Talk:Forests Commission Victoria

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 14 February 2018 by reviewer MatthewVanitas (talk · contribs).

Australia: Victoria C‑class Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Forests Commission Victoria 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
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Forestry (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles

Article Body too long and full

Hi, I love how this article is improving, but:

I've added a tag because the article is becoming very hard to read, navigate and edit. Every historical section is too large. I have trouble imagining a common reader finding a particular paragraph, passage or sentence, since I myself can't. I recommend removing unnecessary information, condensing and most importantly splitting sections by event-periods rather than decades.

The current system creates a 'need' to fill every single decade with too much information, and forces readers to see the history of the Commission as separated into ten-year periods, which it definitely isn't.

Suggestions and edit updates should be posted under this so we can coordinate our actions.
Cheers! Double Plus Ungood (talk) 04:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

I think I mentioned that many of the people who once worked for the Forests Commission are very excited about this project of writing their story on Wikepedia

They feel their achievements have not been properly recorded. The Commission was dissolved with a stroke of a pen nearly 40 years ago.

These gentlemen are in their 70s and 80's. One is nearly 100. I'm only in my 60s...

I feel I should show respect and go back to them first about recrafting the page

But I agree its too long

The easiest thing will be to pull out all the fire aircraft stuff into a separate page. There is more to tell as well. The Forests Commission along with the USFS and Canadians pioneered aircraft at fires.

I wont be able to meet them for a few weeks so other than minor wordsmithing I will leave the article alone

Cheers

DBHOB (Peter) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBHOB (talk • contribs) 23:17, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I have arranged a meeting in a few weeks with the committee about restructuring the page. In the meantime I would like to keep the source of the photos that you have removed today. The FCVRPA association has a large collection and the person who provided the original photo helps set the context. Also I have some more references to add to verify some of the statements which I will add. Cheers DBHOB DBHOB (talk) 09:00, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to those who are working on this project. First, a word of appreciation for this terrific project you are assembling, it's a fascinating record of a great organisation.

Secondly, if you ever find that the Wikipedia "Powers That Be" are making things difficult for you or you want somewhere to post longer or more specific articles, you are welcome to put web pages on australianmountains.com It has contributions from a few people, some articles have won awards, others are still a little rough and are being refined. But authors have absolute control over their own articles and there are no charges. At the moment it is a bit weighted towards huts and skiing, but an article on hydro electricity in Victoria will be uploaded fairly soon. So please let us know in the future if you ever want a site to host forestry related articles. --Bogong (talk) 06:00, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The file FCV Logo - circa 1975.jpg on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the Commons file description page. Community Tech bot (talk) 04:35, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]