Talk:Summer Hill, New South Wales

	Summer Hill, New South Wales was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 7, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 3, 2006 Good article nominee Listed September 16, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted October 29, 2007 Good article nominee Listed January 30, 2023 Good article reassessment Delisted Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Australia: Places / New South Wales / Sydney Low‑importance Summer Hill, New South Wales 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 Australian places (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject New South Wales (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney (assessed as Mid-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of New South Wales. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Currently unresolved feedback from first failed featured article candidate attempt:

1. I still think the history section needs work - there must be more to the history of the suburb than the story of a mansion!
   • Status: Assigned to Nickj.
2. The politics section could do with a copyedit
   • Status: Ambi plans to copyedit at a later date.
     • Message left for Ambi on talk page.

Currently unresolved feedback from second failed FAC attempt:

1. The transportation and politics sections have no good reason not to be rewritten as prose, rather than as a list.
   • Transportation is now back as prose thanks to Ta bu shi da yu, and the politics section is currently prose (I think!).
2. St Patrick's church note is still one sentence, and the Buddhist temple is two - best to include a bit more on each.
   • Buddist temple now has more info; St Pats could probably be expanded though.

Can you please advise me how you come up with the pie charts & sat photos available for publishing under GFDL? I am trying similar pages for futher west.... TIA Garrie 05:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the pie chart, I got the ABS data about place of birth, put it into an Excel 2000 spreadsheet, created a pie chart of the data, then did a "save as" for the spreadsheet in HTML format. This created a PNG or GIF of the pie chart. I then took just that pie chart and uploaded it as GFDL (since I was the author). For the satellite photo, that was done by getting a satellite photo of Sydney from NASA, and most or all NASA photography under US law has to be released into the public domain (the Americans were very smart in mandating this license for most or all government imagery that is made public). I then took that public domain image, and by hand/mouse traced on the borders of Summer Hill (which I knew from other sources such as street directories and Australian government sources). The resulting image was then uploaded as GFDL. Hope that helps! -- All the best, Nickj (t) 23:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added this page for a possible good article nomination as it failed FA status but may still qualify for a Good Article status. Any comments should go below. (JROBBO 13:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Dropped by as a GA reviewer. It looks good except for the lack of inline citations. Please add some so that the reader knows where things came from and where they can go for more informatiom --CTSWyneken^(talk) 01:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked in again, and would like to a little attention to language. For example, the article says: "in the inner-west of Sydney." I found myself asking: inner-west what? Quarter, neighborhood, etc. a little less use of the passive voice would also make it easier to read. Article on hold. --CTSWyneken^(talk) 14:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "Inner-West" is the name of an area in Sydney (usually between Strathfield and the city on the south side of the harbour). (JROBBO 04:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. Could you say something like this in the lead? It would be a mercy to a hopeless American like me. 8-) --CTSWyneken^(talk) 00:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've changed as much as I can that's passive and could be fixed. A lot of it can't be. I've done some rewriting where needed as well. (JROBBO 03:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Fair dinkum! It is very well done. I've promoted the article. Congratulations and G'Day! --CTSWyneken^(talk) 20:47, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was drawn to this statement in the article: "Throughout 2006 and 2007, local residents have opposed the ongoing expansion of the school's buildings and attempted demolition of heritage buildings owned by it." Although Nickj cleaned up the work the editor in question did, I fail to see how this is true at all. Trinity doesn't own any heritage buildings apart from the chapel and the Headmaster's House- no other building in the school is listed on Ashfield Council's heritage listing at all (see here), nor are they on the State Heritage Listing for the suburb (here), nor is there any other listing for any houses on the block bounded by Prospect Road, Victoria Street and Seaview Street; a look through the School's newsletters for the past year (here) reveals no plans whatsoever about the demolition of the Headmaster's House or Chapel. This is quite obviously rubbish and will be left out until such time as someone can provide a source. JROBBO 09:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked the council minutes for the last year - there is nothing there on any dispute with the school. Provide a source or the unreferenced POV statements stay out. JROBBO 04:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TRINITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

The above editor, the esteemed railway timetables expert and pipe-cleaner, has a clear personal interest in protecting Trinity Grammar and in defending it at the expense of verifiable truth. This can be checked by reference to his continual attampts to delete mention of the Development Apllication still before Ashfield Council which has been noted in the article and deleted by him many times.

There is no doubt that the building owned by Trinity that line Seaview Ave and Prospect Road are heritage protected. Further, the current DA calls for the demolition of 11 houses on these streets in order to build a multi-purpose hall, expand the gymnasium, build a multi-level building, townhouses etc. these plans are available from Council - they are not available on the web (though that doesnt mean they dont exist, egg head!).

Redidents HAVE opposed this development - check with council re letters, petitions etc.

The editor (a possible Trinity staffer or ex-pupil or parent)needs censure for an ongoing personal campaign that involves removing all reference BOTH to the development and to his conflict of interest. he should return forthwith to train timetables and the history of the miner's lamp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs)

Again, I would refer you to WP:CIVIL when making comments like this. You have also been warned about providing verifiable sources, and I have already shown Wikipedia policy that shows it is your onus to provide the verifiable sources. The DA Number is not enough and proves nothing - there would be nothing in that document to show that the buildings are "heritage" or that people are upset by the proposed works. I've already shown the heritage registers and there's nothing in there to back up your claims. If you want to put that information, that's fine, but I and anyone else who wants to read this needs to know that it is true, and it is done by the inclusion of a verifiable source. If there's no source, it can't be checked and it should be deleted. My interest is not with the school, it's with the article and keeping it as a Good Article. I'm keen to keep it that way. Calling other users vandals is not going to help. JROBBO 03:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would refer JROBBO to the Civility Code of Wikipedia in reference to his ongoing description of edits he disagrees with as "rubbish" and those who put them in as "vandals". Do you think these remarks qualify under Wiki Civility protocols? These denigrations of other's work and integrity just leads to further disagreements and lowers the level of debate to a childish one. Perhaps you could apologize to Zimbo729 nad the two of you can make up.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs)

I never accused Zimbo729 of vandalism - I suggested that he should provide verifiable sources to the article regarding the POV statements contained therein. When he persisted in taking out the information, then it became vandalism. By the way, aren't you and Zimbo one and the same person? You appear to write in exactly the same way, and with the same sorts of insults. JROBBO 12:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How rude. No I am not the same person as Zimbo whateverhis/her name is. How insulting to even draw the inference. I may have to report you to the Wiki manners committee or whatever its called (Im sure you've got the web-reference handy for me if I need it). To return to abuse, so to speak - so you are not denying repeatedly calling another editor's contributioins "rubbish" then - just because you cant find a web-based verification for it. I am intrigued what verification exists for some of the other (alleged) facts in this article - eg "the area has quite a friendly and community-focussed atmosphere" - is this attributable to some community sampling survey perhaps (pls provide the link) - or else some observer just dreampt it up and put it in, somehow evading the JRobbo Sword of Editing Damocles! Are we to suppose those refernces AREN'T ahem "rubbish" as you didnt snip them out and remark nastily you were excising "Rubbish"?? A casual observer may think the rules seem to change when Trinity is involved... You buddy Nickj also reverts to the "R" word whenever he doesn't like someone elses work. Its most "Uncivil" under the definition you point to. Please, err explain why you and nickyj are allowed such lenience when others get blasted with threats of removal etc... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.124.45 (talk • contribs)

Folks, can we please keep the detailed Trinity stuff out of the Summer Hill article? Trinity is just mentioned in passing because it is located in Summer Hill, but there is a separate article all about Trinity itself, which is I think the best place for things that are mostly relevant to Trinity. Also it would help enormously to include references to anything that is added to the Trinity article (since sometimes that article is a bit of a battleground between pro-and-anti-Trinity positions, and verifiable references go a long way towards documenting any statements, thus making them much harder to dismiss). -- All the best, Nickj (t) 03:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of November 2, 2007, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

• The lead does not adequately summarize the article.
• Every statement that is likely to be challenged needs an inline citation.

Regards, Epbr123 18:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a contributor to this article, I don't think I'm impartial enough to formally review but I do think the renomination is premature. Here are a few examples of problems that will probably be identified as needing to be fixed:

• The intro says SH is 7km from the city, the infobox says 8
• the first par says "The suburb was originally settled in 1794" while the second says "Before settlement, Summer Hill was the home of the Wangal and Cadigal Aboriginal peoples". I'd be uncomfortable with language that implies the aborigines weren't settled there.
• Similarly, 1794 seems an odd date to choose for the founding of the suburb if the name Summer Hill wasn't used till much later and there was no substantial settlement there either. With Ashfield, I chose the date of Elizabeth Underwood's subdivision to found the village of Ashfield as a more obvious date linking to the current suburb.
• In the Characteristics section, it says it has been christened 'the village' without any reference to that effect. As a local, I know this to be true but those sorts of statements will be picked on by reviewers.
• Finally, the schools section makes no reference to Summer Hill Public, which has a long history and, as a partially selective primary school, is very popular. An independent reviewer probably wouldn't note that as an omission but I think it significant.

And there's probably more. I didn't go through it with a fine toothcomb. Crico 22:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just some notes from a partial review of the article.

• Info box states it's 8km from the CBD but the lead states 7km
• 30 acres (120,000 m²) needs a non-breaking space and would be better as 30 acres (12 ha)
• mid-20th Century - century should be lower case
• "area was said" in the lead. Was is redundant as it's implied by the start of the sentence
• I wonder if you should wikilink "upper-class" in the lead and look at this sentence for comma/semicolon usage. Perhaps also wikilink "working-class"
• "It is also very multicultural, with 45% of the 2006 population today born overseas". I see that the reference for this does not back up the "very" part of the line and notes "34.7% were born overseas" rather than 45%...perhaps I'm not reading this reference correctly
• Charateristics "neatly defined" ... how is it neat ? I'd suggest just "defined"
• "To the north of Summer Hill" -> "North of Summer Hill".. the "To the" seems redundant. Is this entire sentence required as it's covered in the infobox ?
• Paragraphs 2 and 4 of the characteristics section are unreferenced and the section contains some weasel words.
• "the area of land we now know as Summer Hill" would be better as "the area of Summer Hill"
• "What is now called the Hawthorne Canal (and was originally the Long Cove Creek)"
• "The use of this name suggests that kangaroos were then common in this area, and therefore that the country was probably fairly open (the type of terrain favoured by Kangaroos); and secondly, that kangaroos may have formed a significant part of the aboriginal diet." -> "This name suggests that the land was the open terrain favoured by Kangaroos, that they were common in the area and may have formed a significant part of the aboriginal diet." seems to read better + is a statement that needs a reference
• St Andrews church ... should this either be St Andrews Church or St Andrew's church ? (don't quote me on this as this is not my forte)
• Statement that the "suburb is popular" needs a citation
• St Patrick's church is a Catholic church located in the oldest known still standing building in the area, built in 1874... isn't the church the building itself or is the building used as a church and other things. Perhaps should be "St Patrick's church is a Catholic church built in 1874 and is the oldest known building in the area"
• "Much of the exterior fabric of the church is however original, and the church has recently been renovated internally" - however is redundant and recently should be changed to a year else this'll age fast.
• "transept arches" should be wikilinked for those of us who have no idea what type of arch this is
• "Local political issues" in the politics section really needs a reference

Will look at some more of this tonight --Peripitus (Talk) 04:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I've fixed all of the above, and added extra references, except for adding a reference to paragraph 4 in the characteristics section. I didn't write that part of the article and I don't have the original references on me so I do not know where I could find a reference to show that. Any ideas? JRG 06:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After looking through the article in depth there are a number of issues to be fixed.

well written..needs a copyedit in some sections

• Look at the short stubby paragraphs in "Transport" . should be combined into less and longer ones.
• Look at the external links section with a view to the guidlines in Wikipedia:External links. "Places to eat in Summer Hill" as a link to a commercial site doesn't really add to the article and many of the links are of questionable use.
• Look at the bit in the infobox "1.1 km² (0 sq mi)" I've tried to fix the suburb template but, if this doesn't work a better way is needed as 0 sq mi makes no sense.
• "Events and attractions" section needs work. The last sentence is a given for any council and is not informative. The entire paragraph needs looking at for grammer and structure. "where you can meet a writer and ask them questions on their experiences" seems a long winded way of saying "where the public can meet and talk to writers"
• "Local political issues include:" this section should be converted to a paragraph of prose.
• some grammer and sentence issues to be addressed (this is not exhaustive)
  • "Aboriginal peoples" not sure why it is not "Aboriginal people". In the same sentence "was the home of the" -> "was home to the"
  • If supported by the reference "It seems likely that the well-documented" -> "It is likely" would read better
  • Governor Phillip not only recorded that half of the local Aboriginal population was estimated to have died from the disease, andbut he also noted that the Aboriginal people always "retired from where the diseases appeared" as well.
  • "A little later in the century" does not read well. "A little" is imprecise and not needed. A date would be better
  • and the subdivisions of much of the surrounding area followed. subdivision should be singular and this reads better like "followed by subdivision of much of the surrounding area"
  • popular choice for city-types..."city-types" ? not exactly an encyclopediac noun.
  • village-style setup containing cafés... not sure of what this should be but to most people in the world village-style would not mean what I know it does. Better to find another way to say this or drop the village-style bit.
  • "for an undisclosed sum" - as it is undisclosed these 4 words can go. It is then implicit that the sum is undisclosed.
  • "The site of the school has been in continuous use for educational purposes for 120 years" might be better as "The schools' site has been in continuous use for education for 120 years"
  • "Trinity Grammar is one of many wealthy schools in New South Wales, and has previously received some of the largest federal funding grants (as government grants to private schools are partially based on postcodes, and the school is located in a not especially wealthy postcode)." ... the entire bit in brackets is a bit POV and also largest grants in comparison to ????
  • "By road Summer Hill is located close to Liverpool Road and Parramatta Road, and so is well served by roads, although in peak hour these roads are quite congested."... By road is not required as roads are identified a few words later. Perhaps this would be better culled down to "Summer Hill is close to the main thoroughfares of Liverpool and Parramatta Roads; although they are quite congested at peak times"
  • "Inner west line" should be in caps as it is a proper name
  • "is currently used only for freight purposes" Need to change currently into a year to avoid readers being unsure as to when this refers. Look for all uses of "currently" as this problem is in a few places.
  • "and has grown" -> growing

accuracy

• Paragraph 3 of "Characteristics" needs a reference.
• Paragraph 1 of "Commercial area" also needs one. I don't think I belive the statement "The suburb is very small and quite old by Australian standards". 1879 is not old (particularly in NSW)
• "the suburb today has again become gentrified, with a "village atmosphere"" in the lead does not seem supported later in the text ... particularly the words used. This reads as a value judgement rather than encyclopediac tone. This seems to relate to paragraph 3 as noted above
• "Local independent business people run most of the shops." - this is not supported by the following reference.
• "one of the leading multicultural festivals" - as it's run by the council and the reference is to the council this should be removed...unless an independant reference to this assertion can be found

thorough

Appears sufficiently broad to meet the GA standards

NPOV

• Weasel words and uneeded qualifiers in the article like "unique blend", "strongly evident" should be converted into more neutral terms

stability

No issues

images

No issues here although personally I don't like galleries.

— Peripitus (Talk) 13:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Crico and Peripitus for all the great comments and detailed feedback! JRG has addressed a whole lot of these issues, but for the ones that remained:

• Added a single sentence about Summer Hill Public School, and emailed the school asking them to flesh the paragraph out a little with a few more sentences.
• Re: "Places to eat in Summer Hill" as a link to a commercial site - one is chefmoz, which is part of the DMOZ, which is (I think) non-commercial. Also the list of phone numbers is kind of useful if you live there like I do and want to order something ;-) But the other one was commercial, and was very slow, so it's been given the flick.
• Tried to de-weasel-word-ify and NPOV-ify.
• Other tweaks made to address concerns - as per the edit summaries.
• I think that address most or all of the items raised - but there were a lot of points that were raised, so it's entirely possible we've unintentionally missed one or two, but I think we've now got most or all points.

-- All the best, Nickj (t) 06:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the intro is a little clunky and inaccurate on one point: the station was built in 1879, the railway line had already been there for over 20 years. I would go for something like:

Summer Hill is a suburb of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia. Summer Hill is located 8 kilometres west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of the Municipality of Ashfield.

Summer Hill is primarily a residential suburb of the Inner West region, adjoining two of Sydney's major arterial roads, Parramatta Road and Liverpool Road. Nestled between the larger commercial centres of Leichhardt and Ashfield, Summer Hill has a lively "village" character. The suburb was established in 1879 when the building of a railway station led to a housing boom in the area. At different times in its history Summer Hill has been both upper class and working class and this has led to a mix of architectural styles with some large mansions, medium-density apartment blocks and federation houses. Today, it is also multicultural, with 35% of the population born overseas.

Obviously, this raises the question of when SH was established so I'll leave it to someone else to decide on the wording. I have also added a paragraph on Summer Hill Public. Crico 00:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A few more things:

• "Summer Hill Public School is located on Moonbie Street, and is a partially selective primary school." needs a citation and explanation of what "partially selective" is. I'm not sure that the schools enrolment policy(pdf) supports this
  • I've deleted this until we can find a reference. The article is not completely comprehensive without this, but it's not necessary for a GA nomination. If it was to go to FA in the future, this will need to be added. JRG 02:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you go to the bottom of page 2 of the enrolment form, it refers to OC enrolment. This stands for Opportunity Class. Their OC Handbook [1] gives more detail about the program. Crico 03:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• "It features some fine examples of architecture from the 19th and early 20th century." would be better with a citation. Looking through real estate ads and seeing that there is a publication about it makes it clear it's true but it would be better cited. perhaps this one.
  •  Done. JRG 02:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• paragraph 3 of "Characteristics" still needs a citation.
  • I'm pretty sure that's from the book, so  Done. JRG 02:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• the last issue I can see is the founding date in the infobox - it's listed as 1794 but this just relates to the first land purchase. The correct date is somewhat later (I think it may be even later than 1849 based on some websearching). This needs to be corrected and cited.
  • When is a suburb established? When it is given a name? When it was officially established by the GNB (in 1998!?) When the first land grant was given? This is hard to tell... 1794 as the first settlement and land grant seems the best option at the moment. JRG 02:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Usually when the suburb's town plan is approved. . If not for this then St Kilda would be 1865 rather than 1893, Para Hills 1847 rather than 1959, Ingle Farm 1836 rather than 1959. The consensus I can see is that the foundation date is either the date a suburb plan was first submitted or some other action associated with building a town/suburb. If we used first settlement then Yarralumla, Australian Capital Territory would look to be founded in 1828 and Sale, Greater Manchester somewhere in prehistoric times - Peripitus (Talk) 05:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- getting there - Peripitus (Talk) 08:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • • • I've removed the established line because I can't find a determinable reference for an accurate establishment date of the suburb. I've fixed the thing about the railway station too - the station, not the line opened in 1879. Hopefully this irons out all issues. JRG 00:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - I've fixed a few minor issues and passed as a Good Article. Appears to now meet all of the criteria and the issues raised in the GA listing have been resolved. Good work all - Peripitus (Talk) 04:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Summer Hill, New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080723111257/http://www.ashfield.nsw.gov.au/planning/dcps/DCP%202007/02.%20Parts%20A-D/C14%20Summer%20Hill%20Urban%20Village.pdf to http://www.ashfield.nsw.gov.au/planning/dcps/DCP%202007/02.%20Parts%20A-D/C14%20Summer%20Hill%20Urban%20Village.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070902153611/http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/99999999/LOCAL01/61130004/0/SOU03/Summer+Hill to http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/99999999/LOCAL01/61130004/0/SOU03/Summer+Hill

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:56, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Summer Hill, New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110525193359/http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/mrsid/lgamap/show_map.pl?client=gnb&image=GNB3602.sid&lgamap=Ashfield to http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/mrsid/lgamap/show_map.pl?client=gnb&image=GNB3602.sid&lgamap=Ashfield
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110706113256/http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/20070710/NWS14/707100314/No+easy+road+for+M4+East+motorway to http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/20070710/NWS14/707100314/No+easy+road+for+M4+East+motorway

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Summer Hill, New South Wales. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041013000434/http://members.optusnet.com.au:80/ashfield_dhs/index.htm to http://members.optusnet.com.au/ashfield_dhs/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070307111205/http://www.summerhillvillage.net.au:80/ to http://www.summerhillvillage.net.au/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 09:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]