This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
List of Australian diarists of World War I 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
A fact from List of Australian diarists of World War I appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 April 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
@Pigsonthewing: I agree the list is too big and I'm going to split it if I can. I'm thinking that maybe four lists of roughly equal size, broken down by the soldier's name (since none of the other columns are really sortable or complete enough for a breakdown). Does that sound like a reasonable approach to you? Craig Franklin (SLQ) (talk) 01:50, 18 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]
No, having looked more closely at it, splitting by state isn't going to work as a lot of entry don't have the home town. Figuring that out first is just too much work. Split into alpha ranges is probably the best idea as Craig suggests. Kerry (talk) 04:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would prefer to do it by state as well, it's just a shame there are so many gaps and I'm not inclined to standardise and research 1000+ entries solely for that. Craig Franklin (SLQ) (talk) 04:50, 18 August 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Understood why this change was requested, and fair enough too, but an unfortunate downside is that this is no longer one of the Wikipedia articles with the most references. For a while there this article was actually the single MOST referenced one in the entire Encyclopedia, but has since been overtaken by a cinema-culture one, one about american city nicknames, and another about american political endorsements. It was good to beat these frivolous ones with an Australian/GLAM article - written by SLNSW librarian user:Rubicon49bce no less. Wittylama09:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Wittylama: I know you realise this, but none of the content has gone away, it's just spread across four pages now. Unfortunately while the citation count on the old page was impressive, trying to edit the thing using Visual Editor to add additional entries was slowing my computer to an absolute crawl. This way it'll be easier to add more entries to the list. Craig Franklin (SLQ) (talk) 23:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC).[reply]
of course of course, it was just a fun thing to be able to show at glam presentations and as a showcase stat about both Aus and GLAM punching above our weight. Now that I think of it... Since you're working with SLQ, and this article was started by SLNSW, does that mean you've an ulterior motive for chopping it up? :-P Wittylama00:12, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
