memorial (South Australia)

National War Memorial (South Australia) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 23, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
November 20, 2008	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
March 10, 2009	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 30, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that a building fire destroyed the first designs for the South Australian National War Memorial?
Current status: Good article

Australia: Adelaide / South Australia / Military history Low‑importance

	Australia portal National War Memorial (South Australia) 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Adelaide (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject South Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of South Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Military history: Memorials / South Pacific / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military memorials and cemeteries task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	World War I task force

Sculpture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture articles

Visual arts: Public art

	Visual arts portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
	This article is supported by the public art task force.

1924 Competition

Currently I've stated that the 1924 competition was open to South Australian British citizens only. This is in keeping with most of the sources - Inglis, Veterans Affairs and Cameron. However, Richardson in his 1998 report (not the 1998 Advertiser article) states that the 1924 competition was open to British citizens, but doesn't state that they need to be South Australian. I'm looking at Richardson as the primary authority (there was a significant error in Inglis, who said that there were three competitions, and I'm not inclined to give the other two as much weight), but I've gone with the majority and stated that the 1924 competition was only open to South Australians. I'd love it if someone can clarify this for me in case I've stuffed up, though. - Bilby (talk) 16:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't access to any additional sources to conclude on way or the other, but I'd agree you've taken the correct approach. As an aside, I'm delighted to see your efforts turn to this article following your work in returning the Shrine of Remembrance to featured standard. This article was really only a rudimentary piece created for Anzac Day, so it's nice to see it padded out.--cj | talk 04:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll leave it as it is, then. I suspect Richardson may simply have brushed over the 1924 rules, as they don't end up being overly significant given the fire. I'm glad to be working on this - I felt a tad funny about working on a Victorian memorial before I worked on the local one, (not that is really an issue, of course, but the whole interstate rivalry thing must be given airtime) so I promised myself that I'd do this next while I still had some of the sources on hand. And then I was pleasantly surprised to see that you had already started it, so I had something to work from. I don't have many refs, simply because there aren't that many around, but I figure that GA should be easy, with featured being possible if the sources are deemed sufficient. - Bilby (talk) 04:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved - I was able to get access to the 1924 competition rules at the State Library, and it confirmed that the '24 contest was restricted to SA residents. It also provided a location for the memorial, which is counter to my reading of Richardson. I've corrected the article accordingly. - Bilby (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:National War Memorial (South Australia)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA on hold

This article has some small issues that need reoslving before it can be passed. Firstly, a {{fact}} template has been placed where a reference is needed because of the use of a direct quote. Secondly, in the construction section, I do not understand the issue over inside and outside rates so this will need to be explained further.

This is otherwise an excellent article, well referenced with good use of images. I have made a few minor changes that mainly involved removing references to authors of books outside of the reception section as it gave the article a slightly essay-like feel rather than encyclopedic. This article will be watched for seven days and if no improvement is made by then may be failed. Good luck! Million_Moments (talk) 18:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! The article is definitely looking better - but I'm a tad embarrassed that I missed a direct quote. :) I've fixed the quote and (hopefully) clarified the inside and outside rates of pay. (I should have known better, given that it took me a while to figure it out when I first read it). - Bilby (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Pass

Congratulations, this article has now passed! The article is very good and there are not many ways I can recomend improving it except to expand it as much as possible. Though possibly impossible to get hold it, you could look for newspaper coverage from the time to be able to expand the reception section. Congratulations again, and keep up the good work! Million_Moments (talk) 10:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'll see what I can do with the reception section - I've been looking, but most of the old newspaper reports I've got hold of so far just said that it existed, and the exceptions were in a collection where they hadn't kept any of the publication details, so I can't use them. :( But I shall keep looking. :) - Bilby (talk) 00:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation tag

I appreciate that the memorial honours all South Australians killed in the war, not just people from Adelaide. But it's located in Adelaide, and that's more germane to how it's disambiguated than whom it is honouring, I think. People wishing to visit it need to know they have to go to Adelaide specifically, not just anywhere in SA. Should we not move it to National War Memorial (Adelaide)? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not overly worried either way. Technically, it was intended as the South Australian National War Memorial, as opposed to being focused on Adelaide (unlike the various regional memorials), so the current title can be read as the (South AUstralian) National War Memorial, which is how I always interpreted it, but being clearer on location also makes some sense. - Bilby (talk) 09:11, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Building, restoration etc.

I worked on the memorial during it's restoration in 2001 and have photographs I took of the interior. Not the room but of the foundation space under the pool and the interior of the arch. These photos are of interest as these areas are not normally accessible (according to the caretaker who has looked after the site since WWII, I was actually the first person to enter the top of the arch since he'd been there). Inside the arch, the construction workers had carved their names, addresses and the period they worked on the memorial. I will have a look for the photos and upload a few to commons when I have time. One item not mentioned in the article that I think may be relevant is the coin on the south-west face. Considering the effort many people make trying to remove it I would think it deserves a mention.
The following is general information of interest only rather than something for the article. The interior of the arch was fitted with light bulbs and it was discovered that they were connected to the memorial lighting so that they were lit whenever the memorial room lights were on. Almost all the bulbs, which were standard household bulbs, still worked after 70 years of daily use. In the foundation space we found that all the 1928 wooden formwork for the concrete was still in place. When the concrete foundations and supporting columns were tested it was found that the concrete had deteriorated to the extent that, in the words of the testing engineer, it was of "comparable strength to that of a concrete path a home handyman would lay in his backyard." The bottom of the pool was also the roof of the foundation space and that concrete had become porous and there was considerable leaking. Apparently, if the foundations had not been restored the entire building would likely have collapsed within a few years. Both my father and grandfather worked on the memorial as employees of Tilletts. Wayne (talk) 07:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wayne. Photos of the interior are tremendously exciting. :) - Bilby (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on National War Memorial (South Australia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]