Jump to content

Talk:Brisbane/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Title Image Change

Hi IP editior 101.165.145.61,

Last time we changed the title image, it was only done after an extensive discussion and title images generally shouldn't just be changed like that.

I seem to remember it was decided at that point that a montage was undesirable as there were already many photos of different aspects of the city throughout the article.

I actually think however, that a montage could be a good idea.

I would ask you, though, to include more pictures outside the central city area. This article is about the entire Brisbane metropolitan area which covers 15 000 sq km, not just the CBD and Southbank.

How about changing the picture of a partial wall of GoMA (which looks like nothing particularly special in itself) to a scenic picture of a bayside beach like Sutton's beach at redcliffe or the Wynnum foreshore or maybe an even more scenic picture of a bay or ocean beach on Moreton or Stradbroke (Tangalooma wrecks perhaps?) as both are included in the Brisbane metro area.

The montage also includes two images side by side of early 20th century non-church sandstone structures with pillars in the CBD (shrine of remembrance and city hall front) which is probably overkill. City hall is certainly iconic in Brisbane but shrine of remembrance not so much. Maybe a natural feature out of the central city area like Mt Coot-tha for example? We have to be representing the whole metro area as this article is not just about postcode 4000.

Lastly, we discussed at this talk page previously the night skyline photo and decided it was no good as a title skyline photo as it is so pitch dark that the buildings cannot be seen. Could you replace it with an up to date (ie post infinity completion) daytime photo from Kangaroo Pt which we discussed extensively and most people believed to be the best vantage point?

Thanks for contributing!--Saruman-the-white (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wow thanks Saruman for taking down my photomontage, sorry if it didn't look nice but its the first one I've ever done and it took me ages. :( But I am glad you agree with me that there should be a photomontage, the article Melbourne has one and looks great. There were actually a few other scenes I wanted to add but Brisbane has so many icons it was hard to figure out which ones to use and which ones to leave out. I think the following should be definitely added to any montage: Story Bridge, Brisbane City Hall, South Bank Parklands, Brisbane CBD

And I think these should be considered to be added: Kangaroo Point Cliffs, Brisbane CityCat on the river (The citycats are quite unique to Brisbane so I think it would be good to add this), Tangalooma Wrecks, Shrine of Remembrance, Nepal Peace Pagoda (Very unique structure and one of the few kinds in the world), Queen Street Mall, The Gabba, St John's Cathedral.

Not sure which ones to choose and which ones to leave out though :(--Empire of War (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey I'm sorry I took it down. That doesn't mean it won't go up though, just that there should be some kind of discussion beforehand, and it took a lot of discussion and someone actually asking a professional photographer to go out and take the photo last time based on the skyline view that we thought was most iconic. Actually I will have a quick stab at changing a couple of things and upload it and tell me what you think.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 02:53, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Okay have a look now and tell me what you think. No no it looks great (significantly better than Melbourne's actually). I just wanted to change two things: 1) make the skyline view from the angle that after extensive discussion last time we decided was most iconic and 2) add a couple of things from outside the inner inner core of the city as the article is about the entire 15 000 sq km metro area of brisbane not just the CBD area. Thanks! --Saruman-the-white (talk) 03:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I took awhile to reply, was away from my computer for a few days. And yes the photomontage looks great much better than Melbourne's, and remember we can always add new pics to the montage later on if we get better pics, its not set in stone. But I thought a photomontage of Brisbane was necessary since this page is viewed more than 2000+ per day, one image of Brisbane is not enough to represent her--Empire of War (talk) 01:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there any way the 'Mt' of Mt Coot-tha can be put onto the same line as 'Coot-tha' in the montage image captions? At the moment, the 'Mt' appears on the line above the 'Coot-tha' part of the name. Thanks. Figaro (talk) 08:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll have a go at fixing this.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Figaro (talk) 08:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Photomontage needs to be updated

When the G20 arrives in Brisbane in November this article will receive a huge amount of views. I think the photomontage should be updated before then to give readers a clearer view of Brisbane. For example many of the new skyscrapers that have been built in Brisbane do not feature on this image of the CBD, the image of the Tangalooma Wrecks is pathetic but could be so much better, the Story Bridge (Brisbane's most iconic structure) is barely made out and doesn't show off it's beauty, the Japanese Gardens in Mt Cootha Gardens are great but I can think of a dozen better icons that could replace it, Brisbane City Hall isn't given enough room to show the entire building. I think we need new photos of many of these structures.--Empire of War (talk) 13:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure there could be better photos of some of these things. The problem is that we have to use photos which exist on Wikipedia, or else they will be removed for copyright violation. Alternatively (as was done for the large skyline photo which is now almost a year old) someone could go out and re-take photos of Brisbane landmarks specifically to upload to Wiki, so that copyright will not be breached. A couple of years ago, knowing that there are great photos of many of these sites on the internet, I foolishly attempted to use from pictures from Flickr, I believe. They were of course speedily deleted for breaching copyright. The skyline shot is from the best angle by far as it shows its location on the iconic river, the entire length of the skyline, the most scenic side with the most iconic buildings, ... but you are right it will have to be replaced at some point when significant new buildings are completed ie 111+222 margaret street and 300 george street, making it all noticeably different. Having said that, the montage is by far more aesthetic than the uninspiring, dull montages used by other Aust cities (Melbourne's in particular fails to showcase any aspects of that city). My main concern is that there could be a tendency to include just images on the central core of the metro area ie the CBD and maybe one or 2 of south bank. A selection like this would better suit the article on Brisbane, Queensland (ie postcode 4000). This article is about the entire huge metro area which stretches from Caboolture to Beenleigh, from Ipswich to Stradbroke. As such, the images should showcase and reflect the content of the article. I feel that unique and scenic places like Mt Coot-tha, with its famous lookout and Moreton Bay, with its unique huge Sand Islands of Moreton and Stradbroke, both included in the Brisbane metro area, which are the most visited places by tourists in the metro area, should be included (also for aesthetic reasons). Otherwise, we risk making the place look like any other interchangeable modern city. (Melbourne's example, which is all man-made structures plus a totally dark, indistict 10 yr old skyline shot is a great example of how to make a unique city look boring and plain) Of course there is much room for improvement and if someone can take better photos as occured last year with the skyline I'm sure everyone on wiki would much appreciate. God knows there are many scenic and historical Brisbane places which don't even have a single photo, quality or otherwise, on wiki!--Saruman-the-white (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Well for example, the Infinity Tower currently Brisbane's tallest building would be visible from that angle of the CBD, yet it doesn't appear (therefore this image is already out of date). I agree with you on Mt Cootha and the Moreton Bay area, both places deserve a image in the montage but the ones in Wikimedia at present don't do it justice. Yes we really need a Wiki member to go out and take new photos. I think Brisbane City Hall certainly deserves to be in there, yet again it needs to show off the entire front façade not just it's Pillars. Story Bridge obviously has a place as well, since it is Brisbane's most recognizable landmark. We need a new image of that too. I would prefer we completed a new Montage before the G20 summit, like as I said before, the page will receive tens of thousands of hits so I think we should have a great montage to truly do Brisbane justice.--Empire of War (talk) 04:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Certainly I agree with all you've said here, and yes Infinity would be just visible on that skyline shot now despite being on the other side of the CBD. If anybody reading this has good pictures of any of these mentioned places, or is in a position to go and take some, or knows more about the Wiki copyright policies re images and can find Flickr or other online images of the places mentioned which are copyright-free, please help out. I am extremely busy for the next couple of weeks but when I get some time later on I will also see if I can find any better examples. :) --Saruman-the-white (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I have gone and taken what I believe to be an aesthetic photo of the Gorge Walk at North Stradbroke Island. I have long believed that one of the photos on the montage should be of an iconic sight at either Stradbroke or Moreton (Gorge Walk or Tangalooma Wrecks). I believe that one of these should be represented for the following reasons: these two islands are a very unique part of the Brisbane metropolitan area, which this article covers (stradbroke is part of redland council while moreton is part of brisbane city council). They are the second and third largest sand islands in the world (the largest being Fraser to our north). As such they really are unique to Brisbane and are something that other major cities can't claim. As such, they are very much among the top tourist attractions in the metro area. Anyone coming to stay in Brisbane for a few days will go to either Stradbroke or Moreton plus South Bank, the CBD, up Mt Coot-tha, etc. Aside from being such a very unique and touristically important part of the Brisbane metro area, they are also highly scenic, and not many large cities around the world could boast such beautiful scenery. My next goal will be to maybe take a good photo from the Mt Coot-tha lookout which is also way up there on the "to-do" list of iconic Brisbane things to do.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 07:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking that shot, Gorge Walk is truly beautiful and that image does justice for Moreton Bay imo.

I was wondering if the montage could be lengthened to include another two images?

  1. 1 reason being I think that "Queenslander architecture", should be shown off in this montage. Queenslander houses are Australia's most unique architecture form and this style developed in and around Brisbane, with many of the most beautiful examples in Brisbane's metropolitan area. This type of architecture is also distinctively "Brisbane", and can be seen almost all over the city.

The other photo could range from various other Brisbane landmarks, the Treasury Casino, Brisbane City Cat, view from Mount Cootha, the Brisbane War Memorial, or even another photo of South Bank or the Cultural Precinct as that is not pictured.--Empire of War (talk) 06:08, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Jeez, could you guys please learn to indent properly? Comment from a non-Brisbanite here. Don't just add new skyscrapers. Every city has skyscrapers. They say nothing about your city. Find unique images. HiLo48 (talk) 07:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I like the Queenslander idea. I've actually seen some very pretty shots of colourful Queenslanders before. It is indeed iconic to the city, glad you thought of it. RE skyscrapers, I agree it shouldn't all be skyscrapers. The reason we have one shot of the skyline at the top of the montage is because a CBD skyline is iconic for a city and is instantly recognisable, which is why they are used to quickly tell a viewer the location in movies/TV shows. Also, Brisbane's skyline is picturesque and shows something of its geography and river so it's a nice photo. We shouldn't fill the rest with skyscrapers though, you are right that one is no doubt suffficient.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 00:42, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
What makes you think Brisbane's skyline is instantly recognisable? It might be to locals, but from reading above, that not who some of you are trying to impress. Only a handful of world cities these days have instantly recognisable skylines - Sydney, London, New York, Paris, maybe Hong Kong, but I'm running out of ideas now. Brisbane's isn't. HiLo48 (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Well it's certainly more recognizable than many other Australian cities including Melbourne and Perth. So I think it is good to have a view of the city skyline.--Empire of War (talk) 04:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Seriously? What's recognisable about it to a non-local? Note that I am from Melbourne, and I don't think Melbourne's skyline is in any way distinctive, even though Australia's tallest building is there. HiLo48 (talk) 05:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Tall buildings don't make a skyline iconic, otherwise Sydney and London would never even rate. It's the distinguishing features of a city that are unique or recognizable. Melbourne has the Flinders Street Station but it's not exactly "on the skyline". Brisbane has several, one from the Story Bridge overlooking the CBD, second from the Cliffs overlooking the river and CBD, third from South Brisbane overlooking the Riverside Express and CBD, and fourth from North Quay overlooking South Bank. Melbourne doesn't really have any major vantage points to look at from, you have the Eureka Tower but it's not showing the "whole picture", unfortunately Melbourne's skyline is not as dense as Brisbane's. The best vantage point of Melbourne imo, would be along the Yarra, probably from Princes Bridge, however even then most of your riverbank is covered in railway.--Empire of War (talk) 06:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I think it could also be argued Brisbane probably has one of the world's most beautiful night skylines--Empire of War (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Obviously you would argue that, but I cannot agree. There is absolutely nothing in Brisbane's skyline that leaps out at the viewer and says, "This is Brisbane!" Do try to see this from the perspective of someone who doesn't live there and isn't interested in your goal of promoting the place. Non-Brisbanites will neither know nor care about those cliffs, or South Brisbane, or North Quay. The Story Bridge itself works, but not the buildings. HiLo48 (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Well I think non-locals wouldn't care about many of the things in the image montage but one skyline shot is almost always included in these city articles because it is a photo of the heart of the city in question where much of the commercial activity began. In the case of Brisbane, the skyline also covers the area which was the site of the original convict settlement and has been considered the centre of our city since then. It is also quite unique in that it is formed by a large pocket of tall highrise inside the loop of a winding river. Most cities with skylines by rivers will just have the skyline by the riverside or with the river flowing through but Brisbane's geography is quite unique in that our river is so endlessly winding that the skyline and CBD are contained within a "loop" of it. Further, Brisbane's skyline is impressive. Indeed there are whole (very well populated) internet forums dedicated to the skylines of our cities. Australian cities have more skyscrapers per capita than the cities of any other country in the world (except I believe Singapore, Hong Kong and the UAE, which are basically cities). You would be very hard-pressed to find a city of Brisbane's size with such a large number of skyscrapers (150m+ buildings) or such a well-developed skyline. Indeed, in the entire continent of Europe, the only city which could possibly compete would be London, and in the US only a handful of much larger cities (NYC, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, Miami). US cities of sub 2.5 million look more like Adelaide than Brisbane skyline-wise! Another test would be to look at Brisbane's skyline (with 55+ buildings over 100m) and then look at Perths (12 buildings over 100m, from memory) - the visual difference is dramatic. I guess this is a difference of opinion thing, ie some people just love highrise buildings like the guys over at skyscrapercity.com and some people think they are a generic blight on the landscape. Still, for good or for bad, skylines are the most common way that a city is identified quickly in film or TV, so it mustn't be totally futile and evidently many people pay some attention to them. Also, they are usually the most visible feature of a city that can be seen from miles around.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree that the winding river is significant. If you could find a really high angle (probably aerial) shot showing the city within the giant river bends, that would be great. Low angle shots just show skyscrapers, without perspective. All cities look like that. HiLo48 (talk) 05:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Actually Brisbane is often compared with London[who?], since both cities are renowned for their old winding rivers.--Empire of War (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Well I personally think our river is far more interesting (and curvy) and that our city is more beautiful and geographically unique as a subtropical city with mountains to one side and a bay to the other. But most cities have something, and in the case of London, it would be the historical built environment as with most cities in that part of the world rather than a modern glassy skyline or beautiful geographical setting. Skyline wise, however, ours is certainly more dramatic than London's or that of any other European city (although European cities are known for their pitiful skylines). Nonetheless I think our skyline is very much something to be proud of for a city of less than 2 and a half million as it dwarfs those of many cities which are many times larger throughout the world and it is rather dramatic in its location. So, like the wiki articles for just about any other city, I believe that the skyline shot should be retained on the montage, however I also agree that the article shouldn't be swamped with skyline shots which indeed would be boring and repetitive. Anyhow, I believe that many aspects of our city are well represented in the montage and this will only continue. For example we have a man-made garden on Mt Coot-Tha, the mountain that sweeps in close by the central city area, a scenic ocean photo on one of our large bay sand islands, the modern CBD skyline by the river, our iconic bridge, our largest cultural precinct (South Bank) and some historic sandstone buildings. This is much better than most city image montages which just focus on built environment entirely within the CBD. Indeed I'm planning to continue taking varied photos at moments which are opportune for a picturesque or iconic shot so this will only improve.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 04:40, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
I have my doubts that you guys who love the place and want to promote are all that good at taking an objective look at your city. I'm not knocking it. It's a great place to visit (in winter), but the skyline? Really? Nah. HiLo48 (talk) 05:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Dymonym

Can someone add "The demonym of Brisbane is Brisbanite." to the table? -- Annonymus User 1000 (talk) 23:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Which table? Do you men the infobox at the top right of the article? That infobox is {{Infobox Australian place}} which has no provision for a demonym, although the generic {{Infobox settlement}} does. However, "Brisbanite" is mentioned in the last sentence of the lead's 1st paragraph. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Brisbane as a "global city"

I've re-removed this material from the lead largely as it doesn't seem particularly important or useful. There are lots of these kinds of city rankings (most of which aren't particularly scientific), and the one here is cited only to the university which produced its website. There is also the issue of why it deserves to be so prominent? Some city rankings are very positive about Brisbane (eg [1], [2]), but others aren't (eg [3], [4]). Why does this positive ranking deserve to be singled out in the lead, and not the less-positive rankings? This material doesn't seem very useful for readers, and the article should communicate the city's economy, lifestyle and other features anyway. Nick-D (talk) 02:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry Nick-D, the Wikipedia rules do not allow editors to argue with the reliable sources, Especially when you are unable to cite any serious scholarship for all these other popular newspaper rankings. . The definition of "world city" is pretty specific and widely accepted among urban scholars. You can read the 2600 Citations to GaWD in the scholarly literature at https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=gawc+Global+city&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C27. no other ranking system has the depth or prestige of the GaWD--certainly not the superficial studies that you mention. The GaWD is a worldwide collaboration of many scholars, and its main website is indeed hosted at a prominent British University. Basically the scholars compile lots of statistical data On multiple dimensions of international linkage on all the major cities in the world, and group them into categories. Brisbane is classified as a "Beta-minus" level (Which is level 7) of Global city, ranking between Rio de Janeiro and Geneva. Sydney is at level 2, and Melbourne is level 4. ["The World According to GaWC 2010". Globalization and World Cities (GaWC) Study Group and Network. Loughborough University. Retrieved 12 April 2015.] Rjensen (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree with NickD. This should be removed. They're non-scientific, subjective lists, and ultimately meaningless. They don't add any useful info to the article. As you say, there are many more, but that only goes to show that we don't need any particular one. I also disagree with the poster's edit summary of "To erase a RS violates wiki rules on NPOV". This is not the case. Just having a source does not make the info pertinent. Selectively adding a single list does violate POV. --Dmol (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it belongs on the lead. Its interesting but I have no preference for inclusion or not. - Shiftchange (talk) 04:30, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
I provided Evidence that thousands of scholars have cited GaWD -- that refutes Demol's assumption that it's somehow " non-scientific, subjective" --- His evaluation is not based on looking at any of the sources, but is pulled out of thin air. His comment is what " non-scientific, subjective " junk commentary looks like. Rjensen (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Not really - the searches seem to be picking up a lot of uses of the generic term "global city" based on the results, and Google hits alone aren't useful for much anyway (with WP:GHITS being somewhat relevant here). There are loads of these kinds of rankings, and there's no reason to cherry pick one. Nick-D (talk) 10:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Photomontage update

The current photomontage is both outdated (CBD picture - as many new skyscrapers have gone up since this image), as well as very ugly. My Photomontage list (From top to bottom from left to right) 1. Brisbane CBD 2. Queenslander (Architecture) 3. Southbank 4. Story Bridge 5. St John's Cathedral 6. Treasury Building 7. Brisbane City Hall All images for the Photomontage should also images during daylight, photomontages with night and day images look very messy. Mount Coo-tha Botanic Gardens and the Gorges Walk in North Stradbroke Island, shouldn't be included in the Photomontage. Images of those can be present later in the article.--Fiftyfires (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Still no answer I've been waiting for over a month!--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with the use of {{Photomontage}} before you attempt to change the lead's pictures. I would also recommend to present your proposal, here or in your sandbox, before implementing it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I presented my sandbox plan, NO ONE ANSWERED ME!--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I also have no idea why its not working, I'm not even happy with the images, no one takes any good photos of Brisbane, and all the nice ones are dated, the skyline has changed tremendously since the 2007s.--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
(ec) (Please consider WP:SHOUT & WP:Please don't shout.) No, you didn't. Your list above is malformed and consists of some descriptions, not actual images. The images you inserted 1) don't show because of syntax errors; 2) are ill suited because, even with proper syntax, leave white space around some images; 3) the parameter |foot_montage= is malformed. I suggest you revert yourself until a consensus for a new montage is found here.
"I also have no idea why its not working, I'm not even happy with the images" – but you insist on having this article with your not-working code. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry I didn't know, but please tell me! It does look so much better doesn't it!!! Can you fix it up so that there aren't huge white spaces?--Fiftyfires (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Well... the top skyline photo is not taken in 2007, but 2014. It depicts that angle as it appears today but will need replacing in the next couple of years once 1 William Street is finished, as that will result in a visible change. As for the picture of the ever burning flame, let's take that out as it's entirely unremarkable and is dwarfed by the war memorials in other Australian cities. Not really significant to Brisbane at large. Also, we had a long, long discussion about this before as the main problem was the montage was too focussed on the CBD area. All photos were of the inner 2km squared of Brisbane, when the article is on the entire metro area ie from Caboolture to Stradbroke to Ipswich to Beenleigh. As such, those images of Mt Coot tha and Stradbroke Island were included as they make it more representative of the actual content of the article ie the whole 15000sq km that make up greater Brisbane rather than just the 2km sqared at the centre. I like the idea of including an image of the Queenslander, which is an iconic style to the city. The South Bank image is very uninspiring though (just formless lowrise with a ferris wheel) and I feel that I photo of the artificial beach or the paths along the river would reflect the character much better than a macro shot from the air which could be any lowrise suburb. Also, it doesn't warrant being twice the size of the other images, which only the lead image of the Brisbane skyline really should be.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

The Queenslander house was my idea, that style of architecture is extremely common around the city and comes in all forms of eras, ie, Victorian, Federation, Interwar, Contemporary, and Modern Queenslanders. Yet the style is completely unique and really found no where else in the world. I agree about the South Bank image, I tried to include a different pic into the montage but I could never really get it to fit in. Do you think it would be best to shrink it down to one of the smaller images, giving us a fourth row? What could the last image be of?--Fiftyfires (talk) 14:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah Queenslander was a very good idea, being iconic to the city. Only thing that would look more "Brisbane" would be if it had a jacaranda tree in the foreground, but as you said it's always impossible to find exactly the picture you want from the ones available on wiki. Hmm, well I was thinking in about 3 years time, when the 1 William Street, 300 George Street and 222 Margaret Street towers are built, the "other side" of the skyline, ie the "North Bank", Riverside Expressway side of the skyline taken from South Bank will be almost as impressive as the iconic "Golden triangle" side facing Kangaroo Point, so that would be a good substitute for a full length image at the bottom once those towers have gone up. I have tried the idea of adding an extra pic so its another double row, what do you think? The picture is super old so it's not ideal either but I reckon that the South Bank beach is pretty unique to Brisbane, gives a very good feel of the city and South Bank itself and is something that people seem to remember about Brisbane if they've visited the city - "that fake beach in the city".. I'm trying a few images for the last one to see what fits dimension wise. Some ideas could be one of those "Riverwalks" which are pretty unique or otherwise New Farm Park with the jacarandas could be a good idea??? I've just left the last one as South Bank from across the river as there are no riverwalk photos that fit into the montage in terms of their dimensions. Have been trying to fit them together with minimal white space. There is a tiny bit of white space under the Queenslander image as its slightly less "tall" than the other images but barely noticeable so I think its fine. --Saruman-the-white (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Nah it's fine, barely noticeable. I'm really not sure about two images of SouthBank though. I had originally thought maybe an image of Parliament House, which would show Brisbane as the capital of Queensland. But all the images of the Parliament House are really "grotty", not very nice at all and once again all very old!! Perhaps an image of Queen Street Mall? This is a fairly famous attraction in Brisbane, and is Australia's most famous shopping mall.--Fiftyfires (talk) 01:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Btw, you're not on Skyscrapercity are you?--Fiftyfires (talk) 01:57, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, I had the same thought about Parliament House and had the same reaction to the images on wiki. I agree that South Bank maybe shouldn't have two, but I left one of Cultural Centre from the river until someone can find something on wiki that looks better. Bound to be something we can use, you may be right even shrine of remembrance may be better although it's pretty unremarkable. As for Skyscrapercity, I have been lurking that forum about once a week since the year 2003! So bloody long that I remember when I was in high school watching the thread for Riparian when that was going up.... --Saruman-the-white (talk) 08:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh wow that's pretty long! I'll see If I can find a replacement, but in any case the montage we have now is far, far better than the previous one *shudders*--Fiftyfires (talk) 23:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Saruman can you please undo some of the edits the other user made, its not letting me for some reason. He has put back that hideous image of Brisbane CBD, along with an image of the Story Bridge which can be barely made out.--Fiftyfires (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
"The current photomontage is both outdated (CBD picture - as many new skyscrapers have gone up since this image), as well as very ugly." Firstly, you have to be joking, right? How does that image constitute as ugly? I've seen far worse, and very few better images of the Brisbane skyline on Wikipedia. It was taken in 2013, only two years have passed, there hasn't been a stupendous difference. Secondly, there isn't some written rule on Wikipedia that states a montage or even an image MUST be immediately updated as soon as there's a change. As long as the image is still an accurate representation of what it is depicting (i.e. Brisbane's skyline), it will be suffice. Thirdly, I don't mean to offend anyone (certainly not to the degree Fiftyfires (talk has offended the photographer of the CBD image!), but how is a suburban home notable enough to belong in an image montage? Look at infobox montages of other noted cities like New York City, Vancouver, Pittsburgh and Madrid. None of them contain an image of a residential home. Thirdly, your complaint about Story Bridge illuminated in blue as "barely made out" is preposterous. It's clearly a bridge, because it traverses over a dark body of water (adjust your brightness, monitor, or whatever), it's a really interesting atypical perspective/angle (something you rarely see on here, it's always the standard shot)... plus it actually looks nice. It gives the city some colour. Which brings us to the last, but certainly not least, feedback I'd like to put across: a man-made beach isn't something to be boastful about, nor is it something that belongs in the lead montage. We already have North Stradbroke, which is natural. Two bodies of water in the same lead is overkill. This infobox was fine for quite sometime. I have nothing against change, I also don't really mind if the CBD picture is replaced, even though it's lovely and taken at the best time of day (twilight). But I think my points about everything else are more than valid. Ashton 29 (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Apologies Ashton if you took offense. You make some excellent points and I must say I kinda agree with you on the man-made beach perhaps an image of the Cultural Centre would be more appropriate. The reason I decided to include an image of a residential home, is because of the architecture type. You must be quite informed already that "Queenslander" architecture is something that essentially evolved in Brisbane and is completely unique to this city. Whereas other Australian cities constructed homes made from stone and brick, Brisbane and its surrounding towns were unique in that they built almost solely out of timber, which came to be the Queenslander style.

I think it is appropriate seeming as how Gabled houses are typical of San Francisco, and latticed ironwork in typical of New Orleans, the same can be said for Brisbane. As for the image of the CBD, I still prefer the "cleaner" version I had originally posted.--Fiftyfires (talk) 02:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I can understand your view on the CBD image, now. I didn't take it personally, but thought it was a bit of a stretch to call it "ugly". A better representation, like you said, ideally would be much cleaner and less-busy as the current one, although I do think it's a lovely shot. As per the Queenslander house, perhaps you could start an Architecture section in the article and use the image there. Most of the major cities with a mix of old and new buildings have a section on it on Wikipedia, (for Australian examples, see Sydney and Melbourne). San Francisco's Gabled house are quite close in proximity to Downtown San Francisco, in fact they are scattered all through it and exist en masse (e.g. they are semi-detached) rather than free-standing Queenslanders. Same with the townhouses in New York City, they don't just exist in the suburbs, they are largely present in the downtown regions too and comprise of rows. Queenslanders aren't that common in Brisbane's inner-city, they are a suburban creation. The Queenslander house actually looks like it's in the middle of the nowhere, i.e. the far out suburbs. I'm not sure myself, so perhaps someone could clarify the location. Either way, I think an image like that belongs in the article body, not the infobox montage. Ashton 29 (talk) 07:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Just my 10c, but North Stradbroke Island isn't actually in Brisbane (it's in Redland City) so I'd rather we stick with images are actually in Brisbane. Similarly, a Japanese garden isn't characteristic of Brisbane. And the Roma Street Parkland photo features autumn leaves; again Brisbane is not noted for its beautiful autumn colours. The Wheel of Brisbane looks a lot like similar things in other cities. I don't have a problem with a Queenslander house since they are characteristic of the suburbs but on the other hand you will see them in many other parts of Queensland so maybe not truly "icons of Brisbane". I think the montage should have the classic Brisbane postcard subjects - e.g. City Hall, Southbank beach, Story Bridge, CityCat, the view of the CBD from the Kangaroo Point cliffs, the things that would be immediately recognised by anyone who had made a brief visit to Brisbane as being "Brisbane". If we have to argue over "does it represent Brisbane?", then it probably doesn't. I don't think we have to have a huge number of photos in the montage, just stick to the absolute icons. I am inclined to agree that daytime photos are better because it's more about the recognisability of the subject than the beauty of the photo. Kerry (talk) 10:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Take a look at the sidebar. The article is about metro brisbane as defined by ABS. Ie it includes brisbane city, logan city, ipswich city, redland city, moreton bay region, etc. As such, not all images can be from the one LGA. It is not an article about the Brisbane City council, which already exists at "City of Brisbane". As ive said before, stradbroke and moreton are 2 of the biggest tourist attractions within official metro brisbane and having 2 of the 3 largest sand islands in the world is pretty unique! --Saruman-the-white (talk) 10:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Back to topic, the current image of the skyline at dusk is beautiful! Sure, itd be better if it had Soleil in it which is a major building, but maybe we can wait til William Street tower goes up before taking a new one. its beautiful and from the perfect vantage point!--Saruman-the-white (talk) 10:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Also with regard to Ashton's claim that Queenslanders are not common in the inner city.... Have you ever been to the inner suburbs of brisbane? Queenslanders are almost totally CONFINED to the inner suburbs. You won't find any in the outer suburbs, as they were all built later on in the 20th century. Brisbane's core inner suburbs like Paddington, Spring Hill, Red Hill, Ashgrove, Bardon, Hamilton, Ascot, etc, etc, etc are the most renowned suburbs for old Queenslander homes. I think we were agreed that the shrine of remembrance is not one of our more iconic or grand old buildings, being dwarfed by those in the other capitals, so how about the treasury casino, which is known to be the grandest of the remaining old buildings in our CBD? This image also reduces the white space. Anyway, looking at the montages for Melbourne (particularly plain and doesn't come close to doing that city justice), Adelaide, Canberra, et al, its fair to say Brisbane's montage is already many times more aesthetic and representative than any of theirs. --Saruman-the-white (talk) 04:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

There was a montage in place for a long time and nobody took any offence. Then Fiftyfires came along and changed it (ineptly) without consulting anyone. Then a slow-burning edit war broke out, in part to restore the previous montage. Now Fiftyfires complains that those edits don't have consensus. What's wrong with this picture? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:01, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Quit Edit Warring the Montage

If this goes on we may just have to get rid of the montage, have a skyline photo only on the sidebar, and the remainder dispersed through the article.

Ashton, you don't "own" the montage. You can't just say "I started this montage and I'm not going to allow any frivolous discussion so its not worth taking it to the talk page" and then making edits. The article doesn't belong to anyone. The merivale bridge is probably Brisbane's most uninspiring and little-known bridge. We've already got a bridge on the montage FFS, which is the storey bridge, the most famous in Brisbane. Why would the merivale be used on the montage? Similarly - the old state library? Certainly not among the more iconic sandstone buildings in Brisbane. Why would anyone use it? Anyway about three people have reverted those changes thus far, not including myself, so obviously you're outnumbered on that one.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 01:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

No, you don't "own" the montage either. I am tired of you reflexively reverting any changes on this article. You are the one resisting other people's edits and I've had a look at your history, you seem to be a repeat offender. All of your points raised here are a matter of subjectivity and frankly, quite bloody boring. Merivale Bridge isn't "little known", nor is it uninspiring, it's actually won a lot of major awards for its aesthetics and functionality. Two bridges in a montage doesn't matter, it merely shows that Brisbane is surrounded by bodies of water, with bridge crossings that permit transportation. If you think some hideously tacky man-made beach represents a city then okay, I can't help you there. You can make this city look like a theme park if that's your desire. The Stradbroke Island lake (which isn't even in Brisbane FYI) I've proposed is natural, it's so quintessentially Queensland, and it represents Brisbane's close association with its country. "Why would anyone use it?"... well okay, that's what YOU think. I'm outnumbered, that isn't surprising, because poor taste is pretty common, particularly around here, unfortunately for you! Ashton 29 (talk) 04:16, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately, you are not the arbiter of taste and as I said, you are outnumbered here. I would be quite happy to get rid of the montage full stop and just have a single skyline photo like Sydney or Perth and leave the others for the body. Unfortunately you seem to think you can make any change you want without going to the talk page and where you have several users who have been reverting the changes, clearly outnumbering you. We are not so undemocratic here. You can't just dismiss people who disagree with you as 'boring'. If this is what happens with a montage, maybe it should go.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 04:24, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
"If this is what happens with a montage then maybe it should go"... you mean, if someone wants to change your montage, aka you can't have it your way, then maybe it should go. Why are you so against my two recent changes (the lae, Merivale Bridge)? What about those two images rile you up so much that you have to see them gone/the edit undone? Why can't you come to an agreement? Ashton 29 (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Not just me, Ashton. I wasn't the one reverting the first few times you tried it. Plus, it's not 'my way'. Only one of the images on the current montage was chosen by me. I'd be happy to get rid of the Southbank Beach picture but replaced with something not so boring and dull as an unremarkable, little-known bridge or example of 19th century CBD architecture which isn't even close to a top tier example. We already have a picture of three random trees, of all things, in Roma St Parklands, that you insisted on, but it seems you always want to dictate the whole montage. And no, what I mean is if the montage becomes a focus of ridiculous edit warring, then maybe it's not worth it.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 09:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Well, why don't we compromise and include the bridge over the Southbank beach? I think the image is fantastically composed and very striking given it was taken at night with such dramatic lighting... It may be not be as well known or as iconic as Story Bridge but that certainly doesn't mean it's not noteworthy! Also, if you want to chose something else over the Roma St parklands then go ahead. But I think I'd chose the bridge over the image of that man made beach anyday. I hope we can reach an agreement. 1.125.48.5 (talk) 01:26, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
How about swap the beach for the bridge and the trees for the treasury building brah--Saruman-the-white (talk) 22:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Which beach image? The artificial one or the one at Stradbroke? Since Stradbroke is natural (and extremely beautiful at that), I propose we leave it. If you want to swap the trees for the Treasury that's fine, I will let you do that. Ashton 29 (talk) 06:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
No, keep the original Stradbroke image. I mean the fake beach that you hate.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Brisbane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Brisbane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 14 external links on Brisbane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Brisbane. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:43, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brisbane. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brisbane. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brisbane. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:32, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


Historical Population

An historical population table needs to be added to the article. Can someone put this on the to do list? Thanks PANewman (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.78.66.126 (talk) 17:32, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Nevermind, I put it on the list myself. Feel free to delete the item if I'm mistaken. Thanks. PANewman (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.78.66.126 (talk) 17:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Traditional name

I've added the traditional name for Brisbane in the Yagerra language, however there is no pronunciation guide. This would probably need an expert! I've just used the two pronunciations given on the State Library website. It may make sense to include this in the info box too. Maxxisti (talk) 04:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Brisbane as part of the Asia-Pacific

@Caltraser55: I have again reverted your edits in relation to Brisbane's role in the Asia Pacific. As I have previously discussed, this citation does describe the current state of affairs but what the Qld Govt would like them to be. Now does your asserting something without citation make it rue. Futhermore, the bulk of the article (of which the lede paragraphs are supposed to be summarising) says relatively little about Brisbane's role in the Asia Pacific. Can I suggest that instead of dumping largely uncited claims in the lede paragraphs, you focus on adding suitably-cited content on Brisbane's role in the Asia Pacific in other sections of the article. Those claims should be factual ones. For example, you say Brisbane Airport is the largest in Australia. Again this is a little bit misleading. The citation you provide says Brisbane Airport is the largest in land area, you should be clear about the metric that you are making a claim about, and I don't think land area size greatly contributes to your hypothesis that Brisbane Airport contributes to Brisbane being an Asia-Pacific hub. Gather some statistics about flights to/from Asia/Pacific (number of fligts, number of destinationsto the various Australian airports, number of passengers, etc) how does Brisbane stand in relation to other Australian airports in that regard? Then you might have a claim to make about the Airport. Similarly you assert that QIMR and TRI are of global importance. On what basis do you say that? Work on improving the factual content of the article, wrt Asia/Pacific and then it may be more obvious what claims might be made in the lede paras. Thanks Kerry (talk) 07:44, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Brisbane Montage for 2018

I've been gathering photos for a 2018 update of the montage for a while now. The old montage was great, but it needs an update. I've chucked up a version which I think we can all enjoy. Let me know if you guys think we can add any more landmarks. MrGeneric299 (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Picture Comments
File:Brisbane Montage 2018c.jpg I personally think these are all great Brisbane landmarks

Actually I'm pretty sure I coined the term Brisvegas in 1997

It's pretty simple actually. I was at a party/dinner/gathering of friends and friends of friends. We were talking about southeast Queensland now having two casinos, one in the Gold Coast - Jupiter's Casino and the new on in Brisbane - The Treasury. I was lamenting the fact that we should now probably rename the city Brisvegas. Everyone laughed but there were a couple there who had the opportunity to spread the term to a wider audience because they were breakfast radio hosts on a very popular radio station. After their success in Brisbane, they went to Perth to host there. I assume the term was spread across Australia within the space of a few years. Their initials are T and Z, but yeah I coined the term Brisvegas, cool huh? Cjreal (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

It's possible you came up with it independently, having never heard it before. Nobody can say that didn't happen. But you were not actually the first to use it, because:

"Cultural capital of Australia"

The lead currently states: "Brisbane has been called the 'cultural capital of Australia'", with two refs to back it up. The first ref is about an Italian ballet company's decision to perform in Brisbane rather than "the nation's culture capitals, Sydney and Melbourne". Here's the problem: throughout this Brisbane Times article, Sydney and Melbourne are the only cities actually referred to as cultural capitals. Brisbane is never explicitly called "the cultural capital of Australia", and the opinion of a red link ballet director, Frederic Olivieri, does not make it so. The second ref is a webarchive of a study reported on in red link Escape magazine. The study, commissioned by red link travel website weekenGO, says that Brisbane (pop. 2.4 million) has more cultural events than Melbourne and Sydney, as well as Paris (pop. 10 million). The article's author uses this as the basis for calling Brisbane a more "cultured" city. Yeah. Great study. Very reliable. The article, like the first ref, also never explicitly calls Brisbane "the cultural capital of Australia". I removed the refs and "cultural capital" part, but was reverted by Caltraser55, who only edits Brisbane articles and the talk pages of editors with whom they have disputes.

Often if Brisbane is referred to as a "cultural capital" in the media, it has a question mark attached, or comes with a claim that Melbourne should "watch out" because Brisbane is catching up. I have nothing against Brisbane, but Melbourne's status as the "cultural capital" is simply too engrained at this point, and pretty much self-evident. I am going to remove it again and open this up to a discussion per WP:BRD. - HappyWaldo (talk) 01:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you here. Melbourne is definitely considered the cultural capital in Australia. I'm also having trouble with Caltraser55. MrGeneric299 (talk) 01:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi HappyWaldo, let me just first say that "Cultural capital" is an abstract term largely and is defined usually by opinions but can sometimes be backed up through facts; which is what the second article does, per capita Brisbanites are more involved in cultural activities than either Sydney or Melbourne. However, the title of "Cultural Capital" is not the monopoly of Melbourne, Melbourne claims to be lots of things including the Sports capital amongst others. Take note it is also not a claim made by Brisbane but has been "called", there's a difference there. And MrGeneric you have already been referred to the Edit war noticeboard, so I suggest you keep your discussion there.--Caltraser55 (talk) 02:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Again, the term "Cultural capital" does not appear in the obscure travel website's "study". Melbourne's claim to being the sporting capital might have something to do with its role in the development of Test cricket and the Ashes, hosting the first Summer Olympics in the Southern Hemisphere, creating the only uniquely Australian sport of any real significance, having the largest stadium and by far the highest spectator numbers, being the home of the National Sports Museum, hosting the Australian Open, Formula 1 and "the race that stops a nation" etc. - HappyWaldo (talk) 04:12, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

An ironic referral at best. MrGeneric299 (talk) 02:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

"Brisbane's culture" means opera and ballet to one person, tattoo parlours and indie gig venues to another, and hot BBQs and cold beers to a third person. Wikipedia isn't about WP:PUFFERY. Tell the reader factually (in the appropriate section) what "cultural" things exist in Brisbane and some pertinent sizes, attendance figures or other factual claims, appropriately cited. We are not here to tell the reader what to think. We inform the reader with facts and let them draw their own conclusions (WP:NPOV). To one reader, based on whatever they are familiar with or interested in, Brisbane will be a cultural delight, to another it will be a wasteland. Their tastes, their past experience, etc will be the basis of their opinion.Kerry (talk) 04:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
I agree Kerry, because of this I have gone and removed the reference of "cultural capital" on the Melbourne talk page, I am glad we came to an agreement.--Caltraser55 (talk) 14:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
You seem to have removed it from the Melbourne *article*, justifying the decision by the conversation on this Talk page. That was inappropriate and appears to be an example of disrupting just to make a point. You were free to be bold at Melbourne (and I don't personally disagree with the edit, it was puffery) but do not use my comments or anyone else's on this Talk page out of context as you did. Kerry (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Vote for Brisbane Montage

File:Brisbane Montage 2018c.jpg

Top or bottom?--Caltraser55 (talk) 14:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

With Mrgenerics montage being deleted for copyright infringements shouldn't my montage be reinstated?--Caltraser55 (talk) 05:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm not sure why the old 2013 montage has been brought back. I'm in favour of changing it to yours. Although, I'd maybe replace the gasworks with something more interesting. - Inkfoot (talk) 02:40, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
I've restored the montage, but I think I can agree with the gasworks, I'll look into remaking it perhaps with the Queenslander house image?--Caltraser55 (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Inkfoot - no, collage is from 2016, but skyline (first picture) is from 2013. Similarly, the version by Caltraser55 - first picture is from 2014. So.
Picture of 1 William Street, Brisbane - why one skyscraper? many montages in Wikipedia has full skyline, previous montage have it on top, new montage also should have skyline like File:Brisbane skyline at dusk.jpg. First image from your montage is poor. Currently, I oppose to change collage in article to File:Brisbane montage 2018b.jpg by Caltraser55. Better is File:Brisbane Montage.jpg, however, the resolution is too small. PS. Colages not must have many pictures in many rows, 3 rows are enough like File:Barcelona collage.JPG or in article of Madrid, for example: skyline + 2 picures below + 2 pictures below. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 22:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I use of the function of Photomontage, do not need to create new graphics as new file, objects in photomontage are compatible with previous collages: skyline, South Brisbane Southbank, Brisbane City Botanic Gardens, Brisbane City Hall, Story Bridge. This photomontage is not too large... and if in the way of discussion there will be a consensus to change any graphic, we can change the graphic that the discussion is about (without having to change others). The only minus of this solution: in a row should be graphics of similar proportions. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 23:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
MrGeneric299 you are using a sock puppet account which is not allowed under Wikipedia's terms and conditions, if you want your montage instated than you will need consensus on the talk page, which so far no one has appealed for yours, so please refrain from edit warring the article.--Caltraser55 (talk) 04:30, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
if you believe it is a sockpuppet account, make the allegation at the sockpuppet investigation noticeboard. To make that allegation here is just a personal attack. Kerry (talk) 07:35, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Caltraser55::
  1. There is no consensus for your photomontage!
  2. If you suspect someone for using a sock-puppet then you must prove it and only in dedicated to this site. Your accusations are nonsense. Of course, since 2010 - user (Subtropical-man) has made almost 30,000 editions in Wikimedia projects (8 years of giving a lot of time and work) and... create new account for change photomontage in article of Brisbane :D :D :D Sorry, but your accusations based on nonsense will not be tolerated here. This is personal attack.
  3. You are still create the edit-war to pushing your photomontage (as only and only your authorship). Enough of this!!!!!!!!!! If you do not agree to the current change, it's ok - then old version will be restored, before editing by You and MrGeneric299. Now, there is seven version of photomontage, six in Commons:Category:Montages of Brisbane and one with template of Photomontage. The new version of the photocollage will be only and exclusively when there will be a clear!!!!!! consensus, per Wikipedia:Consensus (one person's consent is not clear consensus, you should wait for the opinions of other people). Given, that you are trying to push your version and your accoundt created mainly for this, only third person (user) will decide whether the consensus has been reached and (if yes) will change the graphics to consensus. Not you, not MrGeneric299. You received warnings earlier. If you make changes in graphics of photomontage, if you to continue edit-warring, your account will be blocked (without further warnings). Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 17:44, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Excuse me but I left my consensus talks on here for 2 weeks, Inkfoot agreed the new montage was the best display at the current time, and there were no objections to it, if you would like to propose to reinstate the old montage please do so with consensus of approval on the talk page.--Caltraser55 (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Excuse me but opinion by one user - Inkfoot is not consensus. You got a last warning here, I quote: "If you make changes in graphics of photomontage, if you to continue edit-warring, your account will be blocked (without further warnings)" and your user talk page, and many warning before. You again restored own version again without ending discussion or/and clear consensus. OK. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 00:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
An edit war is classed as more than 3 reverts, I only reverted twice, my first edit was an edit which restored my montage after no one opposed my montage, which you failed to give a reason for reverting my edit--Caltraser55 (talk) 05:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
No, edit-warring is more than one revert. Even Kerry Raymond informed you about BRD cycle (new edit -> revert -> discuss cycle and consensus): [6], but you prefer remove majority of own user talk page [7]. You pushing own version very many times: [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17]. If someone reverted your photomontage -->> please start a discussion and wait for consensus. Each user is required to know the Wikipedia rules. You were informed about Wikipedia:CYCLE (BRD) and Wikipedia:Consensus, but you continued to restore your own photomontage. Enough problems with you. PS. I'm create new change - add photomontage with template, but you reverted it with no reason (but only with personal attack) [18] - I not restore my photomontage again!!!! It should be, according to Wikipedia:CYCLE and Wikipedia:Consensus. Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 16:58, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Consensus to restore opening

Please add your support.--Caltraser55 (talk) 14:02, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Oppose - the original opening existed by consensus over many years and the version which you unilaterally re-wrote some months ago has very strange emphases and is a worse opening in every way--Saruman-the-white (talk) 23:18, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
The so called "original opening" was also written by me, also I removed reference to MacArthur since it implies only Americans were fighting in the Pacific, "Allied headquarters" is far more inclusive of other nations.--Caltraser55 (talk) 01:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
saying something along the lines of “Allied headquarters under the command of General Douglas McArthur” would seem to solve the problem. Kerry (talk) 12:49, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Sea

Brisbane is located on the coast of the sea of Coral Sea or Tasman Sea? Subtropical-man (talk / en-2) 02:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

This question has come up before and IIRC the answer for the whole of the Qld east coast is the Coral Sea. Not Tasman. The citation is probably on some random Talk page or article but I don’t remember where. Kerry (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Ah ha, found it, see citation 3 in Coral Sea (page 39 of the pdf), says the Coral Sea extends South to the 30th parallel, so all of Qld and some of Northern NSW fall into that definition. I don’t imagine that there is anything that really distinguishes the Coral Sea from the Tasman Sea, so this is probably more of “needing to draw a line somewhere” than having any genuine significance, Kerry (talk) 15:43, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brisbane/Archive_4&oldid=1027157032"