Talk:Brisbane/Archive 1

message: "legislation decreeing timber construction" ? No, there's never been such legislation on the statute books, timber construction was simply the most cost effective.  In the 19th century Brisbane was in the middle of a vast forest of timber - Rafting Ground Road in Brookfield was where logs were lashed together to float down Moggil Creek and down to Brisbane.  Moggill Road and Waterworks Rds are their peculiar windy routes because they follow the old bullock dray routes that dragged the timber down out of the hills.Paddington62 02:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The photo has nothing to do with me.  The caption has nothing to do with me.  I have absoultely no idea why you even addressed me on the matter.  Figaro 10:20, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: See Sister city. Short answer: the term "sister city" means nothing at all to 99% of the residents of the cities involved. It's just something organised between local goverments as a feelgood exercise. I guess it allows mayors to travel overseas at taxpayers' expense. I'm not being too cynical, am I? :) -- Tim Starling 13:16 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
----
There is already a link to HUMBUG on the UQ page.  That is good enough.  It is not really required on Brisbane as well. - Gaz 16:28, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Yes, even I have to agree with this Robertbrockway 6:14 Apr 22 2005 (UTC) (founder of HUMBUG)
----
Did the hottest maximum temperature record change this year ? Julianp 03:59, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top 

message: Are there any decent facts regarding Brisbane's antipode? EmileVictor 07:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antipode 

message: I have changed the infobox to combine the best of the former box and the one at Johannesburg. Any comments? Brisvegas 11:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reverting this edit. There's no reason Brisbane needs its own infobox. I suggest you take a look at Template:Infobox Australian City instead. Particularly the Talk page. --Dalziel 86 01:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've also submitted Template:Brisbane infobox as a template for deletion, as it is redundant given the existence of Template:Infobox Australian City. --Dalziel 86 01:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New infobox

message: The article should not confuse the pouplate of the City of Brisbane with the Metropolitan area. The City itself is 900,000 - still the largest in Australia. The metropolitan area contains other cities (Logan, Ipswich, Redland and a few other shires).<ANON entry>
well... you must be just the person to update the page! Erich 13:30, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracy in Population 

message: I've just reverted an addition listing a series of state rugby league teams based in and around Brisbane. This was done on the assumption that the "sporting teams" we're talking about are actually the ones which play in the national competitions (such as the Broncos, Reds, Bulls etc etc), rather than every single team in any level of competition.
BigHaz 03:47, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Brief Word on Sporting Teams 

message: Is the empty link to "Brisbane botanical gardens" the same as the Brisbane City Botanical Gardens linked to in the entry above it?  Fix it by either writing a new article or identifying by full name as above without link.  Gene Nygaard 04:55, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: botanic gardens

message: This was added to the article, I moved it to talk so it wasn't cluttering up the page, it may also contains some useful information--nixie 06:17, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: media list

message: I was always taught that Redcliffe was the original choice.  Redcliffe was the first city settled in Qld but Brisbane was chosen due to its accessibility for large ships (thanks to the Brisbane River).
From here...
http://www.margatebiz.com.au/redcliff.html
"Redcliffe was proposed initially as the capital of Queensland, but lacked a suitable deep water entry for large ships and so Brisbane was chosen as the capital instead."
::I also thought Redcliffe was the original candidate.  It doesn't make any sense to use Ipswich which is an inland city and no boat acccess at all.
:::I believe Cleveland was intended to be Ipswich's port. Lankiveil 02:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: city of Ipswich was intended to be the capital of Queensland

message: Surely we should be able to do better than including Sandra Sully and Savage Garden... Does Daniel Jones qualify as a Brisbanite if he was born in the UK anyway??
What about just a list of world famous bands? - Powderfinger, Regurgitator and some others to name a few. James Pinnell 17:45, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable Brisbanites

message: Lots of work still required. The authors may wish to ask for editorial assistance by some of the experienced administrators who have painstakingly written and maintained the article on Australia. Tony 06:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: One doesn't have to be an administrator to work hard (or to be experienced) ;-). But yes, this article isn't ready for featured status. It seems it will be referred to Wikipedia:Peer review.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 07:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Premature to put this up for featured-article status 

message: Not every browser is able to cope with IPA symbols.  If IPA symbols are the only means whereby the pronunciation of the name of Brisbane is given, then those people with browsers incapable of reading IPA symbols will be left in ignorance of the proper pronunciation.  It is for this reason that it is important to have alternative means for these people to know the correct pronunciation.  This is the reason for the inclusion of briz'bun as the pronunciation of the name.  Those with browsers capable of reading IPA symbols can use those symbols.  Those with browsers incapable of reading IPA symbols can use the alternative that has been supplied.  The reason why I am aware that some browsers do not recognise IPA symbols is because my own browser does not recognise the IPA symbols. Figaro 10:55 4 October, 2005 (UTC)
:There's something wrong with their display at present, that's true.  Formerly, I was able to see them, and now I can't.  But we simply can't have ad-hoc, jerry-rigged pronunciation guides throughout the encyclopedia, particularly when we're not intended only for native English speakers.  I'm afraid the other pronunciation guide isn't necessarily very informative.
:And at any rate, it's not a huge problem if it's misprounced.  Someone can always do a spoken version of the article.  Slac speak up! 19:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, whatever happened to using SAMPA, an ASCII-based alternative to the IPA? SAMPA used to be quite common in Wikipedia articles - I think it may even have been used on the Brisbane article a couple of years ago. Perhaps a SAMPA pronounciation can be used in conjunction with an IPA example? Using pronounciation guides like "briz-BUHN" or "brizbun" is extremely ambiguous and should be avoided. --Humehwy 08:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Hmm, I'm not the biggest fan of SAMPA.  It's actually not a great way to transcribe IPA.  I think we'd far better off with readable IPA characters than with SAMPA.  Slac speak up! 19:41, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronounciation of Brisbane and IPA symbols 

message: Does anyone have any recent imagery of Buses/Trains or knows of any public sources of such? The transport section looks very text based since I re-wrote it and I would love to add some pictures to liven it up. James Pinnell 07:47, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images for Transport, Tourism 

message: Why was the Art and Literature section removed? Come on, if we can have a Theatre and Stage section, we can have an Arts and Literature section. --Dalziel 86 05:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to Figaro for returning the Arts and Literature content in the new Creative Arts section. I'm wondering if perhaps that section could benefit from being replaced by a summary and a link to a main article on Creative Arts/Culture in Brisbane. Anyone? --Dalziel 86 09:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Art and Literature

message: What is the criteria for adding artists to this section?  I recently added a couple of Brisbane most popular electronic artists and then they were removed, with the suggestion that they were not popular.  I am not familiar with all the artists in that section, yet I wouldn't remove them.  Electronic and techno musicians have a large following even if they are not mainstream.  Shouldn't they be included as well? - Shiftchange 02:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Do the artists have existing articles on Wikipedia? if they're notable enough for that, then they can be considered notable enough to be included in the list. That said, I'm not in favour of such a list being a part of the main Brisbane article in the first place... --Dalziel 86 05:55, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I did check, and none of the three you added have Wikipedia articles. There's also not whole lot in the way of Google results. So, yeah, I'd say they probably don't meet the notability criteria for inclusion, I'm afraid. --Dalziel 86 11:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Entertainment inclusions 

message: I tried to add something about this but i'm not sure how to word it because I don't really understand what that means.  According to the BCC website, Brisbane is the largest municipality in Australia.
:The City of Brisbane, with around 957,000 inhabitants, is the most populous Local Government Area in Australia. It is not the largest. I believe the Guinness Book of Records gives that honour to the City of Mount Isa, Queensland. --Humehwy 05:37, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No sorry.  The city of Kalgoorlie-Boulder is more than twice the size of mount isa.194.46.239.182 16:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Have you considered the possibility that they might mean that Brisbane has a higher population than any other municipality in Australia?  Figaro 04:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is what they mean, although it was a perfectly legitimate question to ask (it could have referred to area or some other measure - although there are definitely other municipalities which are larger). They mean that the Brisbane City Council has more residents than any other local government area in the country. They probably also mean that it has a larger budget than any other Local Government in the country. I have often heard it said that BCC has a budget bigger than that of the State of Tasmania (and I suppose that of the ACT, and possibly NT, although would need to do research). -- Adz 05:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Municipality 

message: The area in the infobox times the population density stated comes to 517,667, but the population shown is more than three times that. Rhollenton 00:31, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The population/area/density numbers don't work

message: When I edited the comment on the Brisbane metropolitan area, it was genuinely misinformation.  It read:
::The Brisbane metroplitan area included several other local government areas including Redland Shire, Logan City, Ipswich, Pine Rivers Shire and Redcliffe.
Figaro 00:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Governance 

message: I have tagged the image :Image:Water gu.jpg as lacking proper licensing info, it will be deleted in 7 days. --Martyman-(talk) 02:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coprighted image 

message: I've changed a reference to the Storey Bridge Climb in the landmarks & tourist attractions section. It read a little bit like an advertisment. I moved the external commercial link to inline text, but I think it should be removed altogether. Could other people please take a look at it and see if you agree? Thanks. -- Adz|talk 11:20, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the official name of the bridge is the Story Bridge, named after John Douglas Story, (who is perhaps better known as J. D. Story). Figaro 14:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Storey Bridge commercial links/Advertising?

message: How come this section has re-inflated into list form? It needs to be either rewritten in prose, or again cut from the article.--cj | talk 06:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Landmarks and tourist destinations

message: Can we get a Fahrenheit temperature on this, and likely other pages as well?  There are those who don't use Celsius measurements... --JamesR1701E 06:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha! now you know how we feel all the time! I'm sorry, but 30 degrees should be hot weather! :P Slac speak up! 07:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I see no reason why you couldn't add old fashioned temperature measurements.  Feel free to also add old fashioned rainfall measurements.  Make my grandparents happy. Sofixit.  Factoid Killer 19:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Temperatures

message: I know Brisbane city itself is a particularly large municipality but satelite cities are still taken into accoutn when referring to the greater metropolitan area.
A casual reader looking at this article and attempting to compare it to the Sydney and Melbourne articles is going to be very confused.
To the best of my knowledge the 1363 km² figure for the cities area applies only to the municpality of Brisbane.  So firstly, this figure should be replaced by the figure for the metropolitan area.
I take it the claim that Brisbane's surface area is the largest of all capitals is a comparison of the Brisbane City Council to City of Sydney and City of Melbourne (and others)?
Suggested Changes
* Everything relating to the Brisbane Municipality needs to go into an article called City of Brisbane.
* The Brisbane City Council article should be an article about the Brisbane city council as oposed to the city of brisbane.
* The Brisbane article should be an article about the Brisbane Metropolitan area and thus it should NOT contain any information about:
**Sister Cities
**Coats of Arms
**Flags of Brisbane City
**Statistics relevant only to the Brisbane municipality
**Information about the Lord Mayor (metropolitan areas don't have lord mayors)
And furthermore, it should contain:
**Statistics relevant to the wider Brisbane Metroplitan area
**General information about the city as a whole
These changes will bring Brisbane in line with all of the other Australian capital city articles.  It will also ease cunfusion in claims such as the one we're making about the surface area of the city.  We claim it's the largest at 1363.  The casual observer then goes to Sydney to see a claim of 12 145 km². 
Lets vote on it shall we? Factoid Killer 10:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no need to vote. This is the standard, but Brisbane and Perth articles have yet to be brought completely into line. Brisbane City Council should be merged into City of Brisbane.--cj | talk 15:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing Metropolitan area and City 

message: At least one of the population/population density numbers is wrong because they don't come close to tieing up. ReeseM 07:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Extrapolating linearly from (ABS 1387.3) Queensland in review, 2003 we see that the population density figure is 'about right' for the corresponding increase in population. So I'd say the figure for Land Area is incorrect. Anyone care to calculate the area as per (ABS 1252.0.55.001) ASGC 2003? sendai 02:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, we both could have read up and found that there has been some discussion regarding what this article pertains to; which would influence the figures somewhat. But hey, to err and all, and the corresponding article (Brisbane City Council) also has inconsistent figures. Factoid Killer When are we having that vote? sendai 02:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Obvious error in the infobox

message: I've removed the claim that Brisbane is the second largest municipality by area. The local Gov't Association website says that East Pilbara Shire is the largest by area. If Mt Isa is also bigger than Brisbane (see discussion above), then Brisbane isn't teh second biggest. I would be very surprised if there weren't a number of municipalities - particularly rural ones - bigger than Brisbane. -- 202.161.21.191 04:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to say that the City of Brisbane (ie. the area administered by BCC) is Australia's largest metropolitan municipality in terms of area? BrightLights 06:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Municipality (again) 

message: I've added a section within the media/radio bit about infrastructure and telecommunications. To me it fills out the section a bit more and shows that Brisbane is as technologically advanced/up-to-date as any world city out there. --58.104.223.30 13:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  internet 

message: It is stated in the intro to the article that Brisbane extends from Moreton Bay to the Great Dividing Range. That would put the Western border of Brisbane at around Kingaroy. The Great Dividing Range (that separates the Eastern flowing rivers from the Western that go either to the Gulf of Carpentaria or to the Murray Darling Basin) is, in our region, comprised by ranges such as the Bunya Mountains. I'll look in on this article in a couple of weeks and will, unless otherwise edited, will replace with the term "Queensland's Coastal Range". --MichaelGG 09:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Dividing Range?

message: I removed this edit from the intro. (text below). It is unreferenced, but I suspect that it may refer to the CBD or the Brisbane city ABS statistical area. It definitely does not refer to the city as a whole. If the source can be referenced then perhaps the info can be included in the Brisbane central business district article. -- Adz|talk 11:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Besides the debate over its relevance, it made the intro far too long and really, to be honest, doesn't need to stay in the article unless it's updated regularily IMO. --James Pinnell 08:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Statistics in intro

message: *I've started the clean up. It still needs work, the article is heavy in all the wrong places. --Peta 09:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: Brisbane's population does not some up to 1.9 million people. Exclude City of Caboolture, Redcliffe City, Logan City and Ipswich City, that would leave the population 1.6-1.7million. Maybe the artical should list its Urban population as 1.9 million.
Unknown User 04:16, 19 October 2006
::Considering the results from the last census haven't been tallied, the population mark is a growth estimate by the ABS. The last census before the most recent one this year, was in 2001. In the last 5 years, Brisbane has featured phenomenal growth, so it will be interesting to see what comes out of the 06' effort when the stats come available in July next year. 59.167.108.234 17:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Population

message: The article states that Brisbane is one of the most multicultural cities in Australia.  This is a factoid.  The statistics just don't add up to this.  
Look at the stats:
Comparative percentages of those born overseas in Australian major cities (as at 2001):
*Melbourne: 43.5% 
*Perth: 31.6%
*Sydney: 31.2%
*Adelaide: 24.6% 
*Darwin: 22.0%
*Canberra: 22.0%
*Brisbane: 21.0%
*Hobart: 14.0%
The ABS shows that Brisbane has a relatively low overseas migration rate compared to Sydney and Melbourne, and while Melbourne and Sydney's is growing, Brisbanes has either stayed the same or actually decreased.  The reason for this is most likely that migrants are attracted to cities that offer high employment in areas of unskilled labour, in manufacturing and industry, whereas the majority of Brisbane's growth is actually in white collar industries.  Even with interstate migration over the last few years, Brisbane still has the second lowest multicultural rate of the capital cities, and there are several provincial cities like Geelong and Newcastle that have higher multicultural proportions.  For example, Dandenong, Victoria has a rate of 54% overseas born.  --Biatch 01:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While the statement in the article certainly needs to be sourced, I'm not sure your statistics disprove it. I don't think it is correct to assume that multiculturalism is determined by proportion of overseas-born population; there are cultural differences amongst native Australians, no?--cj | talk 08:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you disagree with the definition of Multiculturalism on Wikipedia and believe it needs changing.  I quote: "Multiculturalism is almost always applied to distinct cultures of immigrant groups in developed countries"  and "not to the presence of indigenous peoples".  Australian born people are much more likely to have embraced Australian culture and less likely to know the customs of or be able to speak the language of their descendants.--Biatch 02:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The statistics quoted do not indicate the % of 'immigrant groups' (as quoted from the multiculturalism article), they indicate the % of population born overseas. Although this may seem to be the same thing, it is not. It does not take into account 'immigrant groups' that have been established here for more than one generation, and hence are not born overseas. Your statistics just show the recent immigration, not overall 'immigrant group' size. but I do think the comment should be reworded, brisbane is a multicultural city, but comparison to other cities is not required. Rimmeraj 02:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are talking about the visible minority, which is not a true indication or measure of a multicultural community.  Second generation immigrants rarely retain their culture of their descendants.  Until recently, Brisbane's population was dominated by the White Australia Policy, hence most immigrants are from Europe and English speaking backgrounds and have been quick adopters of Australian culture.  Cities like Melbourne, however, have had multicultural populations for example from China since the Gold Rush 150 years ago which has influenced the diversity much more since.  Ultimately everyone in Australia is an immigrant at some point - even indigenous Australians.  Most cities in the developed world are to a certain extent.  This is not, however, notable.  To say so would not be doing justice to truly multicultural cities like Toronto, Melbourne, New York, London and Perth.--Biatch 05:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: So you have to have lots of immigrants to be multicultural?  Australian-born means that you enjoy barbequed steak, rugby league, and Fosters, without exception?  I would disagree with that assessment. Lankiveil 01:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brisbane one of most multicultural cities ? 

message: This claim is made in the opening paragraph of the article.
Where does this claim hail from ?  
What periods are we talking about ?? 
I looked around and couldn't find anything on this.  The claim is spurious at best.  
I did find this article  which seems to indicate Las Vegas, Austin and Atlanta in the United States are in the world top 100, but no mention of Brisbane.  I could find no mention in reputable articles here  or here .  According to the Developed country article (redirected from Developed World), Dubai is the fastest growing city on Earth, Brisbane surely does not hold a candle to the growth of Dubai. Is this another factoid ??  If a source can't be found, it should be deleted.  --Biatch 03:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second fastest growing city in the developed world ??? 

message: What is going on at the corner of albert and elizabeth?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.51.1 (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What about all the construction?