Talk:Sunshine Coast, Queensland

message: Do we really need a hyperlink to tropical fruit.? --Randolph 08:52, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the tropical fruit article has a photo of some unusual fruit that can be grown on the Sunshine Coast. If it wasn't for that link I wouldn't have found that article... Zephyr103 04:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: This is absolutely the case. The Sunshine Coast is a region made up of the Caloundra City, Maroochy Shire, and Noosa Shire. Calling it a city is erroneous.SauliH 05:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: old comments from 2005

message: I've noticed that theres a few editors other than myself or Zephyr103 chipping in with some contributions to Sunshine Coast related articles over time.  Maybe start a Sunshine Coast Wikiproject? --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 12:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Being a local ATM, the buses do run quite frequently in the more populated areas (eg Maroochydore, Caloundra) but are subject to traffic conditions per all other areas.  I'm reverting the edits to what it was before. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 07:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Sunshine Coast?

message: I recently added a link to the website www.mysunshinecoast.com.au  due to it being a valuable resource for both tourists and locals. It is a community based website and has more to offer than some of the other ones that have been linked to. 
The link was removed and I was told it was spam. Now, I thought that wikipedia was for the greater good, and people power based. I would ask the question: who of the "mods" owns the website that is an absolute link farm? That is "allowed" to stay? mysunshinecoast.com.au has more to offer than the tourims sc site.
I was also quoted that wikipedia uses nofollow tags: Who cares? I dont much care if the sites I put on here have a good pagerank. I was sharing a resource. 
Sb617 you msg me regarding your supreme rule of wikipedia, I think it is time you get off your godly power ride, and look at the world objectively, not just what suits you. (FisherEd (talk) 01:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please, observe WP:CIVIL and discuss this in a civil manner instead of attacking contributors if you disagree with this removal.  Also I removed the other sites concerned as it was advertising fares. --Sb617  02:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Please see your talk page and discuss this in a civil manner without resorting to personal attacks, thank you.  The links are explained on your talk page.  There is no vendetta against you.  I have left messages on your talk which explains it clearly enough. --Sb617  04:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

text: You might want to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI#What_is_a_conflict_of_interest.3F, as your edits were pretty much only adding a link, making it easier to suspect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:COI#Editors_who_may_have_a_conflict_of_interest. --Sb617  05:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

text: You wouldnt happen to be User:Noosalife? --Sb617  05:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Will send ya a private email as soon as I can, when I get off work.  Got a few questions to clear up, Cheers! --Sb617  08:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: link

message: The coast is so stunning to look at and the wildlife is lovely. Do you think we could include some more photos of the scenery and the kangaroos/Koalas/echinas etc???!?!?!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.120.16.131 (talk) 23:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO the article would benefit from more images of the natural environment. As discussed above though, it must not become a tourist brochure. HiLo48 (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: More images?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sunshine Coast, Queensland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120503013407/http://www.usmevents.com.au/Page6369.aspx to http://www.usmevents.com.au/Page6369.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120818102537/http://www.usmevents.com.au:80/Page6371.aspx to http://www.usmevents.com.au/Page6371.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Sunshine Coast, Queensland. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110405002842/http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/parks/glass-house-mountains/culture.html to http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/parks/glass-house-mountains/culture.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110725074334/http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/addfiles/documents/projects/msfs_cultural_heritage.pdf to http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/addfiles/documents/projects/msfs_cultural_heritage.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usmevents.com.au/Page6369.aspx
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.usmevents.com.au/Page6371.aspx
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140715195510/http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au:80/sitePage.cfm?code=about-the-coast to http://www.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/sitePage.cfm?code=about-the-coast
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article has a number of problems. As stated in some comments, it has a strong PR slant and does not appear entirely neutral.
In addition, it is somewhat confusing in it's definition of 'Sunshine Coast' and does not contain a firm geographical definition. This is because the 'Sunshine Coast' as a colloquialism, which appears to encompass the area that this article refers to is, in fact, two distinct areas, the Sunshine Coast Region (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_Coast_Region) and the Shire of Noosa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shire_of_Noosa).
As such, this article should probably be reduced in size to reflect the colloquial reference to the 'Sunshine Coast' as understood by Australians to be the area of coastline from approximately Caloundra to Noosa, but to refer to the individual articles above for 'more information'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.63.100.10 (talk) 06:16, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually we do have an official definition of Sunshine Coast as it is an officially named place search here where it says:
Named as an area by Minister for Lands 1 August 1967 for "the area contained in the Shires of Landsborough, Maroochy and Noosa, but excluding Bribie Island".
which translated into 2017 LGAs presumably means Shire of Noosa plus Sunshine Coast Region minus Bribie Island (noting that only the northern unpopulated part of Bribie is in Sunshine Coast Region, the southern populated part of Bribie Island is in Moreton Bay Region).
So I don't think the merger makes any sense given that defintion. I think this article should at least mention the Qld Govt definition and it would be much improved if we stopped using the phrase "Sunshine Coast region" (lower case "r") as being something different to Sunshine Coast Region (upper case "R") as I think that might be a bit too subtle a distinction for the reader. I note that the Qld Govt define Sunshine Coast as a "district" so maybe we should talk about the Sunshine Coast district and Sunshine Coast Region when we are trying to distinguish between the two of them. Kerry (talk) 06:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

text: Your edits have improved the article a lot. Thank you for doing it. Kerry (talk) 03:23, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge this article with Sunshine Coast Region 

message: In MOS:LEADIMAGE it says "It is common for an article's lead or infobox to carry a representative image—such as of a person or place, a book or album cover—to give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page." I think the current montage is failing hopelessly with this. OK, first I will say I dislike montages, but laying that point to one side for a moment. That street photo (top left) could be anywhere and it's not an attractive photo. The highrise, river and lake photos could also be anywhere (and the lake photo isn't very appealing). The Steve Irwin photo is a good one for the Australia Zoo article, but it's a very small part of the Sunshine Coast (which the article defines as being a strip of coast with hinterland. The Glasshouse mountains photo is good, attractive image with have strong "iconic" connections for the hinterland aspect of the Sunshine Coast (so big tick for that one), but what is completely missing is "the sunshine and the coast". Could we perhaps go with just 2 images in the montage: one for the "sunny coast" (e.g. like the one showing here, first one I saw, there may be better ones) and the GlassHouse mountains photo (or similar) to depict the hinterland. I think the coastal photo should try to embody the qualities of the Sunshine Coast that make it different to the Gold Coast, so more natural environment, lower rise buildings, not as crowded, which I feel are the distinguishing differences. Kerry (talk) 06:45, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections to your thoughts, although I have difficulties telling one beach picture from another, except of course that your example is clearly not the Gold Coast, but could be from thousands of other beaches. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:26, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox photo 

message: Move to Sunshine Coast as it the overwhelmingly main usage and should not be disambiguated.
2A02:C7F:31CF:6400:E407:D0E5:679:F454 (talk) 23:07, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: The lede used to contain some confused language about the ABS definition of Sunshine Coast being different from the Qld Govt's (without citation). Such differeneces do occur but generally not to any significant extent in the 2016 census (although the 2011 census districts were bad and the comment may relate to that). I've overlaid the 2016 boundaries of the ABS SA4 for Sunshine Coast with two local government areas (Sunshine Coast and Noosa) and the alignment is almost perfect with one exception: the northern tip of Bribie Island is in the Sunshine Coast Region but not in the ABS SA4. However, as it is an unpopulated area (all within either the national park or state forest with no residential land use), the difference in boundaries will make no real difference for census purposes. I restructured the lede accordingly. Kerry (talk) 07:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qld Govt definition and ABS  

message: Any reason why the SA4 population figures are being used for the city/metro population instead of the SUA or UCL? Sdinesh2222 (talk) 23:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't put it there but I did take a look at it. First, as to SUA and UCL data, right now we don't have them for the 2021 census. The ABS has only released certain kinds of data in their Release 1 but SUA and UCL data is coming in Release 2, see this and open the tab "Geography availability for QuickStats by search type". The official 1967 definition of the Sunshine Coast is the Shires of Landsborough, Maroochy and Noosa (excluding Bribie Island) which reinterpreted in terms of the current LGAs is that the Sunshine Coast is the combination of the local government areas of Sunshine Coast Region and Shire of Noosa (where the Bribie Island exclusion is irrelevant as only the northern unpopulated part of Bribie Island was ever in the Shire of Landsborough -- the populated part is now in Moreton Bay Region). So if you look at the LGA census data which has been released, you find 342,541 (for Sunshine Coast Region) and 56,298 (for Shire of Noosa) which add up to 398,839 and the SA4 population is 398,840 (that is, differs by one person -- the mind boggles where that one person must have been located). So the SA4 number given does seem to be a reasonable estimate for the population. It might be that the next data releases makes us decide there is a better population value to include in this article, but for now I think what's there is reasonable. Kerry (talk) 01:07, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHy are SA4 population figures used?