Talk:Royal Automobile Club of Australia

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: New South Wales Low‑importance

	Australia portal Royal Automobile Club of Australia 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 New South Wales (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What'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.

Untitled[edit]

Couldn't this and the 21 other RACA articles be turned into just a few articles? Wikipedia articles can have sections to divide the content up, they don't need to be split into dozens of small articles. Also, I notice that these pages tend to assume that the reader will want to read a page and then progress to the "next" article. That doesn't really take advantage of Wikipedia's hyperlinked nature. Rather, readers should jump from concept to concept when they see a link they're interested in. So I don't really like the pattern used here that just intends for readers to go through these articles like chapters in a book.

Speaking of chapters, the RACA Origins at one point instructs the reader to "see Chapter XX". So clearly this was not orignally written for Wikipedia. The note on the original version of the RACA article implies that this was put here with permission or perhaps even by the author... is Jez Ford the author? It would be helpful to see some info about who wrote this and whether permission was given to post it. Right now I'm leaning toward thinking that Jez Ford is the author or an authorized representative (in this case, the publication editor) of whoever wrote this; In all likelyhood this was written by RACA. But it would be nice to see an "official" note on this discussion page regarding the original author and granting the necesary permission... keeping in mind that once it's put here it becomes GNUFDL.

And regardless, these pages definately need to go onto cleanup. There's no wiki, and it's written in a non-encyclopedic style. Just my ten cents worth.

- Eisnel 04:15, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

FROM Jez Ford - To confirm - yes, I am the publication editor of the RACA articles, that permission is granted by the publisher for Wikipedia to carry all the RACA articles. And yes, many apologies for being a newbie to Wikipedia and so well out of style! The articles were from RACA's 100 Years hardback publication, and I hoped to preserve them online through Wikipedia, as otherwise all the historical research for them is likely to tumble back into obscurity.