Major General James G. Blunt

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Map

Just a minor issue with respect to the map. The Australian Capital Territory was known as the Federal Capital Territory until its name was changed in 1938. There was also the Jervis Bay Territory (from 1915) which was actually part of the FCT. If the map is to represent the period fo 1926-31, then the ACT should be labeled as the FCT. Also, the division did not occur until 1927. Alan Davidson 00:50, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The region vs the former Federal territory

Hi everyone,

I have removed all of the content concerning the former territory called Central Australia from the article because it is very confusing to the reader. The territory called Central Australia ceased to exist in 1931 while the Northern Territory Government region of the same name probably came into existence after 1978. I have created a redirect called Central Australia (territory) which can be expanded into a new article. I have also upgraded links re the former territory in various articles. The large number of links to the current Central Australia article indicates a need for a general geographic style about the place called Central Australia; there is also probably a need for a disambiguation article for Central Australia. Finally, I have remove the section entitled "Centre of Australia" because this is off-topic and because there is already an article called Centre points of Australia for which a link has been placed in 'See also'.

Regards Cowdy001 (talk) 04:44, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Having just seen Cowdy001's comment above after posting on the noticeboard, I think this serves to reinforce my point. What I posted there:
There is a DAB page for Central Australia, with the primary topic being the region in the NT. I think this is a problem, not only because I found it confusing when I first came across it, but because I see the term used loosely applied to the interior of the continent frequently. Few non-Australians, and I think many Australians, would not be aware of the narrower definition. This ABC article published today illustrates my point.
I agree with Cowdy re the need for a general geographic article, and I would suggest no primary topic for the DAB page. This could take some time to untangle, but a lot of the incoming links are from one or more templates, so changing them would automatically change a lot of the links. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the usual usage of the term "Central Australia" is an informal one. All of the formal definitions are ad hoc as far as I am aware, including the one discussed here. This Wiki article is sparse on citations, does not give any clear indication of the authority for the precise declaration of boundaries, and at best it appears to be used for one department within the NT government, at worst an invention of a Wiki editor. I am not sure what the point of this wiki article is at all. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 02:13, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Before you get to far into page can we address the basics on regions. https://cmc.nt.gov.au/strengthening-regions defines 6 regions, whereas https://budget.nt.gov.au/regional-highlights defines 5, with slight differences in the areas. Tourism seems to define different areas again https://www.tourismnt.com.au/research-strategies/research/regional-profiles. There is also a wiki page Regions of the Northern Territory that is also confusing. Furthermore the regions appear to be dependent on the whim of the ruling government.
With regards central australia as a region https://cmc.nt.gov.au/strengthening-regions/regional-economic-growth-plans/central-australia says its 40% of the NT, whereas https://budget.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/1103040/central-australia.pdf says it's 42%. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 05:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Jameel the Saluki. I started fiddling with it yesterday but my day was rather broken up and so haven't really had a chance to get my head around it properly. I also started looking at the Regions of the NT article, which you may have seen, but it all seems to be a bit of a dog's breakfast. I might have a go at modifying what I have wrote earlierin this one, having started to uncover the problem, but I want to get a few other things done so probably won't get back to this for a day or two. Please feel free to edit as you see fit yourself. I guess one question is: do we want this article to cover all current uses of the word, explaining these issues, or do we try to create separate articles for ??? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it should be written in a manner that primarily deals with the informal aspects of the term Central Australia, which would include examples of the semi-formal uses such as the administrative use in the NT, but also include all the other potential informal uses. I do not think that the current regional divisions by the NT government warrant their own pages as the divisions are entirely internal to the NT government's administration and largely invisible to the general public (for example is their a need to contact a specific regional administration centre based on address?). The previous state of Central Australia is worthy of its own article, anything else that needs its own article should become apparent as the article progresses. I have been avoiding this because there are numerous articles on Australia like this with artificial formalisations imposed, and so it's a widespread problem, but one restricted to Australia, as I haven't seen any other country with this problem. What I will do is make a collection of all the examples of the term Central Australia that I can find and then formulate a way to reword this particular article. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 23:57, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's great, Jameel the Saluki. I have had a go at broadening the scope, but the NT region still dominates the article. Probably needs to be something in the body about the distinction between the capitalised and uncapitalised versions. I agree that the informal (uncapitalised) version should be the more dominant one. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:14, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's what I've got so far. All modern usages of the term are ad hoc, that is the term is applied to an area where that area is defined for the purposes of whatever the area is being used for. In general though, it seems to be always centred around Alice Springs, or at least Alice Springs is always included. Northern South Australia is frequently included and occasionally central Western Australia. Frequent synonym is "red centre". The use of the term has gone out of favour amongst academic geographers, slowly disappearing from about 1950-1970, thereafter only being used in the most non-scientific sense. There are no climate, ecoregion, or cultural boundaries. In it's narrowest sense it means Alice Springs and the nearby areas of the MacDonnell Ranges. In its broadest sense it means the area inside the outer ring of sealed roads, where there is little European development or change, somewhat synonymous with "outback". Pages that link to Central Australia within Wikipedia are similarly broad, ranging from the completely non-specific to a pseudo-geographic location. No links refer to the government administration areas specifically (that I could find).
The reason for the articles existence appears to be through the generation of a template Template:Regions of the world, which contains a subtemplate Template:Regions of Oceania where someone had to generate regions of Australia. For the NT there are six regions used. One editor made the comment on the Regions of the world template - "This template is oversaturated - Please limit all entries to physical geography." which would require the NT regions to be redone.
What can be said about "Central Australia" is fairly limited
- can discuss what I've posted here, namely the vagueness of the term and what it can mean
- can describe the general features - climate, ecology, economic development, various geographic and geologic features (with a broad inclusion)
- could list specific examples of use, but difficult to find anything worthwhile
- cannot describe population or area (except for government administrative area)
- can provide non-exclusive list of possible LGAs
- I cannot find anything on "Centralia" - is this even real? Jameel the Saluki (talk) 05:21, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is the very first entry for Central Australia - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Central_Australia&oldid=14053963
This is clearly describing Central Australia in general terms. Importantly, it demonstrates that the article was not intended to be about an administrative region, and thus this general meaning should take precedence (unless there has been some discussion to the contrary, which I don't believe has occurred).
With regards the native language name "Mparntwe Ampere", this is misspelled and has the words around the wrong way. It should be "Apmere Mparntwe", and it refers to the general land around Alice Springs, has no official acceptance anywhere, and does not correspond to any other meaning. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 07:32, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for all your work. That looks like a lot of progress. I was googling on my tablet earlier and sent myself a few links of possible interest to add to the above.

Firstly, kind of minor, and incidental now, but a couple of things perhaps worth a mention in the article, perhaps both in the same section:

Centralia, wrt this part of the world, is represented on wiki by the Centralian Advocate, but the only two articles of real relevance I could find by googling are Centralia on a site called Lasseteria, which looks like research done by an individual called Robert Ross. Possibly not the highest standard of RS, but its clips look legit and could probably be found on Trove, and google turns up a few others citing his work. "An historic and geographic place name favoured by Ion Idriess when referring to the far interior of Australia..." and goes on to give quite a bit of detail. And then a 2019 news. com story "Idea to merge South Australia and the Northern Territory gains support" - suggested name Centralia. All worthy of mention in the body of the article, but I wouldn't have thought in the lead, not being in common use.
Tourism sites tend to only refer to NT, as they are no doubt all related to the NT Govt or supported by them in some way. This one refers to the Red Centre as including several sub-regions around Alice Springs, as well as Tennant Creek & the Barkly.
I would be happy for you to remove the incorrect native name, as well as reference to Centralia in the lead, as a first step. And I agree now that we should keep the main description as the more general term. What about mentioning that there are some specific uses applied by the NT Govt, with a few examples, but not too much detail, as this is likely to keep changing with changing administrations in the future? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The uses by the NT gov should definitely be mentioned and it made clear on the specific use, that is the current year and it being a largely internal administrative formality as well as externally with its funding (eg:https://www.ntphn.org.au/living-and-working-in-the-nt/central-australia/).
Centralia should probably be mentioned but not in the current manner of unstated authority. Perhaps saying the terms Centralia and Centralian are commonly used in association with Central Australia.
Tourist sites definitely use the term, but extremely loosely, with the exception of https://www.discovercentralaustralia.com/ which specifically services local government areas "We service 61% of the Northern Territory including the local government areas of Barkly Region, MacDonnell Region, Central Deserts Region and Alice Springs Town "
I'm still thinking things over currently. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Central_Australia