Talk:Old St Paul's Anglican Church, Deniliquin

Australia: New South Wales Low‑importance

	Australia portal Old St Paul's Anglican Church, Deniliquin 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.

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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Old St Paul's Anglican Church, Deniliquin is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Waring Gardens included

This listing apparently also includes structures in surrounding gardens - see this article about work done in the gardens in contravention of the proection order. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 06:29, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image on the State Heritage website confirms the Waring Gardens are part of the Permanent Conservation Order. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 06:42, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattinbgn and Rangasyd: There is no question that the Waring Gardens are on the local heritage register. I'd point you at the URL for that but it seems the NSW heritage folk have decided to improve" their service by returning search results in the browser so you don't get a URL to cite them any more (why are the government agencies increasingly doing this?!) so you will have to search for yourself here [1]. But are the gardens part of the St Paul's entry on the NSW SHR? The image you point to (from the NSW SHR entry for St Paul's) is (if you zoom right in) as for the Permanent Conservation Order in 1981 (which is mentioned in the body of the state heritage entry) but the state heritage listing was on 2 Apr 1999 so is the area covered by the 1981 order the same as the heritage listing in 1999? I don't know. There is no mention of the gardens in the text of the state heritage listings. The local environment plan (which I assume means the local heritage register?!) for Waring Gardens is dated 2013 (after the state listing). The church is part of the local environment plan too but as a separate entry and I note the garden's entry says (in criteria d) "Within or adjacent to the gardens are the Cenotaph, St Pauls church and sunday school, the three muses, the CWA rooms all of which are considered as being individual items in their own right". So did they split up the entries in the local environment plan in 2013 because they knew the state listing was only for part of it and they wanted their local listing for the church to have the same boundaries as the state listing? Certainly the state listing is silent about the cenotaph etc. But in terms of this article, given the church content is pretty minimal (due to the lack of content in the state heritage register), I think we could expand the article with content about the gardens, cenotaph etc citing the local heritage register (which is certainly correct), and add redirects for Waring Gardens etc to this article. The news story can then be incorporated but just talk about the gardens being heritage-listed without specifically saying they are state heritage-listed. That tells the reader the story while side-stepping the uncertainty about the status of the gardens. Kerry (talk) 07:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattinbgn and Rangasyd: Despite saying "being individual items in their own right", I note that the local heritage listings don't include the cenotaph, the 3 muses or the CWA (unless they are buried in some other listing with a misleading title). There is also a listing for the St Paul's Sunday School separate from the listing for St Paul's Church and Sunday School, but the combined entry is more recent the Sunday School only entry so may have superseded it. This doesn't change what I suggest might be the way forward for the article, just another oddity strewn in our path :-) Kerry (talk) 08:10, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattinbgn and Kerry Raymond: The following are listed on the NSWSHR/NSWHD:

I'm ok for the article to be amended, as long as it's appropriately referenced. Over to you. Cheers. Rangasyd (talk) 09:40, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mattinbgn and Rangasyd: In the end, it seemed simpler just to create a separate article for Waring Gardens, as apart from physical proximity, their history seems be independent. Kerry (talk) 23:04, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And it seems from this source the council knew nothing of any state heritage listing of the gardens so it sounds like the council and NSW govt need to sort out the issue as to whether or not those gardens are really in the state heritage listing or whether they got dropped between the earlier conservation order and the subsequent heritage listing. Kerry (talk) 23:09, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kerry. Edward River Council have conceded that the gardens are State heritage-protected in some way, shape or form. This article in the Deniliquin Pastoral Times states "Council interim general manager John Rayner said even after recent heritage reviews relating to the project — particularly in reference to the now partially removed low brick fence — council was only aware of certain structures in the gardens being officially listed on the register. New information presented to the council this week confirms the gardens themselves were made subject to a Permanent Conservation Order (later becoming the State Heritage Register) in 1981." -- Mattinbgn (talk) 22:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]