Talk:Brunswick, Victoria

message: To the anonymous user who added the stuff on the Bombay Rock, sounds like an interesting venue...which particular ethnic groups used to fight it out there, and was there a live music score to accompany such brawls?  --Robert Merkel 03:47, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004 messages

message: --144.139.89.106 11:55, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little bit of History of Brunswick (feel free to add it to the main text)

message: It is actually far enough up Lygon Street to be in Brunswick (or possibly Brunswick East).  Still probably shouldn't be mentioned specifically here.  --Robert Merkel 07:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, it's in Brunswick East, as Lygon Street is the border between Brunswick and Brunswick East. Cnwb 11:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This points to a problem with the way information is included in these kinds of articles. Yes, the boundary between Brunswick and Brunswick East runs down the centre of Lygon St. Does that mean we have to state that the No.1 & 8 trams are only in Brunswick when they are travelling north? Its true, but ... how technical does Wikipedia need to be? User:Eyedubya 11:55pm AEST, 25/4/07
The boundary between Brunswick and Brunswick East is not the centre of Lygon Street, but along the back fences of the properties on the western side of Lygon Street (ie any property with a Lygon St address is in Brunswick East). Trams 1 and 8 are therefore completely in Brunswick East. I notice someone has also mentioned the Quarry and Lyndhurst Hotels as being in Brunswick. These should be referred to in the Brunswick East article if one is being technically correct. Mustard Pot 12:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for pointing that out. The issue is, how technically correct should we be? Eyedubya 22:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Given that there are separate articles for Brunswick East and Brunswick West, features in these suburbs should probably appear in those articles only. That's just my view on things - happy to go with any consensus. Mustard Pot 05:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Makes sense, though because historically all three Brunswick suburbs were under the former City of Brunswick, some historical materials don't treat them as separate places, nor do some contemporary materials either. Eyedubya 12:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  True - most materials around (and people) would probably have no idea what a suburb is let alone its boundaries. I'm sure North Fitzroy, Hawthorn East etc suffer in the same way. The three Brunswicks have been separately identified (with their own postcodes) at least since the 1930s based on old maps i have seen. Mustard Pot 13:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Comfortable Chair

message: I am going to delete in 5 days unless someone can find a good reason to keep it. As per WP:NOT#DIR Michellecrisp 02:17, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please state exactly which clause of WP:NOT#DIR you regard as applicable to support the case for such a deletion. In support of leaving the material for a judicious edit, it's worth noting that these items were placed in the article (and a number of others) following a discussion about the notability of a range of places mentioned in this and other similar place-based articles. As part of that discussion on notability, it was suggested by other editors that places with heritage significance were eminently notable because of the process by which such significance is ascertained. Eyedubya 14:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with both of you in a way. The current list is unencyclopaedic but could be rewritten in a way which is not simply a directory listing - heritage listings are notable, but content about them is preferable to just noting its existence (which one could do on the relevant Heritage Council website). Orderinchaos 15:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another way of looking at it is to consider how the information about heritage would be dealt with if all articles about neighbourhoods/suburbs/local places contained a section on heritage. Some places have more of it than others, but almost everywhere has something that has been formally assessed as having heritage significance. Heritage is thus one of those notable attributes that might be regarded as essential for inclusion in place-based encyclopedia articles. The question becomes how such information should be presented in each case, and under what circumstances a place has so much heritage that it warrants a separate article on the topic. As it stands, the sources of the information upon which the current presentation is based, are hard to use, since they are not ordered by suburb. As such, these WP articles are the only places that I know of that actually do present this information in such an accessible form - i.e. this 'list' (such as it is) is actually a useful resource for people interested to know about the topic of heritage on a place-by-place basis - with links that make it easier for them to follow up on heritage places that interest them. If this information were to be included in all WP articles about places, then the notability component of much of the information contained therein, as well as its usefulness overall, would be improved. Eyedubya 10:31, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

text: The thing is not all WP locality artices contain heritage. And there is generally a preference for some explanatory text with the most notable examples (as this is an encyclopaedia) rather than long lists. There is nothing wrong with creating separate articles linked to the main article, see Melbourne. Put it this way, if someone still wanted to know the Heritage of Brunswick on Wikipedia, they could first go to Brunswick then click on a link to the main article of Heritage of Brunswick. Michellecrisp 11:46, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - basically, write a potted summary that those wanting to browse Brunswick can view and obtain a superficial understanding of the issue, with a  link at the top of that section. Orderinchaos 14:01, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

text:  Furthermore, If having many heritage places isn't a characteristic if all localities, then a category would be useful for grouping localities with significant amounts of heritage places in them - so that people who are interested in heritage in Melbourne, Victoria or Australia can see at a glance which articles will be of interest from that point of view. I don't know if such a category exists, perhaps someone with more experience can advise, or create one? Eyedubya 16:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: sounds like an idea worth discussing. Perhaps the best place to discuss is Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia or Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian places. I am still proposing a new entry for Heritage of Brunswick (no deletion of content). Michellecrisp 04:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Heritage deleting

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Brunswick, Victoria. 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/20070831020121/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831020121/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831020121/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831020121/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831020121/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/pdfs/profile/Brunswick%20Suburb%20Profile%202004%20b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110901195212/http://vsdca.cricketvictoria.com.au/ to http://vsdca.cricketvictoria.com.au/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228123012/http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au:80/building-and-planning/structure-planning/brunswick-structure-plan.html to http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/building-and-planning/structure-planning/brunswick-structure-plan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Brunswick, Victoria. 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/20110901195212/http://vsdca.cricketvictoria.com.au/ to http://vsdca.cricketvictoria.com.au/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.moreland.vic.gov.au/building-and-planning/structure-planning/brunswick-structure-plan.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:46, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I see in the media that the Tinning Street silo will get an artwork of Jacinda Ardern painted on it. Maybe somebody would want to take a photo of the structure (link to its location) before that happens; taking photos after the artwork is finished will probably be a copy-violation (not sure about the Australian freedom of panorama rules). Schwede66 23:02, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tinning Street silo