Talk:City of Enfield

	Australia portal City of Enfield 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 Adelaide (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Redirect

Until historical information is added in a sufficent quantity/quality I would suggest this remains as a redirect. michael ^talk 15:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted back to own article on 24 February 2016. For more on this, see Talk:Lands administrative divisions of South Australia#County of Adelaide. Donama (talk) 22:27, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yatala South

What would people think about merging this with the currently redirected District Council of Yatala South? I don't see a point in having separate articles where it is literally the same council and only the name has been changed (District Council of Carrieton is an example of this that I did) and prefer to cover the whole history in the same article and just denote the name change. I feel like "The City of Enfield was a local government area of South Australia from 1933 to 1996 is not quite accurate": there was a municipality called Enfield for that period of time (but it had three different forms), and it existed in the first of those forms, just under a different name, prior to that for many decades. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:27, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yatala South included Prospect earlier on so I'd rather keep that as discussed in the District Council of Yatala article. If the seat of Yatala South was at Enfield (and I suppose it might well have been) then I could be convinced otherwise. Do you know? Donama (talk) 06:33, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like Yatala North and Yatala South are a bit awkwardly merged into Yatala at the moment: like, they were entirely new councils (with separate chairmen, if you wanted to list them, etc.), whereas Enfield (appears to be a?) direct continuation of Yatala South with a new name. It's still true, for instance, that Prospect split away from the same municipality as Enfield even if hadn't yet been renamed, if you get what I'm saying?

The Civic Record says the Yatala South council chambers were at Gepps Cross, and treats them as the same council: "The Council, early in 1935, petitioned the Governor to change the name of the district to Enfield, and on July 11th, 1935, a Proclamation was accordingly published in the Government Gazette. The Council met for the first time under the name of Enfield on July 15th, 1935...". It also has an unbroken list of chairmen of the council that doesn't distinguish between Yatala South and Enfield and goes back to 1853.

Having read that bit of the Civic Record (which has quite a detailed entry for even just Enfield), I feel like the last section of District Council of Yatala should focus on summarising its comparatively bloody demerger and they really do need to be broken out for the whole rest of their history - Yatala North into its own and the former South into here. Yatala North existed under that name for 65 years: the two don't in any way work as footnotes in their predecessor article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, fair point, Drover's Wife. I'll create some redlinks. Donama (talk) 03:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually blue links because redirects already in place. Please expand sections where you can. Important question is whether to make establishment year 1868 (date of Yatala South formation) or 1933, date of rename to Enfield. Probably to former but it's a bit unclear to me as the District Council of Yatala South redirect has the Category:1868 establishments in Australia category on board already. Donama (talk) 03:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'd just make it 1868 for this article and delete the one from the redirect (since it's not like there's any useful content there and it's the same thing). The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on City of Enfield. 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/20150403000805/https://www.portenf.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?u=333 to http://www.portenf.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?u=333

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) 11:20, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]