Talk:Westfield Miranda

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 05:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:The Westfield Group logo.svg

The image Image:The Westfield Group logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

4th largest shopping centre, or 4th largest Westfield?

I have my doubts that this is the 4th largest shopping centre in Sydney. I'm wondering if it's meant to mean it's the 4th largest Westfield in Sydney? Anoldtreeok (talk) 14:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

490 stores? more like 396

Whoever has put Westfield Miranda contains 490 stores, is obviosly wrong. The centre contains 396 stores, that is according to Westfield Miranda's portfolio [1]. I have replaced 490 with 396. Thankyou. MelbourneStar1 (talk) 07:19, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

2013-2014 Rebuilding and Renovations

I have previously updated the page re the rebuilding of the nth-western part of the centre. I've been taking photos since the demolishing of the office tower a year ago, but have only just started uploading to commons. I added a photo of the demolished area just now, though it's already 6 months out of date, and updated the captions of the existing pictures to indicate where they are now historical.

There are also renovations stretching up to the eastern end which may need adding to the text.--220 of ^Borg 19:16, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

statement on rail access

"making it easily accessible from southern and eastern suburbs of Sydney". This statement presumes people go to Miranda to shop from the eastern suburbs. Secondly it's only accessible to Bondi Junction and Edgecliff. Miranda is not easily accessible by rail to most of the eastern suburbs like randwick, coogee, maroubra. Similarly why not say Westfield Bondi Junction is "easily accessible" to miranda and cronulla. LibStar (talk) 11:32, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I have no problem rephrasing or dropping the word "easily" but my point was I think it is relevant to include details of the rail line in the access section of the article. -- Whats new?^(talk) 11:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

It's still misleading as it implies access to whole eastern suburbs when in fact it is only 2 out of about 25 suburbs. If anyone wants to know what rail stations it serves they simply need to click on the link to the rail line article. LibStar (talk) 11:57, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

You're taking the sentence too literaly. The same could be said of the southern suburbs without a rail line. It is intended to show the regions of Sydney with a direct rail service, and the Eastern subs is one of them -- Whats new?^(talk) 12:01, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely not, the article even links to Eastern Suburbs (Sydney). The statement is misleading. And as you know already incorrectly states linking to all southern suburbs. Even the Miranda, New South Wales makes no mention of being easily accessible to eastern and southern suburbs. LibStar (talk) 12:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Would you support a change to something like "providing a direct rail connection to the southern and eastern suburbs of Sydney"? -- Whats new?^(talk) 12:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Again, you're taking it too literally. If you live in Kurnell (a southern suburb without a train station), there is still direct rail service to the southern suburbs. People from that suburb would need to get to the nearest station if they wanted to travel to Miranda, but the rail access it still there and worth mentioning in my opinion. Same for the eastern subs. -- Whats new?^(talk) 22:58, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

and is it correct to say you can access Eastern Suburbs (Sydney) from Miranda, when it is in fact 2 out of 25 suburbs? why doesn't the suburb article even mention this. LibStar (talk) 02:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

no you simply say it can access the rail line. It only provides direct access to 2 suburbs of about 25 in eastern Sydney. LibStar (talk) 12:07, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you see the need to inflate the actual access to the shopping centre. The shopping centre has direct access to the eastern suburbs line, which was named because it terminates at Bondi Junction not because it serves most of the eastern suburbs. Somehow using the name of the line to imply miranda has easy access to most of the eastern suburbs by rail when it clearly does not is misleading. LibStar (talk) 12:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

It also doesn't serve a majority of southern suburbs, yet you're happy to include that region? Seems a double standard to me -- Whats new?^(talk) 03:02, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

No. Exclude southern suburbs. The phrase is misleading at worst and exaggeration at best. The only fact is that the shopping centre is accessible to the train line. LibStar (talk) 04:23, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I still don't entirely agree, but I won't oppose any longer -- Whats new?^(talk) 04:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

who the hell is david galilee

is this vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:C00A:3900:DC32:78C4:6CF8:F20E (talk) 12:43, 19 December 2020 (UTC)