Template created by inspiration from Template:NSW former LGAs based on semi-complete information at Wikipedia:WikiProject South Australia/Historic places. Donama (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2017-10-16T00:19:00.000Z","author":"Donama","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Donama-2017-10-16T00:19:00.000Z-Started","replies":[]}}-->
I tweaked the labels of a couple of groups in the template in the hope of clarifying that the periods did not refer to complete abolishment and re-establishment on the boundary dates. Looking more closely at the articles, I find that there were significant adjustments on or near those dates, but also later changes in each period and some that were unchanged across the dates. I wonder if better group labels (which might require slight adjustments to membership) would be "District councils established under the Local Government Areas (Re-arrangement) Acts 1929 and 1931", "District councils established under the District Councils Act 1887", etc. Thoughts? --Scott Davis Talk 06:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z","author":"ScottDavis","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ScottDavis-2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z-Group_labels","replies":["c-Donama-2018-10-23T05:05:00.000Z-ScottDavis-2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z","c-Donama-2018-10-23T06:25:00.000Z-ScottDavis-2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Scott Davis"}}-->
- @ScottDavis: So I've rearranged these now. What are you thoughts. It's different to how it's done at Template:NSW former LGAs but then it seems to make more sense to break up purely by decade of establishment given than many district councils ultimately became municipalities/corporations/cities. If I'm not mistaken the entirety of the establishments in the 1930s was under the "Local Government Areas (Re-arrangement) Acts 1929 and 1931" btw. Donama (talk) 05:05, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2018-10-23T05:05:00.000Z","author":"Donama","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Donama-2018-10-23T05:05:00.000Z-ScottDavis-2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
- If we did it by region, it would look like this: Donama (talk) 06:25, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2018-10-23T06:25:00.000Z","author":"Donama","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Donama-2018-10-23T06:25:00.000Z-ScottDavis-2017-10-30T06:09:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
@Donama: I think I like the organisation by regions as it is more likely to help guide my eye towards the the "other council" I am looking for in the navbox. Establishment decade is somewhat arbitrary, region gives some spatial indication of where I might be looking for, or a tractable set to scan if I don't know which one I want. Thanks! (BTW, {{ping}} only works if you sign in the same edit) --Scott Davis Talk 00:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2018-10-24T00:51:00.000Z","author":"ScottDavis","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-ScottDavis-2018-10-24T00:51:00.000Z-Group_labels","replies":[],"displayName":"Scott Davis"}}-->
