Talk:Portland, Victoria

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is now a separate article on the Portland aluminium smelter. Could remove some of the detail on this page. Qwerty310 23:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geothermal[edit]

We seem to have a million different figures for it, that differ considerably. Here they are for interests sake:

  • Wannon Water

http://www.wannonwater.com.au/media_releases/2006_media/20060118.html

The Henty Park bore was constructed in 1982 for the purpose of extracting 2,400 megalitres of geothermal heated water from the Dilwyn aquifer 1.3 kilometres below the city of Portland.

  • DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES

http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/DPI/dpincor.nsf/93a98744f6ec41bd4a256c8e00013aa9/89ab801511056909ca25731b00234153/$FILE/DPI4374.pdf

Operating since 1983, Portland draws its water supplies from four bores

drilled 1400 metres below the natural surface. • The water is brought to the surface at a temperature of 58 degrees celsuis

at a rate of 56 litres per second.

  • Sustainability Victoria

http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/www/html/2105-operating-geothermal-generators-in-victoria.asp

Portland in Victoria has the only geothermal space heating facility in Australia providing an estimated 3.6MW for space heating to local residents and for heating the municipal pool.

  • Murdoch University / Research Institute for Sustainable Energy

http://www.rise.org.au/info/Tech/geo/index.html

Portland in Victoria has sued hot water (58°C) extracted from a bore (1400m deep) at a rate of 90L/s, to heat more than 19,000 square metres of buildings for more than 15 years, and also heat 2000m3 of swimming pool. It is the only spaceheating project in Australia that uses a geothermal resource, as opposed to heap pumps. The total capacity of the Portland facility, operated by the Glenelg Shire is 10.4 MWt (Burns, K.L., Weber, C., Perry, J. and H. J Harrington, 2000).

All appear to be reliable, so make of it what you will... Wongm 03:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add another confligting site....

  • Murdoch University

http://wwwphys.murdoch.edu.au/rise/reslab/resfiles/geo/text.html

Portland in Victoria uses hot water (58 degrees C) extracted from a bore (1400m deep) at a rate of 65L/s to heat more than 19,000 square metres of buildings for more than 15 years.

--Thelastnameleft 05:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portland Sustainability Group[edit]

Regarding the undo of mentioning the Portland Sustainability Group on the Portland, Victoria page, would you please let me know what part of the addition was either "Not notable, Self Promotion, or an advertisment"? This is the second time mention of the Portland Sustainability Group has been undone by a Wiki admin, and I'm wondering if there's wider issue here.

If the answer is "Not notable", do you mean for people within Portland, people with an interest in Portland, or people with no interest in Portland? Apart from the PSG now having run activities attended by approximately 2,000 of Portland's overall population of 10,000, the group has formal support of local government; our State and Fedaral MPs, the entire school community which we are helping install renewable energy systems onto; the Committe for Portland of which we are involved in rebadging the town as the "Renewable Energy Hub of Australia"; other service club such as Lions, Rotary, etc that we combine volunteers with at events; the local print and radio media which give us frequent and regular coverage; or the actual residents here that have benefitted from our activities?

If the answer is "Self promotion", I would have thought a community based online resource like Wikipedia would not be against a non profit group which clearly exists with no agenda other than to help people reduce their environmental impacts and save energy. Nobody within the group collects a salary and frankly it can be hard to achieve at times.

If the answer is "Advertisement", surely the entry is no more of an advertisement for almost all of the other things mentioned on the page. Golf club? Cable trams? Arts Centre? Portland Aluminium? I have nothing against any of these, but there is an obvious inconsistency in the advertising policy if these can be included while the PSG can't.

I would urge you to either reinstate the content, of explain to me what needs to be changed in order for it to be able to be part of the Wikipedia Portland, Victoria article.

Thank you. --PeterReefman (talk) 04:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that is grossly unfair. Most cities/towns of this size (approximately 10,000) are still only now starting sustainability groups such as the PSG. Do you have any proof to show that the group is any less "notable" than every town of this size having schools, community radio stations, golf courses, etc. And yes you did say "Other stuff may of may not exist", but surely common sense needs to prevail here. Through the PSG, Portland is the first town in Victoria to have solar panels put on EVERY school. We are the only town/city in Vcitoria outside Melbourne that has conducted a 1,000+ person human sign which was across Nun's beach in the middle of town. If your personal opinion is that the group is not notable I would invite you to verify with the mayor, schools principle network leader, Portland Observer, etc.

By the way you refer to CIO, no one who actually lives in Portland can ever actually contribute to it's Wiki article, even if that person knows more about the topic than a random administrator. Yes I do belong to the PSG as an unpaid volunteer. That does not alter the fact that the content is correct and worthwhile. If it needs editing then please do. But some mention of the group is certainly warranted.

You last line about Wiki not being a guide for reducing environmental impacts is frankly way out of line. I would like to escalate this dispute as I feel you have an agenda to block any kind of mention of environmentalism in Portland

--PeterReefman (talk) 06:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your obvious determination of stopping any kind of mention of the sustainability group against all appeals and compromises shows that you have a clear agenda of keeping any mention of environmental sustainability out of the article, and that shows that you have a conflict of interest which is far more serious, and also that you are not fit to decide if it should be included in the article or not.

I'm going to open this up to a third party to decide and will paste this conversation into the Portland article discussion to do so. --PeterReefman (talk) 08:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not notable or, at least, you have not demonstrated that it is notable. Notability is not about what you think, or even asking the mayor. It is about whether it has been noticed in detail by a reliable independent source. You only have a source to the Group's own web site. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I accept that Portland Victoria doesn't have a 'notable' sustainability group as defined by Wikipedia. I honestly can't for the life of me see what would need to occur for that to change, and don't have anymore time to give to this. So will leave it at that.

The article itself about Portland has so many significant omissions in it that it's quite a flimsy resource in terms of what the town is. There is no mention of the Blue Whales in the area, no mention of the many surf breaks in the area, no mention of the Great South West Walk, no mention of the huge numbers of other sporting clubs beside Footy and Golf. I've got nothing against these sports by the way, but wonder what they have been selected as being 'notable' above Netball, recreational fishing, soccer, surf-lifesaving, swimming, yachting, dune buggy racing, waterskiing, squash, drag-racing, motocross, Basketball, Cycling, Surfing, tennis, cricket, running, hockey, bmx, shooting, go-karting, horse riding, bowls, karate, judo, polocross, etc etc. And while there USED to be a mention of the town-stopping annual festival (that used to be called the Portland Bay Festival but is now called the bonney Upwelling Festival) and 3-Bays marathon on the same weekend, but that was also deleted - aparently it was more "not notable" content.

I'm pretty disillusioned by this site but thank you Bduke for giving what I believe is an objective third opinion. --PeterReefman (talk) 09:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry you are disillusioned. If you look hard at our guidelines and so on, you could move on to look for good sources to add material about your town. Wikipedia is only as good as its editors. You can add anything you like that you know to be true, but if it is removed or challenged, then you must accept its removal unless you can find really good sources to support it. Fighting against removal without such sources is just not the way wikipedia works. Hang in. --Bduke (Discussion) 11:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Portland, Victoria. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Portland,_Victoria&oldid=1202056824"