Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Brisbane suburbs

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 00:35Z

List of Brisbane suburbs

This article contains duplicate information to Category:Suburbs of Brisbane. Debate on Talk:List of Brisbane suburbs completed in November 2006 under heading 'Direction of Article'. The reason for deletion is that the list already exists in the category (exactly identicle). Rimmeraj 03:40, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see no reason to delete this encyclopedic list. It's like List of Brooklyn, New York neighborhoods. Maybe I should read the nom's comments properly next time. Yes, Redirect and Merge to avoid duplicate. --Oakshade 06:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- cj | talk 12:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 15:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge with the category. Nardman1 17:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - duplication is not a reason to delete. Besides, this could easily be made into a proper list with dates of gazetting of the suburb, council area, etc. JROBBO 22:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion on talk page which could not find any such listing that would be of any importance. Rimmeraj 22:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Council area may not be relevant (although do Logan City Council suburbs count as Brisbane?), but dates of gazettal as suburb, postcode, etc. could be relevant information as a list. This could be easily made into a Featured list with some of the extra information. JROBBO 07:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per JROBBO (personally I'd delete the category, but I feel about categories the way some folk feel about lists.) Jcuk 01:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per JROBBO. Note this deletion does not really come under any particular deletion policy, except maybe duplication. Also I'd note that such a list exists for every Australian city (see Category:Lists of places in Australia for examples). Brisbane has the unique feature that over half of its suburbs fall under one local government authority, which skews the debate in that city - there are suburbs beyond it (Pine Rivers, Redland, Logan etc) which in any other city, and certainly according to the ABS, would be included in such a list, but are not included by Brisbane editors. By deviating from the Australian consensus on lists of suburbs for cities, in such a way that one city does it one way and the rest all do it another way (while recognising that this is a consensus amongst Brisbane editors), it seems to go the opposite route from forming standards for Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian places to begin with. Orderinchaos78 09:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Suburbs within the Brisbane City Council area is generally included in the Brisbane Wikiproject. However, the surrounding shires suburbs, although part of greater Brisbane, is not included. (as technically Brisbane suburbs is within the council boundaries, as said earlier, Brisbane City Council is one of the largest councils by area). --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 11:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's very inconsistent with what's in the Brisbane page which mentions that the Brisbane metropolitan area now encompasses parts of Logan City, Beaudesert Shire, the Gold Coast City, some of the councils to the north, etc. The List of Brisbane suburbs should have all the suburbs within the Brisbane metropolitan area, not just ones in the Brisbane City Council; although it would be fine for the category to continue to reflect the council's suburbs, so long as that difference is made clear at the top of the page. JROBBO 22:27, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No idea why it says that, but the wording should be changed to reflect the greater Brisbane area, not the Brisbane metropolitan area (which is the Suburbs within the BCC). As the metropolitan Brisbane area does not include Logan City suburbs, Redlands Shire (eg Capalaba, Cleveland), Beaudessert, Caboolture (more closer to Sunshine Coast than Brisbane, but is inbetween those areas). --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 01:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking at all the other 4 major cities and several minor ones, and seeing a very different definition of metropolitan. If it's based on city council boundaries, Perth, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide would be tiny areas with populations in the 4 and 5 digits. Yet they count areas more than 60km from their CBD (32 in Adelaide's case, as a smaller centre). Some parts of Pine Rivers and Redlands in particular aren't even 15km from Brisbane, a city of comparable size to Perth. Orderinchaos78 11:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been stated before, the suburbs you refer to that belong to Logan City and other areas are not considered to be part of brisbane by anyone who actually lives here. Unlike the 4 cities you mention where the other areas are considered to be part of the main city. Ask a resident of pine rivers shire 'where do I live', and they will not reply 'brisbane'. Rimmeraj 12:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep it short (as we are well and truly off-topic), but just to say I do know people in both Redlands and Logan who describe themselves as Brisbane residents, the ABS does not differentiate between Brisbane and other cities, and that forms the basis of my belief that the situation isn't so different that it requires a radical departure from Australian norms. This discussion, however, should as cj said continue elsewhere. Orderinchaos78 05:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please continue this discussion elsewhere, preferably Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places.--cj | talk 17:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think having duplication across lists/categories is a bad thing here. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep unless consensus is established to delete equivalent lists.--cj | talk 17:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think if this list can be "value added" to distinguish it from a category, it's worth keeping. Order the suburbs by LGA instead of alphabetically, as suggested above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Canley (talk • contribs) 00:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Oops, forgot to sign! --Canley 00:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except that Brisbane is a special case, they control the largest area by LGA, and thus the Brisbane suburbs are by the ones within the BCC area. As suburbs in Logan City, Redlands, Caboolture (Caboolture is considered Sunshine Coast sometimes) are not considered as part of metropolitan Brisbane, but rather greater Brisbane. As rimmeraj said, ask anyone from the outer LGAs where they live and they will NOT reply Brisbane, but the appropriate area (eg Logan, Pine Rivers, etc). --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 01:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

note that to "ask anyone" would be WP:OR, Gnan garra

Keep DanielT5 13:55, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add value as per Canley. Aye-Aye 23:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but the issue about what is Brisbane needs to be clarified Gnan garra 02:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.