Talk:Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Western Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne 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 Western Australia (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 Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

A fact from Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 January 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the recently restored Holy Trinity Anglican Church in Roebourne is the oldest church in North West Australia?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Holy Trinity Church, Roebourne, in 2009

... that the recently restored Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Roebourne (pictured), is the oldest church in North West Australia? Source: Anglican Diocese of North West Australia: "Holy Trinity Roebourne is ... the oldest church in North West Australia."
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Providence and Worcester Railroad

Created by Bahnfrend (talk). Self-nominated at 05:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Hook is interesting and sourced properly in the article, QPQ has been completed properly, article meets the required size, though I have my doubts about the reliability of Monument Australia with its few members of staff and the Copyvio score is too high at 68.1% for ref 2 so fix this by reducing the amount of direct quoting. K. Peake 09:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: Thanks for the comments. I found another source, reworded some of the existing content, and added quite a bit more content. The copyvio score is now zero. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The copyvio score is definitely up to scratch now and good thing you found an alternate source, but it has not been used as a replacement here yet. K. Peake 08:26, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: The "alternate source" is for the article as a whole, and is now footnote 1. I'm not sure what you mean by "replacement". Monument Australia was only ever a supplement to another source, which is also already cited. The hook is sourced to two sources, neither of them Monument Australia: Anglican Diocese of North West Australia: "Holy Trinity Roebourne is ... the oldest church in North West Australia.", Government of Western Australia: "... the oldest church in the Pilbara district ..." Bahnfrend (talk) 09:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: No, my problem is that an article itself is supposed to be covered by reliable sources to pass DYK. K. Peake 10:17, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: I'm sorry, but I don't understand your explanation. Which of the points in the article is not supported by a reliable source? Bahnfrend (talk) 13:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is that only reliable sources should be USED in the article and I have doubts about the reliability of the aforementioned one. K. Peake 20:22, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: I don't share your doubts. Monuments Australia is a long established website. Its content is not user-generated; it is edited by two people with appropriate qualifications and/or experience, and relies upon a large number of other reliable sources. It also has many contributors, including 17 "Volunteer Research Officers" from all States and the ACT who for the most part similarly have appropriate qualifications and/or experience. If you use the expressions "monuments australia" and "monumentaustralia.org.au" to search Wikipedia, you will see that the Monuments Australia website is cited as a source for more than 200 other Wikipedia articles on a wide variety of topics. That is a good indication that Wikipedia editors other than myself similarly consider it to be a reliable source. Bahnfrend (talk) 05:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not know about this reasoning behind the source being reliable since initially, I thought it was lacking after seeing not many staff members on the site. You are entirely correct though, but should have mentioned this initially because I did say I had my doubts, not there is no way this is reliable. This should be good to go now, nice job and I see no remaining issues! K. Peake 07:53, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]