Talk:Orange Sky Laundry

Aspects I need advice with please...

• Is it too soon? Is media coverage trivial?

• Notability - I'm a bit confused with the inherited bit. They received Young Australian of the Year - but is their charity notable? Also much media mentions it as 'world first'.

• Images - I haven't been able to find any freely licensed yet but, if it is accepted, I am happy to email them (with the requisite donating form) to request use of photo/s of vans with clients. Whilst many of the media articles have own staff photos, many others are marked 'supplied' so hopefully the blokes will similarly agree to use.

It would probably be easy to find out (eg by asking them) when and where they will be, and then (ask a Wikipedian who's good with a camera to) pop out there and take a photo to upload to Commons. Things to be careful of in this case:

• A photo of a van with their logo clearly displayed might be a derivative work so might not be allowed on Commons - although it might be OK on Wikipedia itself.
• Do not include any of their clients in the photo - it might introduce BLP issues. If you do, be absolutely certain to get their permission to publish. See also Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.

Mitch Ames (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

• Logo - I have read that use of their logo might meet fair use. Again if likely to pass, I will work out how to upload it (to enwp not commons?) for use in infobox. Otherwise, the infobox is prob not necessary?

I would always try to include an infobox if possible even when there is no photo. - Shiftchange (talk) 09:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

• BLP - I want to ensure the article meets blp rules. But, after the lead, how should I refer to the guys - by their first names, surnames, as boys (though they're now about 21-23ish), the men (but that de-emphasises their young ages which seems to be integral to the appreciation of their initiative and its rapid growth)? Suggestion?

My understanding is that BLP rules are only for biographical articles. I would use their surnames and the words "organisation founders" or similar. - Shiftchange (talk) 09:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

BLP applies to all articles, per the first sentence of WP:BLP:

Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page.

What you've currently got looks fine - there's no obvious BLP issues.

WP:SURNAME is the guideline for how to refer to people (even in articles that are not biographies):

After the initial mention of any name, the person should generally be referred to by surname only, without an honorific prefix such as "Mx", "Mr", "Mrs", "Miss", or "Ms", or by a pronoun.

You should probably avoid "the boys" or "men", and simply use surnames, or "they", or "founders", as appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

• Article name - On Sunday after seeing them (yet again) on TV (ABC Australia Wide), I thought article would be named Orange Sky Laundry... but, today they have launched a mobile free hot showers van so a more umbrella name of either Orange Sky (charity) or even simply Orange Sky would be more appropriate?

Not that important atm. We can always move the page to a better title if needed down the track. - Shiftchange (talk) 09:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

• I don't want it to sound promotional but it is hard not to sound like advocacy when all the citeds are favourable in their coverage. Balance? nothing negative found so is it neutral?

If nobody says anything bad about them, then the article can be deemed balanced and neutral even if it only says good things. (If any reasonable criticism of Orange Sky appears in reputable media, we'd be obliged to include then.) That being said, some of your text might need rewording for neutrality, eg "the volunteers sit with their visitors and have positive and genuine conversation" might be better and more neutrally worded as "the volunteers sit and chat with their visitors". Mitch Ames (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for any help, even if simple yes/no. JennyOz (talk) 06:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Some comments/suggestions

First of all, excellent work - are you sure it is your first article ?

Do not worry about notability - your list of references well and truly covers that off. Your in line referencing is good.

You can reduce the BLP tone in places by changing theirs to thes et cetera. But yes, anything more about the principals should be in a separate article, which would be a BLP.

No it is not soon as per the two year plus time period and the number of references / reliable sources.

You can use up some more of your references and fully time line the growth of the service by perhaps using {{event list}}. See end of article Oscar Werner Tiegs for example.

The only change to the article I might suggest, and then no biggy at all, is to move the middle paragraph out of Background into a new section possibly called Initial Locations ?

I heard them on ABC radio this morning too. Bloody marvelous I thought.

You do need to use something like {{cite web}} though for all your references. i.e <ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |publisher= |access-date= |date= |first= |last= }}</ref>

Cheers.

PS Ditto comments by others above too. Aoziwe (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Aoziwe (talk) 13:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Help:Referencing for beginners is a good place to start for referencing as there are a number of acceptable ways to reference articles on Wikipedia. Hack (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Looking good. As others have said, use {{cite web}} and {{cite news}} for references and refer to people by surname only after first use. I put red links for the founders in the first paragraph, the same as the red links currently in the award list. More links to the same target makes it easier to write those articles later. --Scott Davis ^Talk 02:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

While I am dealing with each of the aspects, I wanted to duck in and voice my appreciation for everyone's help here. As I just posted on the noticeboard, gotta love collaboration! JennyOz (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Background

Orange Sky Laundry#Background - in particular after this re-arrangement - is really only "background" for the first (maybe second) paragraph. Some restructuring/resectioning might be appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 10:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Yep, rearrangement needed, Aoziwe mentioned it too. I have got some more to add tomorrow with maybe new section on vans/equip. I have recorded tv of interview which includes their mums discussing them as kids etc, might be something there to add to background. Also heard Brisbane council was funding mobile doctor trials for homeless but not sure if anything to do with OSL, will look up. Thanks JennyOz (talk) 12:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK help

Hi Mitch, re quotes needed for dyk nomination, this is long version..., cite is via that same 'Australia Wide' episode, screened on 17 & 20 Aug online here. OSL segment starts around 1:30 in. The presentation from PM and the speeches are at around 5:03. I'm not sure where the Australia Day presentation footage originated but am wagering there are probably no transcripts around. I was going to work out how to use this cite tag Template:Cite_episode and add to article tomorrow. Then will add reply to dyk page to say is done. Thanks JennyOz (talk) 15:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mitch, firstly thanks so much for helping me to navigate this. I only tried a DYK as the notes in the AfC suggested it. The Cite episode template is rather difficult to understand. This was my attempt: "Australia Wide". Australia Wide. Season 2016. 17 August 2016. 5 minutes in. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. ABC News 24. Retrieved 3 September 2016.

However, because Cite web says can be used for "any resource accessible through a URL" I have used it instead. Is that OK? Thanks again. JennyOz (talk) 02:57, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I had a look at {{cite episode}} - you're right, it's too complicated! {{Cite web}} is fine; it provides the necessary verifiability. I've added the reporter's name (from 01:43/01:54) and time of the quote (and removed {{cn}} ).

DYK looks OK to me. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:49, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

World homeless day

EdChem asserts in the lead section that Orange Sky Laundry "began operations on World Homeless Day (10 October) 2014", but I disagree with this. Relevant edits: [1][2][3]

EdChem's wording implies that the service explicitly started on World Homeless Day (ie because it was that particular named day) rather than 10 October (which just happened to be World Homeless Day), but the cited ref does not say that - it says that on their 1st birthday / World Homeless Day they launched their 4th service but it does not say that they deliberately started on World Homeless Day. The implication of "began operations on World Homeless Day" is synthesis, in the absence of an explicit statement stating that they deliberately started on World Homeless Day. I suggest that without such a reference we should simply state that they "began operations on 10 October 2014". Mitch Ames (talk) 05:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

References

Hopefully we are agreed that:

1. Orange Sky Laundry began operations on 10 October 2014
2. 10 October each year is World Homeless Day
3. Orange Sky made a point of noting that the launch of the fourth van was on their first birthday and on World Homeless Day

I have no evidence whether their start of operations on World Homeless Day in 2014 was coincidental or not, but the combination in 2015 with the link-up with the Good Guys was most definitely deliberately promoted as happening on World Homeless Day, so I think the connection belongs in the article.

If the implication of a deliberate choice of day in my wording is too strong, perhaps "... began operations on 10 October, 2014 (which was also World Homeless Day"? EdChem (talk) 06:18, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello Mitch and EdChem, I saw Mitch's message and the article changes and had to head over to help pages to understand synth.

I have also just been through all the refs and some newer articles that have appeared in searches. I cannot find mention that their first load on 10 October 2014 was intentionally timed for World Homeless Day. So either it is a serendipitous coincidence or they just didn't mention it in interviews (or they did but none of the journos used it).

The page from the OSL website that EdChem is referencing must be a new page as I don't recall seeing it (or the other individual city pages) when perusing their site before.

I was just about to ask if we could say 'which happened to be' or similar without that being synth when EdChem posted. I agree with what you are both saying. JennyOz (talk) 06:49, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I noticed that the article contained nothing about the national sponsorship by the Good Guys, which started with the Dandenong van launched on World Homeless Day 2015 - so I have made some additions. Now that it does, the link (be it deliberate or coincidental) is included in the main text. While I still think it is worth including in the lede, I am suspecting it was serindipidous. There was an interview on the first birthday with one of the founders (see the 2SER link in the article) and he does not include mention that the start of operations was timed for WHD, and that would have seemed an opportune moment to mention it. My only problem with "with happened to be" or "which coincidentally was also" is that they imply we know it was coincidence, but we don't know that. EdChem (talk) 06:56, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mitch, do you still think mention of WHD in lede is a problem? JennyOz (talk) 07:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I still think that if we don't know that they deliberately started on WHD we should not mention it in relation to their starting. (The mention is "Rapid growth" is OK because it matches the ref. Actually there are a couple of other minor problems with that section, but I'll get to that later.) I still think we should just drop WHD from the lead and simply put the date. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

@Mitch Ames: re this edit, the fact in question is included in the audio interview included on that page. Press play and listen. EdChem (talk) 08:33, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

My mistake, fixed. (My usual browser, Pale Moon, didn't show the audio control, for reasons unknown, which is why I hadn't listened to it.) Mitch Ames (talk) 08:49, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the time stamp into the ref, didn't know about that. I have removed WHD from the lede.  :) EdChem (talk) 10:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

new service in SE Victoria for 1st birthday

My reasons for this edit

• So far as I can tell they started a new service on their 1st birthday, but the did not "announce a new national partner, The Good Guys". (They partnered with TGG in 2015, but none of the refs say that the partnership started or was announced 10 Oct.)
• The Good Guys paid for half, but "The Jelley Family Foundation and The Bennelong Foundation (also) funded the delivery of this much needed service in South East Victoria"
• The new service is in south east Victoria; it covers Frankston and Narre Warren, not just Dandenong.

Mitch Ames (talk) 09:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I used Dandenong because it was what was already there, totally comfortable with SEMel.

According to Media from the Good Guys (dated 10 October 2015) "Orange Sky Laundry, Australia’s first mobile laundry for the homeless, has partnered with leading appliance retailer The Good Guys to launch a new service in South East Melbourne on Saturday 10 October 2015." and "However The Good Guys’ contribution has only covered half the cost of getting this van up and running, so we still require further support from the community." and "The launch of the new van, which is the second in Melbourne and the fourth in Australia, coincides with World Homeless Day and the charity’s first birthday."

I'm sure I saw something about National Partner on the GG website, though that may have been formalised later. EdChem (talk) 10:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Also this from Andrew Muir, Good Guys CEO. EdChem (talk) 10:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)