Talk:Sydney New Year's Eve
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Queries
[edit]This article read like a brochure issued by the event organiser, and not like an impartial encyclopedia entry. The article was full of inappropriate hyperbole. For example, it contained the claim that the 2005/2006 fireworks display ended racism in Sydney. To say that this was unverifiable is an understatement. It's absurd. Also, do the individual displays really warrant individual articles?, and shouldn't an article with this title contain information about the whole of New Years Eve and not just the fireworks display, and are events like this of significant historical importance unless something else happens on that day of significance? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim Metherall (talk • contribs) 23:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- TBA means To Be Announced, right? Well, it's the wrong expression to use for something that took place years ago, and will never be announced. I wonder if it's possible to find out>
- "started to simulate oral sex"... if he started to, and the meaning was clear then it ought to be worded "simulated oral sex" even if he never finished the job.
- 2007-08, the "ongoing display" in January. What display in January? The article doesn't tell us, the readers, anything about any "ongoing display, so please explain.
Regardless of the fact that it is dealt with here, the "Bridge Effect" pertains specifically to the bbridge.. While I agree with the merger, the usual way to treat such a matter is to also mention it on the Harbour Bridge page, with a "Main article" heading that directs to this page.
Apart from the Bridge Effect, this article gives very little information. I am sure that a great deal more could be found with a little effort.
Amandajm (talk) 09:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
"QUAD DRUMS" is NOT on the 'Drumline' soundtrack - get your info right —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjcrow (talk • contribs) 12:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
There is no history as to how it was created. - Aussieman92 (talk) 02:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
The fact that the article portrays the NYE fireworks only regularly started in Sydney in 1996 with a vague reference to a radio station doing it in "the late eighties" is itself somewhat bizarre. It really does feel lifted from a promotional publication whose only commercial interest started in 1996. They existed long before then. -- Rob.au (talk) 10:36, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- [reference] describes the use of Fireworks centred around Circular Quay starting from 1976. -- Rob.au (talk) 10:52, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
1993/94 to 1995/96 bridge fireworks
[edit]Fireworks display on the bridge DID NOT start in '96/97. They date back to at least 1993/94. It's even on the Sydney Morning Hearald front page for that year http://frontpages.fairfaxsyndication.com/C.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2ITP1GCA6U2T&SMLS=1&RW=1920&RH=947 They may go back even further. I don't have full access to SMH archieve so I can't read the article to find out details. Hb1556 (talk) 12:26, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Twits
[edit]Sydney New Year's Eve#ABC coverage mentions twits on Twitter slinging criticisms around in the hope that someone with influence will notice and/or care. Twits with over-inflated egos and a sense of entitlement towards their highly opinionated self-perception of expert advice being donated so freely for the benefit of all are not a new phenomenon. They have been slinging their criticisms at least as far back as Usenet, if not before, yet they remain utterly insignificant. Such armchair experts are not notable and whatever platform they use to disseminate their opinions (Twitter, at the moment) is not reliable. Wikipedia is not an echo chamber to lend authority to such keyboard warriors. I have therefore removed such promotional content from the article. 49.186.37.5 (talk) 01:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)