Talk:Port Douglas

Copyrighted text

I've removed the following text from the fromt page because it has been taken from The Douglas Shire Council Homepage. Although it was referenced, I'm still not sure that it isn't a WP:Copyvio. I thought it best to move it here until somebody can clarify. -- Adz|talk 06:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

The Douglas Shire is a small rural region on the coastline of North East Australia. It is the only place in the World where two World Heritage Areas meet - the Great Barrier Reef and the Wet Tropics of Far North Queensland. Over 80% of the Shire is World Heritage listed.

Douglas Shire has a population over 11,000 people. Its economy is built on a relatively new tourism industry and an established agriculture sector. The Shire accommodates a million visitors a year and produces a million tonnes of sugar cane, cattle and a variety of fruit crops. It also has one of the oldest intact surviving Indigenous communities in the world – the Kuku Yalanji.

The administrative centre of the Shire is in Mossman which is 75 kilometres north of Cairns. The Douglas Shire extends from Simpson Point in the south to the Bloomfield River in the north (approx 90kms in length). The Shire is currently experiencing rapid growth and incorporates Port Douglas and the Daintree National Park. Both of these areas are renowned nationally and internationally as tourism destinations and the Council is committed to sustaining a balance between economic growth and the biodiversity of the natural environment.

More copyrighted text, this time from here

The area known as the Douglas Shire was discovered by George Elphinstone Dalrymple in 1873. Dalrymple noted a hill rising from the water’s edge at the end of a low sandy beach. From a distance, before the low sandy shore was visible, the hill looked like an island so he gave it the name “Island Point”, this was changed to Port Douglas in 1877.

Residents of Port Douglas

I have an issue with this.

• Firstly, most of the people mentioned don't actually live in Port Douglas. Some own property in/near Port Douglas, but don't live there.
• Secondly, why are we mentioning that they live there. Isn't the bio on them going to refer to where they live?

Mark1800 05:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It reads a bit like a tabloid celebrity piece. The content could be removed. Citations are not provided either. However, some may find it interesting . . . --Peter Campbell Talk! 07:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd agree with removing the celebrity "residents" section. As Mark1800 said - most of them don't live there. --Mkfenn 09:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Done 202.161.83.215 10:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to move Port Douglas, Queensland to Port Douglas

I recently botched moving "Port Douglas Queensland" to "Port Douglas". The reason why it should be moved to just 'Port Douglas' is that it is it's common name, no-one refers to it simply as 'Douglas' and is more widely well-known than 'Port' Douglas in Canada. A simple google search (using google.com, not .au) removing monikers such as cairns, queensland, australia, sailing, and charters, still comes up with pictures of tropical places, something it seriously doubt Canada has (could be wrong). Any opposers? Luxure Σ 05:09, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

It may be the case that the Queensland location is the most likely target. However, using Google for this purpose (regardless of whether you use the .com or .com.au site) does not automatically prove your point. Regardless of which Google site you use, the results are still affected by geolocation of your IP address, as well as Google's other algorithms including your previous Google search history and other Google metrics information encoded into some other sites you might visit. So unless you're running it through a foreign or anonymous proxy, your own search is not conclusive. Editors from outside Australia may be able to provide more universal search results.--Jeffro77 (talk) 06:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Well we need an editor from Europe or USA to confirm. Luxure Σ 00:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jeffro77: Well, I did it through an anonymous proxy geolocating to the Netherlands (got to watch my back for ASIO now) and the results were very much the same. A few small differences regarding numbers (eg. 8.2million vs 8.21 million) but otherwise the same. This is final nail in the redirects coffin. Oppose? Luxure Σ 05:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

In theory, that's sufficient. It would be best to wait for other editors to comment.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:12, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jeffro77: I also asked another editor who got similar results here. Well we'll wait for other editors to comment. Luxure Σ 08:12, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I see. I'm not sure that "accused of regional bias" was an appropriate description, but I'm willing to let that go.--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:13, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

If it helps you guys, my gsearch for "Port Douglas" (with quotes) from Canada brings up results for Queensland exclusively, at least on the first page. However I'm about as close to Port Douglas BC as Port Douglas Queensland is to Tokyo. Still, looks like Luxure is right. Ivanvector (talk) 18:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Exactly what we needed.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

SupportNeutral - A Canadian editor has confirmed that the Australian location has prominence in search results over the Canadian location. However most of the sources are promotional rather than informational.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

• weak oppose Sopport this is why we have disambiguation pages to begin with. As a Canadaian when I seach "Port Douglas" I get canadain results. That said ...to everyone else my guess would be that "Queensland" is the result thay get. -- Moxy (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

It's a little concerning that you misspelled the demonym for your own country, but if you do in fact get primary results for the Canadian location then it is not clear-cut.--Jeffro77 (talk) 23:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

LOL voice to text error ..LOL never noticed it was not right....as I was saying I bet I get Canadian results because Google.ca is used up here in the far north...well its what I have in my igloo LOL  :-) -- Moxy (talk) 23:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Interesting, Moxy I'm also using google.ca from Toronto but didn't get results for Port Douglas BC when I searched. What do you get if you click this: [1]? I don't know if there's a more reliable way to check this but I will if you guys have any ideas. Ivanvector (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

WOW I get hits for Queensland when I click the link...very odd. Wonder if its a browser setting (I default to Canada?). I do think as a Canadian that Queensland would be the main search people look for....and think i will change my vote...with just a bit more input from others.-- Moxy (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I think I've lost confidence in your previous search results.--Jeffro77 (talk) 02:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

As have I. Luxure Σ 03:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

• Supporting my own proposal books.google.com, which can be used for scholarly articles, finds only 1 book for me regarding Canada (or, as our PM would say Canadia)(even with -queensland etc., all of them appear from Australia), with 27000 results with -british columbia etc. @Ivanvector and Moxy: are welcome to try that through their Canadian ip's. Luxure Σ 03:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I still get results for Queensland. It could be that my search results are skewed because of pages I've visited recently (I've been discussing here, and there was that noise at Rfd) but I'm still leaning towards Queensland as the primary topic. I'm neutral on the move (it's probably fine for it to be a disambiguation page) but I'm not opposed to it. Ivanvector (talk) 05:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Moxy reported that your link above (which doesn't include reference to your personal search history) also indicated results for the Australian location, so your recent searches probably don't influence things too much. Luxure, I'm not sure that 'supporting' your own proposal actually counts.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Fixed it Jeffro ! 101.174.3.28 (talk) 10:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree, I think you're probably right. I'm sticking to neutral because the search results could be interpreted as simply Port Douglas QLD has a higher promotion budget than Port Douglas BC. I'm not quite convinced that Port Douglas QLD is definitely the primary topic, but I really can't argue with the logic - based on the way we usually evaluate these things, it is. But there's not really anything written about either of the towns, they're roughly the same size, and I think it's about equally likely that someone in, say, Germany, has heard of either one. It's not like Paris vs. Paris, Ontario for example. Ivanvector (talk) 17:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

If you have ever visited Far North Queensland, especially Cairns/PD/the Daintree, you will know that the area is full, full, of Asian tourists and European backpackers. It is much, much more likely they have heard of Port Douglas QLD than they have heard of Port Douglas Canada. I hadn't until I wanted to redirect. Even reading the article, which only has one reference, it is fairly obvious to me that PD QLD is far more well known. Luxure Σ 04:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

And the place is a major tourist destination. DYK that Bill Clinton only visited PD out of all the out towns he had in Australia, and he chose to eat only at the Salsa Bar and Grill. Anyway, it seems to me that no-one (besides Moxy) is directly or somewhat opposed to it. Even Moxy seems to have changed her mind. I will wait, of course, to go further. Only with your blessings. Luxure Σ 09:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not against it. If you're not confident in the result here you could request a close through WP:AN, then the closing admin would probably evaluate this discussion as generally supporting the proposal. But that process is seriously backlogged; I think you should probably just go ahead and do it. If Moxy does still disagree then moves can be undone. Do you need help with the technical side? This might need to be done by an admin through WP:Requested moves. Ivanvector (talk) 12:09, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

First of all I would like to thank all of you for this conversation. Well done. Responding to Ivan, that page is also backlogged, so I speedily deleted through CSD G6 point 3. Once that is done, it will be moved. Cheers, Luxure Σ 04:18, 1 February 2015 (UTC)