Talk:Lake Margaret Power Station

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

Australia: Tasmania Low‑importance Lake Margaret Power Station 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Tasmania (assessed as Low-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Tasmania. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance. Energy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy 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.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Historic sites Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Well, here we have a NPOV issue - the story as found read like, either the ABC report on the issue of about 2 months ago, or possibly from a Hydro insider. Also avoiding mentioning the mayor of the west coast council might be good legal sense - it sure makes it seem to be a 'local issue' and not the wider one of heritage. There are people in other parts of Tasmania,' and on the mainland who know of the place and or area who think it's criminal that the hydro should have the right to close it down.

OK so Mt Lyell locked people out of the place -consequently limiting the number of people who might see it or experience it for all of its time in charge, and now there's a potential tourist heritage site the hydro want to can it?

Put it this way the Hydro get's its newer constructions further down the range on to the national heritage register, nothing less, and it wants to scrap a potential tourism/heritage button in its cap - if it had the imagination. But then it did dam pedder. User:SatuSuro 08:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I understand your point, but then I don't know anything about the subject outside of what's in this article, either. --Scott Davis ^Talk 05:24, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Lake Margaret and not the hydro, they are the villains of the piece!~ Its not a pr article for them! (unsigned)

Hi. I have done a bit of research about Lake Margaret recently and today I noticed a few factual errors and out dated text in the Lake Margaret Wiki entry. I'm pretty keen on fleshing out this entry with current information re: the future of the site and also accurate historical information. However this is my first attempt at editing in Wikipedia so if anybody has any suggestions or thinks that I'm being a bit too hands-on please let me know. I'll be adding information about the recent Tasmanian Heritage Listing of the site and maybe a photo or two. Regards Travis Tiddy 13:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if the title of this Wiki entry is a little limited. The Lake Margaret site as a whole is termed the Lake Margaret Hydro-Electric Power Scheme. This broader description encapsulates the body of water that is Lake Margaret, the dam structure, the wood stave pipeline, the penstock pipe/s, the power station, transmission lines, the Lake Margaret village precinct and trout hatchery area, the c1914-1964 tram system that linked the site with Queenstown, the lower power scheme (including intake weir, wood stave pipeline, penstock and power plant building), and also workers camp sites c1911-1914 and c1931. Terming the entry the Lake Margaret Power Station limits the scope of what can be covered on this rather broad and historically significant hydro-electric site. Regards Travis Tiddy 23:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Youre getting into Hydro nomenclature here - dont even start on that one here -- look very carefully and you will find there is an article on lake margaret, and the lake margaret tram, I would suggest leave this one as is - and __if__ you have enough material (and the hydro docs on their website would be enough to create up to 5 or 6 separate articles) do separate ones for separate things - one very important thing about wikipedia is we try to build consensus - I would suggest that the lake margaret power station is one article - and the lake article and the tram articles are expandable... we dont wantt to crowd too much into one article in one sense - take a look at west coast range article as welll SatuSuro 23:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aah I see. Thanks for the feedback. I'm starting to get a better idea of the Wiki structure. Would that then mean that the 'Back to Lake Margaret Day' subheading should have its own entry? And would it also preclude mentioning the Lake Margaret village side of things -- would that need another entry or could it be included in the Power Station entry? I guess that they lived there whilst working at the power station so it would merely be a case of mentioning employees lived in a village 'x' distance away.

Not quite sure what you mean by Hydro 'nomenclature' -- 'devising or choosing of names for things'. Could you explain that comment? Regards Travis Tiddy 00:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at materials produced by the hydro pr people, or materials presented to Parliament in the 1970's and 1980's they alway talk about 'X Power Development Schemes' - wikipedia tries for NPOV - I believe that the Lake Margaret site is only a de facto Hydro property - it was the Mt Lyell property (and even the personnel at the station when it passed into Hydro hands were in most cases ex Mt Lyell rather than Hydro people) for most of its life - and if someone from the hydro wants to call it a 'scheme' its a denial of its longer history and consequently an appropriated identity which most queenstown and lake margaret people not even having 'scheme' as part of their vocabulary.

I would strongly suggest you wade through the massive pdfs that the Hydro had on their website last year re the whole issue of the lake margaret area http://www.hydro.com.au/home/Energy/Lake_Margaret_Redevelopment/

has some but I am sure there are earlier reports that arent included in the current lot. If you are au fait with all that material - then there is a start for a range of materials that can be utilised... SatuSuro 06:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lake Margaret Power Station. 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/20060819111901/http://www.hydro.com.au/home/Energy/Cultural+Heritage/Conservation+Management+Plans.htm to http://www.hydro.com.au/home/Energy/Cultural+Heritage/Conservation+Management+Plans.htm

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} 04:15, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]