Talk:District Council of Strathalbyn

Australia: South Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal District Council of Strathalbyn 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 South Australia (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 South Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Two different councils[edit]

Conversation from when it was a draft titled 'Corporation and District Council of Strathalbyn'

Donama, I think it's extremely confusing to mash different councils in together in this way. I know the 1936 Civic Record did this, but so many people incorrectly read it as meaning that they were one and the same and it really caused a lot of confusion - I don't doubt that that's why the 1986 Civic Record didn't repeat the practice and reported the surviving councils like this separately. I'm not keen on messing with other people's work in this area, but I really hoped we'd see the ones like this that already exist split up eventually. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Drover's Wife, A very good point you make. I hummed and hahed over Clare for ages but the entire history of the council was apparently kept very much together in that case and it appears to be even more so with Strathalbyn. If you can come up with any argument or resource to distinguish the history of DC Strathalbyn from Corporation of Strathalbyn I'd love to use it to create two separately. In the meantime, an article about the two together is better than none at all. I'll try to move this out of draft today or tomorrow. Thanks. Donama (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really get what you mean about the entire history being kept very much together - nothing in this draft (that I can see) would necessitate intertwining the two. The 1936 Civic Record did it in a particularly confusing way, and the 1986 Civic Record discusses the history of the predecessor councils in the (then-current) council's entry as it does with every other council with amalgamations in its history. It notes that they worked closely (as you'd expect) but doesn't suggest any closer linkage than that. There is that note in Marsden's PDF in the "Bremer" entry which mangles them, but IMO that's all the more reason to separate it, because the existing confusion further spreads errors (i.e. we know that the DC didn't become a municipality in 1868; rather, the municipality seceded from it, as the 1986 Civic Record makes clear). There's nothing more overlapping about this or Clare than any other area which had a town and a shire council, and these are the only cases I know of on Wikipedia where they share an article. (Also noticed the note in the draft about the end date of the Corp being missing - amalgamation date for DC and Corp was 22 April 1976 - source pp 562 of the 1986 Civic Record). The Drover's Wife (talk) 23:11, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all that. Duly noted. Because I haven't seen the 1986 civic record yet, I didn't know all of it. Lucky you to have a digital copy on hand! Donama (talk) 01:23, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]