![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Its a big deal that the soccer team is going to the world cup and its an historic event that happened in sydney, why was it removed?
the sydeny team that is going for its most famouse cup is the LBW
In the transport or history section it might be worth noting that Sydney was once well-served by a tram system, before that system was gradually but determinedly dismantled, to be replaced by noisy, slow, polluting, infrequent, overcrowded buses. My reasoning behind this proposed entry is not that I am a tram nutter but that I have noticed that the presence or absence of trams in a city is a major indicator of the quality of life afforded its citizens. A recommended source for Sydney history pictures (of trams, the harbourside and other landmarks) is the work of photographer Max Dupain.
--MJL
If the Melbourne entry is going to mention that city's distance from Sydney . . . Oh, and you might mention the city's namesake.
As an inhabitant of Sydney, I honestly can't see why its subway is considered interesting - some details please, or else excise the reference -- MB
Manning: You don't find Sydney's subway system interesting? You've obviously never gone on a tour of the disused tunnels off St. James station :) -- Simon J Kissane
Again, some discussion of Sin City's criminal past is worthwhile, but the article as it stands gives the misleading impression that the crime rate is extremely high in world terms, which is just not true. Not even Alan Jones can make it so.--- Robert Merkel 07:31 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)
I agree - the crime section seems very out of place - wm
I just had a look at the Toronto city page and it seems to have more "stuff" and I think Toronto is good comparison city for Sydney. I might attempt to write some more stuff on Culture (isn't that with a K??) Film Festivals, Theatre (STC, Belvoir) Mardi Gras, Sydney Festival, SSO/ACO/Musica Viva etc etc any other thoughts?? Scotth1 08:33, 2004 Mar 17 (UTC)
links should not generally appear in headings of narrative articles (sometimes it's OK in "list of"-style articles) see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Headings, also WikiProject Countries and other templates (see my comment above), as well other articles use the Main article: convention. clarkk 12:39, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
How can Sydeny be the largest cityin the southern hemisphere? Isn't Rio and Sao Paulo located in the southern hemisphere also?
I added a list of local government areas...IMHO these are more important then most of the listed suburbs...only notable suburbs that aren't also LGAs should be listed, e.g. Bondi Junction, Chatswood, Cronulla. But the list is pretty long. Too long? I don't know how to format it into two columns. Maybe it's better to have a separate article, 'list of Sydney local government areas'.-- Randwicked 10:06, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I'm trying to develop the Australian section of the article on Chinatown, so no country will feel they're excluded from the list. Does Sydney also follow the old touristy urban Sydney Chinatown vs. the new surburban Chinatown pattern? If you have any local perspective, please add them to the article.
By the way, correct anything you feel is erroneous.
The ARL is a unique sport mainly played in Sydney. Someone wanna write something about that if they're interested?
I made a start in the Sports section. Needs a lot of work though.
I find no reference for this claim outside wikipedia mirrors. Its metro area is nowhere as big as LA's or New York's, and 'suburban' is a dodgy term. I changed it to 'one of the world's largest urban areas for its population', which is definitely true as the density is low. Randwicked 04:19, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It is true that Sydney is not the largest city in the world by area. This is not relevant. The claim being disputed is whether Greater Sydney has the largest suburban area in the world. I did not originate this claim and was curious about its veracity when I first came across it in this article. As it is, I found two references for it fairly quickly: [1] and [2]. Although one of them comes from a university website, I can excuse someone for not thinking that these are authoritative. But the assumption has hardly been pulled out of the air either. I have no inclination to want to argue the point, however. I am content that the claim has been withdrawn due to lack of evidence. -- Susurrus 08:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
What, you trust that piece of junk called Microsoft Encarta? The info is SO out of date it should have been used for school kids in 1900, not 2005. Take a look at Google Earth, and compare Sydney with New York and LA - it's just a tad smaller, doddipols. And I'm not being biased - I live in Johannesburg...
Two of the three largest cities on earth are in Australia. The first being the city of Kalgoorlie-Boulder which is in excess of 96, 000sq Kms and the second Mt Isa (which is 3rd in the world) at around half the size of KB. Sydney doesn't even come close.
However, I do recall reading on the ABS site a while back that Sydney has one of the largest CBDs in the world. Larger than London in fact. This relates to the specific area where all of the highrise buildings are which excludes what would be considered 'the suburbs' but extends past what is specifically the area governed by the Sydney City Council (which is a very small area).
Is there an article on this somewhere? If not there should be. The interesting thing I find about it is that the rivalry seems more prominent in Sydney than in Melbourne. People in Sydney have a dislike of Melbourne whereas people in Melbourne generally like Sydney but dislike its egocentricity, or at least that is my experience. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that Melbourne was for many years after the gold rush larger and more influential than Sydney. It was chosen as the first capital of Australia. Many federal government institutions were set up there and have gradually left for Canberra or sometimes Sydney. It had all the embassies and all of these factors were reasons for many companies setting up there. With the move of the capital to Canberra, Sydney was then much closer and this has been a factor in Sydney's rise, not to mention the weather and the harbour views. Interestingly, most people in Sydney are unaware that Melbourne was ever the capital of Australia. I suspect they have forgotten why they don't like Melbourne. I am sure there must be heaps of documentation from the time of Federation and both before and after. I am not a historian but surely this is an interesting topic for someone. -- CloudSurfer 23:25, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
As a Sydney resident for nearly 50 years, can I ask that the prominent reference to Sydney–Melbourne rivalry be removed? It's a parochial way to start an important text, and is ... kind of childish. Tony 13:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Cloudsurfer had better come down from the clouds. This silly rivalry is far stronger in Melbourne than it is in Sydney.(IMO).Some Melburnians seem a little envious that Sydney is better known. And I don't think Sydney people dislike Melbourne at all - they just dislike Melbourne's boasting about being the capital of just about everything.
FYI, there's another NASA satellite photo of Sydney here - much higher res (maybe too high?). Can be used under the PD-USGov-NASA image tag. - Nickj 03:34, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I really disagree with the list of regions of sydney, though I like the concept. Rather than Western Sydney, we should be talking about the Outer West and the South West. I also feel that the Sutherland Shire is a distinct (socio)geographical entity to Southern Sydney. Thought I'd sound people out before makign alterations.-- XmarkX 08:37, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
If I had to divide the city up into relatively cohesive and comparable regions I'd do it so:
Now I don't know if some other areas have regional names like St. George and Macarthur. Some sub-regions of these regions have names, like Wentworth is a part of the Eastern Suburbs. But is there a local name for the Inner South West? Non-pejorative I mean? - Randwicked 15:08, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hey, I have no idea how to change the inset that appears on all the Sydney pages listing the regions, suburbs etc. to match what I've done on this page. Would really appreciate knowing how.-- XmarkX 06:34, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I am interested why North Sydney is not mentioned as a major CBD area outside of the true Sydney CBD? In reviewing the North Sydney entry it is stated as the second largest CBD area in NSW. Any thoughts? -- Michael 07:31, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The latest figures on the page are misleading. The Sydney Statistical Division as defined by the ABS is about 12,000 sq km. What isn't obvious from this figure though is that it includes vast swathes of national park. The whole of the Central Coast, Hawkesbury, Blue Mountains and Wollondilly Shire are part of the SSD. It's nonsensical to compare this massive area to the 835 sq km of New York City, a figure which encompasses only the five boroughs, and not its massive metro area which sprawls across three states. The value for Beijing is as large only because that's the figure for the whole (defacto) province. I'm removing this section, but I'll try to get some comparable figures from some learned people. - Randwicked 23:34, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Re the last editing comment on what to call Sydneyites: Let's not get too carried away with the term 'neutral'. In some cases it is important to point out what is correct usage, and so pointing out is still NPOV. Lots of terms are "used" but it is sometimes important to point out what is and is not correct usage. A schoolkid needs to know that it is not correct to write 'New Yorican' or 'Noo Yawker' in a essay, e.g.; both are 'used'. Quill 21:12, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Just a note: I've lived in Sydney for 20+ years. From personal experience, I have never heard the term 'Sydneyite' *ever*. Sydneysider is quite common, you will see it in newspapers and hear it on the street/TV. I can't think of a formal way of saying a 'resident of sydney'. Novacatz 01:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
An anon inserts links to http://www.oceania.com/australia/photos/cities/sydney/ and similar to Australia and NZ related articles. If this is spam, keep removing. Zocky 01:33, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
If we're going to add the coat of arms then we at least should add the current version (see the City of Sydney website). Cursive 13:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
There are a few problems with the current opening:
Sydney is the capital city of the Australian state of New South Wales and Australia's largest and oldest city (founded in 1788). With a metropolitan area population of 4.3 million and a population of approximately 146,297 people in the city proper (known as the "City of Sydney"), the Sydney metropolis is the larger of the two main financial, transport, trade and cultural centres of Australia (the other being Melbourne).
It would be preferable not to cite the population count of the city proper to the very last person—such a level of accuracy belies the instability of the measure. Brisbane, Perth, etc, might be miffed at being classified as not being financial, transport, trade and cultural centres. Do we need to tip our hats to that silly Sydney-Melbourne rivalry? What's a transport centre? I'll fix these matters if no one objects. Tony 22:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
I have a problem with the time zones in the infobox. Sydney standard time +10 should not be given the same name as summer time +11. Australian Eastern Daylight (saving) Time (AEDT) is a different time to Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST). Of course, it is confusing because sometimes the names Australian Eastern Time (AET) and Australian Eastern Summer Time (AEST) are used instead, so that AEST is ambiguous without knowing what system is being used, but we definitely shouldn't use it for both of them.
It is also a bit strange to me that the summer time name should link to UTC+10, although it is understandable if it is exlained there as a variation of AEST. However, I noticed that British Summer Time is listed separately at UTC1 and (North American) Eastern Daylight Time is listed as distinct from Eastern Standard Time at UTC-4, so perhaps AEDT, ACDT should be added to UTC11 and UTC10:30? JPD 10:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't "City of Sydney" get merged into here? City articles more or less usually cover the city proper. WhisperToMe 02:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I think there should be a section, maybe within the existing Culture section listing the universities and TAFE that are based in Sydney. At the very least there should be links to them in the "See Also" but they deserve to be talked about in the text. Sydney does have 5 universities (of which 2 are in the top 20 worldwide) and several TAFE institutes. These are significant assets to the city (both culturally and financially) and bring in tens of thousands of international students each year. What do you think? Witty lama 14:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
removed "crippling" and "The CityRail service has been named one of the worst in the Western world." - POV without source, you could hardly say its the consensus especially as the last editor says that "Sydney is said to have the best commuter rail network in the world" Astrokey44 09:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
When, the Rail Clearways project is completed in 2010 and the new trains arrive, with a new timetable in 2011 and station upgrades Sydney is said to have the best commuter rail network in the world, with new confortable state of the art trains...
Sydney should adopt a Melbourne style infobox user:Vox latina
have you people ever been to London, Paris or Milan?
Sorry but Sydney does not have what would be considered an 'Underground', 'metro' or 'subway' and nor does Melbourne. If you class what Sydney and Melbourne have to be 'Underground rail systems, then Brisbane also has one. I've been there too. I starts at bowen hills and continues to central station.
Actually I don't know enough about the London Underground to comment. So cheers. -- Sumple 00:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Put it this way. The closest thing you have to a london underground system in Sydney is the monorail. So take your monorail and make a whole network of monorrails running on... say 10 or 12 different lines and then put them underground. The underground carriages are not trains, they're much smaller than trains.
This is the london underground map... http://www.oxfordtube.com/assets/london/underground_map.jpg Looks much like a normal train network map but the difference is that the distance between each stop is quite small. They vary but generally speaking you could get off and walk from one stop to another in about 5-10 mins.
London also has a suburban train netowrk that goes underground when it reaches the city. If you were to catch the train from say Luton to London, the train takes you right into the heart of the city. You can get off at kings cross thameslink (train station) and you're already there. But maybe you want to walk along the river thames. You could walk there which would take about 30 mins or you can climb onto the tube and be there in 10 mins. So you'd get off the train, walk down a buch of stairs onto the tube at st Pancras. Jump on the mordon tube and get off at London Bridge station.
Does this make any more sense? Factoid Killer 14:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh and there's a tube carriage every 2 to 5 mins Factoid Killer 14:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I came here looking for almanac information about Sydney's climate, and unfortunately didn't find any (just that it was "nice"). -- Beland 03:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Would be great if the historical population of sydney was sourced. Just a thought because I noticed all the figures have been revised lately. -- Alexxx1 ( talk/ contribs) 01:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
I have converted the references for the transport section to footnotes, as a test of this citation method (used in the Australia article among others). Please let me know your thoughts on whether this system is appropriate for this article. - Randwicked 13:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that this section be deleted, or at least moved to a separate article. It doesn't work without a decent definition of "famous", and would get very very long. JPD ( talk) 11:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I would say it is a feat of engineering instead. the harbour bridge is almost identical to several bridges overseas, such as in Newcastle, UK, and in New York (i think)-- Sumple 11:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Agree. The 'Hell's Gate' bridge in the USA was built about 20 years before the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Sydney's bridge is an engineering feat all right, but it's hardly unique architecture. Mercurius 05:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Who or what is the reference for the nomenclature 'Emerald City' referred to in the first sentence of the page? I have lived in Sydney more than 20 years and have never heard it described as 'Emerald City'. Harbour City yes, but never Emerald. Mercurius 22:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, Melbourne is not the sister city of Sydney, as a previous edit stated. The website of the City of Sydney Municipal Council lists six cities which have 'sister city' relationships with Sydney, and Melbourne ain't one of them....see: http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/Business/ProgramsAndInitiatives/SisterCityProgram.asp Mercurius 23:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The bit about it meaning little village or whatever in Danish has been edited out. But I'm' pretty sure that's not true. Sydney is named after Sir Whatshisname Sydney, the Colonial Secretary at the time. Sydney is an English name, and while it may have come from Danish, I'm pretty sure the city name doesn't directly derive from that. -- Sumple 22:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the name "Sydney" was intended to refer only to the Sydney Cove itself, with the city around it intended to be named something else which never cought up with people. I'll try to find the source (I think it's Bill Bryson's "Down Under" but will have to verify).
Penedo 06:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
About the origin of the name (for whatever it was intended to be refered to) I found the following link, which seems to me to be pretty authoritative: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/elect/eldivnam.htm. It says:
Sydney (New South Wales) Locality name - city named after Viscount Sydney, Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1787.
The landmarks section is a little jumbled... I'm thinking perhaps the landmarks mentioned there should be categorised? Also many of the landmarks are also tourist attractions, while some of the tourist attractions are major landmarks but not mentioned in the landmarks seciton. The Universities are not so much landmarks as cultural sites (as in, should probly belong under culture?) -- Sumple 04:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess it could be appropriate to describe some of the main shopping centres/areas/markets, but phrases like "the most popular X would be" aren't particularly verifiable. JPD ( talk) 19:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Since Sydney is the biggest and best known Australian city, I think its time to get it in shape to be a featured article. These are the areas that I think need improving and will be working on, statistical data needs to be sourced and the ABS is the best source, help is appreciated -- nixie 00:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite comfortable with the paragraph on water shortages being included in the climate section. Water levels are affected by climate, but there are other factors, and it's really a broader topic. JPD ( talk) 15:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I was planning on shifting and rewriting that bit when I get a section about the city's utilities started.-- nixie 22:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Who agrees with Petaholmes' reversions on the basis of there being "too many pics"?? I don't. I think having lots of pictures is good. (And no, they weren't my additions being reverted) -- Russell E 06:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Ideally images complement and enhance the text, the images that keep getting added do neither, they are simply cosmetic, they increase the loading time and break up the flow of the text. If someone has images that demonstrate something about Sydney other than the harbour and skyline by all means add them, images showing what the suburbs and other parts of Sydney look like would be good additions too.-- nixie 00:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
The geographical coordinates in the infobox appear to be corrupted, but I don't know how to fix this. -- Shantavira 17:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I've just added up all of the area and population in Sydney's LGA, With exception to Hawksbury.
The area's add up to 3,971,851 and population add up to a surprising 4,906,618 with a density of about 1,235km²
Why do these numbers vary so much to the stats given in the info box? How big is Hawksbury city council area? cheers.
203.109.166.220 09:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I had a major stuff up, The numbers I collected was 3,971.851 not the info I gave, I interpreted it wrong.
But back to the topic, even with Hawksbury the Area is only 5,771km² far off the 12,145 km² in the article, Where did I leave out? I used every LGA listed in the article plus the city of Sydney.
203.109.166.220 23:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't the national parks be included in Hawksbury, Ku-ring-gai and Sutherland total areas?
I have repeatedly removed lists of "sister cities". A verifiable list of sister cities of the City of Sydney is already in that article, and doesn't belong here. It seems to me that this confusion might be more easily avoided a link to City of Sydney occured near the start of the article, either in the text or the disambiguation line/. Any ideas on the most natural way to mention it? JPD ( talk) 19:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, there are other uses as well. I was going to put
at the top - any comments? JPD ( talk) 10:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Im not sure, but perhaps the lead photo could be changed to a daytime shot? the wide night-time photo is a beautiful image but doesnt seem right for the initial photo - a standard sized daytime shot might be better like Image:PortJackson_2004_SeanMcClean.jpg, Image:Sydney_opera_house_and_skyline.jpg or even Image:Sydney_harbour_bridge_nye2004.jpg -- Astrokey44| talk 09:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone has added some extra LGAs to the list. Some of them (Gosford, Wyong) have already been mentioned as being in the Sydney statistical division used by the ABS, and so are relevant to the stats in the article. I don't know whether the others (Blue Mountains, Wollondilly) are in the SSD or not, and I'm not going to check right now, but none of them are part of what it usually referred to as "Sydney", including by the NSW government. In any case, I think we should decide and make clear what area is covered by the article, and change whatever is necessary to make sure that all the stats and prose refer to the same area. JPD ( talk) 19:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Where is the coat of arms and flag for Sydney, every other city has one....well why not Sydney!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????? Everytime I add one it dissapears!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jackp ( talk • contribs) .
I'm about to create a portal on Sydney-AGAIN!!! As the other time I did it it was removed..this time if there is something wrong please don't remove the page, just edit it!!!!!!!!
Well-of I go and creat the portal:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackp ( talk • contribs)
I fell that the Sydney article needs to be updated....the page needs to be extended and more pictures need to be added, and because Sydney is an important city it needs more info (like I've said). Anyone agree??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackp ( talk • contribs)
Jesus Christ!! I tried to add more info to this article on Sydney and get flamed for it!! I just can't believe some people on this website...I mean it's ludicrous that cities like New York City, London and LA get pages with over 100000 sections and other cities get reduced to the minimum of bloody 13 or 12!! I think every article should be at the same length, just because London is a great place doesn't mean it needs like 18 sections of articles (some of which aren't even relevant)….if this isn’t stopped, I’ll do something about it myself, and Darklight what is so bad about adding Independence Day to the list of Sydney films…DID IT HARM ANYONE-NO….and I’m sorry, but I didn’t know that the Emerald City is no longer a name for Sydney, why don’t you take away my right and arrest me for adding back in Jackp 07:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)!
I removed the Sydney in film list, but it was reverted. I just wanted to see what a few more people here thought. --
darkliight
[πalk]
05:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the infobox be placed above the image? It looks like it has been thrown in as an afterthought where it is now /shrug. Also, I thought the panorama shot at the bottom of the page would probably look good in place of a square image. It would fill out some of the white space created by TOC. Just a couple of thoughts. -- darkliight [πalk] 09:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I was interested in creating a portal (as I stated in the a previous comment)...but I'm not sure how to, anyone willing to help Jackp 04:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
When I ever I try to the edit never appears??? Why is this 202.6.138.33 04:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
An anon added this link * Sydney Travel Blogs and Travel Reviews. Is it spam, do you think? Skittle 19:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I took my time and researched that information about fashion in Sydney, and then all of a suddent the article is romoved *ROLLSEYES*, it makes editeting articles on Wikipedia seem pointless, if it isn't replaced, then I'll do so myself, because I'm not going to go out of my way and then suddenly find my work removed!!!!!!!!!!
Was it sourced? I vaguely recall making changes to the fashion section as it had been hijacked by melbournites. But that was a while ago. Factoid Killer 11:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
While high-profile cities such as London, Milan, Paris, and New York are traditionally regarded as the fashion centres of the world, these days Australia's unique style and creativity mean Sydney is also mentioned as a 'must-visit' centre on the international fashion circuit. When it came to fashion, Sydney used to be seen as isolated and out-of-touch. That notion is now out-of-touch itself, as designs from Australians such as Wayne Cooper, Collette Dinnigan, Akira Isogawa, Lisa Ho, and Easton Pearson are seen all around the globe. In fact, around 60 Australian labels are currently exporting their designs to boutiques and department stores in Asia, Europe and the United States.
Sydney hosts Spring/Summer Mercedes Australian Fashion Week (MAFW) held annually (April/May) in Circular Quay. The event involves over 100 designers from Australia and Asia Pacific that present their collections to some of the world's most significant buyers. Some designers that parcicipated in MAFW: Jayson Brunsdon · Jeenenun · Jimmy D · Josh Goot · Joshua Granath · Joveeba · Jozette · Jtah · Juliannne · Kate Sylvester · Leona Edmiston · Lisa Ho · Lorena Laing · Lover · Mad Cortes · Marnie Skillings · Melissa Polynkova · Milich & Morton · Milk & Honey · Mimco · Miok Kang · Mjolk · NA by Nicole and Aaron · Natasha Gan · Nicola Finetti · Nookie. Other fashion events are also hold bi-annualy by David Jones and Myer.
Looks like a whole lot of unsourced Point of View and original research to me. Factoid Killer 11:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I noticed these have vanished (again). I was going to add a few links to QTVR projects (ahem - not by me). So... what's the policy / consensus? Other Wiki city entries have a few links to city-related photo webpages, why not Sydney?... -- Andrew N - Monday , May 15, 2006 at 03:17:13 (UTC)
If they are commerical websites, then there is no reason to include links on this page. See
Wikipedia:External links for guidelines on what kind of links to include on article pages.--
Peta
03:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Understood. Three of the links were definitely non-commercial though:
All of these feature candid photographs of Sydneysiders. Surely these and others like them can be added under a separate "Picture Galleries" heading? After all, a city is more than just a collection of buildings :?) -- Andrew N - 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
If you want to see your images on Wikipedia, why not release some under a compatible licence, some of them would make good additions to exisiting articles. Your site does have adds, so it does count as a commercial link. The council link is probably ok, better for the history article. I'm ambivalent about the other artists gallery - seems like promotion.-- Peta 09:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted the addition of an extra 4 rows of data to the climate table, it is far more information than is necessary or useful in an article of this type.-- Peta 12:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
At the very least cloudy days are crucial for a reader to ascertain and compare the weather of various cities. It gives a much better indication than total rain days. If something has to go i'd agree to rain days and clear days. Factoid Killer 12:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Recently I had language such as hot, warm, cool and mild removed from the London article providing the argument that use of such language to describe weather conditions is both vague and Non-NPOV. Londoners believe they have 'Mild' winters.... so do Brisbane people even though Brisbane's winters are like London's summers which were described as warm. Sydney's winters in this article are described as 'cool'.
I received very little argument from London article editors and my edits still stand. I believe use of such language is un-encyclopedic because it is open to wild differences in interpretation. I wanted to offer some discussion on the topic before I go changing the climate section any further. Does anyone have any comments? Factoid Killer 15:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
OK. My first attmempt at searching for a definition has lead me to the American Meteorological glossary here. They don't include the terms hot, cold, cool, warm or anything similar. Dictionary.com has various definitions but there is no specific meteorological definition. American national weather service climate glossary has nothing on any of these terms here. Australian Bureau of Meteorology climage glossary has none of these terms here. The closest i've been able to find is this here which uses the terms hot, warm and cold within other definitions but stops short of actually defining hot, warm and cold. Factoid Killer 13:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
I know of a forum where I could put this question to an experienced Australian meteorologist. I'm going to post a question there and see where that leads me. Factoid Killer 13:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Aha! - Bureau of Meteorology in Australia says there is NO international standard for use of these terms. They define the terms in the context of their own use. Because these terms mean different things based on the point of view of the reader, use of these terms qualifies as non-Neutral Point of View and therefore should not be used...
Also in notes - down the page a bit;
..No international definitions have been laid down for the terms hot, warm, etc. The above table has therefore been developed in the Bureau to serve as a general guide only.
Factoid Killer 14:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
The fashion section on Sydney, I was told "violates the neutral point of view", so does anyone want to consider writing a new article on the fashion in Sydney?? Since Sydney is the fashion capital of Australia, and is home to some important lables, I think Sydney deserves at least a good article on the fashion in Sydney, so I'd like to see an article about it, anyone agree??? Jackp 10:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm always trying to make this article on Sydney a little more detailed and contribute more, but it get's removed! However, I have said over and over again (and no one seems to listen) that this article needs more info, it's totally ridiculous that cities such as New York City, London, Los Angeles, Toronto ect get pages with sections going over or up to 14 or 15!! And wikipedia's pages about Sydney, Paris and Tokyo are reduced to a tiny 11 or 12, either add more sections and IMPROVE this page or make them all equal!!! Jackp 06:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
A few things that could be added:
Well, maybe these things can be created on a seperate page? Jackp 07:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I agree now...but, every time I add that little tibblet-"Sydney Harbour Is Commonly Refferd To As One Of The Most Beautiful Natural Harbour in The World", it gets removed...but it's ture, and even Wikipedia states that it is on the Sydney Harbour page, so I think that should stay, also when I add "Sydney is an important finance centre for Asia-Pacific"...it is removed once again, but that is all true, Sydney is certinly an important place for finance, so that should also stay....I'll also add a link next to the fact to state, now please I don't want to see them removed, either! Jackp 07:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but how come that the info regarding Sydney Harbour is suitable on that page, but not on the page of Sydney? Oh, and about the tourism thing (which also keeps getting removed) how come it is ok for there to be info on the tourism in London, Tokyo, New York City and Melbourne ect. But not in Sydney’s article. I mean, if the tourism section I wrote isn't good enough, does anyone want to consider re-writing it, to meet Wikipedia's standards (which would be the best idea), the same goes for everything else that keeps getting removed??? Jackp 09:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I understand!! But I'm still wondering why it's ok to have a section about the tourism in articles on Tokyo and London Jackp 11:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
oh, I'm sure that will happen!! AND KNOW ONE HAS SAID WHY THIS CAN'T STAY-"Sydney Harbour Is Commonly Refferd To As One Of The Most Beautiful Natural Harbour in The World" and "Sydney is an important finance centre for Asia-Pacific", and they are both %100 true!!!! So until, someone can prove there not, they will stay!! Jackp 06:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Jack, time to give up with the games. You've been overruled so many times. The difference between an encyclopedia and brochure should be clear. The beauty of wiki is that it cuts through all the self-promotion s**t of the rest of the web. In this way it is unique but your edits seem determined to reduce wiki to the garbage level of most of the rest of the web. Seriously, what is so hard about this??? And stop REMOVING this stuff from pages like London 1 min after adding it to Sydney. What a stupid game. --
Merbabu
09:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should!!! I mean Sydney's skyline is very recognizable nationally and internationally, especially with the Sydney Opera House and Sydney Harbour Bridge in the picture, which are certainly the most prominent. Many of its buildings are unique and there are many gothic style churches ect. So I think it deserves one, if anyone wants to consider on doing this...since I don't think I could. Agree??? Jackp 08:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, I would certainly consider the Sydney Opera House unique, maybe not so much the Sydney Harbour Bridge...but they certainly are famous structures, oh and the Queen Victoria Mall, is a rare Victorian building...so I think that we should consider writing an article about the architecture Jackp 12:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I don't agree with that, the sydney article deserves one on it's architecture hands down!
I don't think the article needs a separate architecture section. If there are any well referenced things to say about Sydney architecture, then they could be added to the urban structure section. As Merbabu says, many individual notable structures have articles of their own, and are already mentioned in the article. JPD ( talk) 10:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
What is so wrong with this?:
Sydney’s skyline is widely recognizable. Sydney also possesses a wide array of diversity of architectural style. They range from the simple Francis Greenways Georgian buildings, to Jorn Utzon’s expressionist, the Sydney Opera House. Sydney also has a large amount of Victorian buildings, such as the Sydney Town Hall and the Queen Victoria Building. The most architecturally significant would be the Sydney Opera House, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, among many others. Skyscrapers in Sydney are also large and modern such as the Sydney Tower, which dominates the Sydney skyline.
It keeps getting removed, I don't really see what's so bad about it! Jackp 10:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
The area of Sydney was wrong. (Area x density = population)...
What is the name of the article about the famous sydneysiders?? Jackp 10:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Is this ok to put into the Sydney article? "Sydney is home to some of the Australia's most prominent universities, theaters, and museums.", I really don't see what's so wrong with it, so why does it keep getting removed from the article ! Jackp 05:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, yes sure! It's positively fine if the article on London (just using that as an example) states "London is a leader in international finance, politics, education, culture, entertainment, fashion and the arts and has considerable influence worldwide." Well, I'm sorry but all of your actions are a little strange, and ridiculous, because you state it isn't alright to say that "Sydney is home to some of the Australia's most prominent
universities,
theaters, and
museums."...what can't the article on Sydney have that??? Or are all of you against the article and believe it shouldn't have that kind of info on it, none of you have managed to state why London or any other city can have it and Sydney can't...so either you don't have a good enough reason or your all just plain stupid!!!
Jackp
09:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, I certinly wouldn't if it was left in this article! Jackp 09:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Why are they not worth inspiring, what is Sydney not as big and internationally influential, I think not!! Sydney' article should be equal to London's or Sydney's, not cities that are only known in there nations, because Sydney is a globally influential city, it's article shouldn't be reduced to a size as small as cities which you mentioned (I.E. Ann Arbor and Canberra)!!!!!!!!!! Jackp 12:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
And while we're on the topic of your latest attempted additions, Jack, your reverted section on shopping was copied verbatim from http://www.discoversydney.com.au/sydney/shopping.html which is in violation of copyright. Steve 23:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I see. But, if there is soemthing wrong with my edits, I really don't understand why anyone doesn't take time to fix them up...instead of just removing them? Jackp 12:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I see now, I just wish that people would make them better instead of deleting them all together, it is just really annoying. Also, I'm a little puzzled on why everytime I put culture and finance into the sentence "notable for its climate, beaches, and architectural landmarks like the Sydney Opera House and the Sydney Harbour Bridge" it is constantly removed, I mean Sydney is Australia's cultural capital, so it's feasible for that to stay and since Sydney is an important place for trading and finance in the Asia-Pacific...then that can also stay!! Jackp 07:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
You said it was "Australia's main financial centre"...not an important centre for finance in the Asia-Pacific.Oh, and yes I do have a verifiable fact, from the website "About Australia" it states that Sydney and Melbourne share the status of "Australia's Culture Capital- [5] Jackp 09:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but I have seen on countless websites, books ect. that Sydney is renowned for it's culture, it even states on Culture of Sydney that it's diverse and multi-cultural!! I'll try to find a better source in the meantime, though. Oh, and why was the Asia Pacific thing removed, it had a reliable and appropriate source. Jackp 12:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be better if the article said something a little more high-brow about the finance in Sydney. Not just "Sydney is Australia's man financial centre"...because that is obvious when it is the countries largest city, it needs to state something more important!! Jackp 11:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, I have added a section about Film and Fashion (an improved version) in the "Culture" section, I don't think there is anything wrong with it...but if there is, I'd really appreciate if you could just improve it, instead of removing it all together! Jackp 12:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Because, there is a lot to say about film in sydney, and what I wrote would be too long to be merged into the "arts" section...so there is nothing wrong with it where it was. So can it stay? Also, why couldn't you easily fix the fashion section like I said? And, I think it would be relevant if this article had a section about Tourism in Sydney, since it's a vital part of the sydney economy. Jackp 09:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
If you think it is so bad, then would you care to explain what is so bad about it. But I think the tourism section is fine there, and I've already said why! Jackp 12:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
(SORRY, CAPS KEY BROKEN, ONE KEY DOESN'T WORK) PERHAPS JACKP COULD ADD STUFF ABOUT FOX STUDIOS. IT IS NPOV AND NOTEWORTHY. JACK, THIS IS HOW YOU NEED TO DO IT. ADD LINKS TO
FOX STUDIOS AUSTRALIA,
http://www.foxstudiosaustralia.com/, AND LINK TO 2 THINGS SHOT THERE, BUT YOU HAVE TO SAY IT IN ONE SENTENCE.
129.94.6.28
05:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC) (PS GUESS WHICH LETTER KEY IS BROKEN) (XZJQ)
I still think the tourism section belongs in the article, it doesn't need to be cutting edge or a long section, we only need a couple of sentences to direct the reader to the main article, cause the link to the tourism article isn't bold enough in the "see also" section. So it deserves a section on it's own since it's a vital part of the sydney economy. Jackp 06:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, how about a sub-section in the tourist section...otherwise, it's gonna need to stay as its own article...because most of the economy is related to tourism, or does someone want to cosnider writting a long section about tourism, maybe similar to the one on New York City's page, either way we need a tourism section. Jackp 11:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Above I was 129.94.... sorry, really was at a bad key board. Anyway, though someone else seems to have written in the point that I wanted JackP to write, I still think you could try my solution. Have JackP write something into the article which is wanted, and maybe he can learn about how to be constructive that way. The only thing I can see atm is getting rid of the list of local government areas, because that's already included in the template at the bottom; please, nobody do it just yet. A J Hay 00:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
How do you know it is only Sydneysiders? And A J Hay, what is wanted in the article, the only think I think we should do is to have an article on tourism, it doesn't have to be about the toruism and how it helps the enconomy, it could be just about what the main tourist attractions are and remove the other sections that alreay state what they are...something similar to London's: Tourism in London, but make it a little shorter. Jackp 09:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it works quit well. I'm not saying we should totally rip it off, but co-operate and make a version of it, that would go well and work on the Sydney page. I've written a new version of the tourist section, if it doesn't work, please feel free to fix it or extend it (I don't really care if that involves removing most of my content)...as long as it is there and it works well, Here it is:
Jackp 12:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I think the article needs a tourism section because it will make Sydney's even with all the other articles on cities that have tourism sections (i.e. Melbourne, Cape Town, New York City ect.), also it will give readers an insight on what the tourism is like in the city, and what are the most notable. It also directs the reader to Tourism in Sydney. If you still don't agree, then why don't we have it in a sub-section under culture or economy? Jackp 03:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, What is so wrong with saying "Sydney is the nation's centre for fashion, education, mass media and buisness"? Because Sydney is cleary is that. And the sport section isn't really culture, it is more a leisure activity, so that should stay in it's on section. And I have made the sub-sections under "Arts and Entertainment" bold, so they can be easily read. Jackp 11:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for telling me in a calm way! Also, I mean "even" as in it will be divisible by the two, like Sydney's article will be on an equal level to Melbourne's ect. Jackp 15:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
And, if you want to know why I keep adding culture, then I'll awnser that! When people think of culture in Australia, they think of Sydney. Everyone knows that Sydney is more than the Wild West of the Southern Hemisphere- it is a cosmopolitan, modern center of fashion, commerce and culture. I've added links next to my added sentence...but it is always removed! Jackp 03:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think Sydney's article is brilliant yet, I mean we still need a section about Sydney's architecture. Why on earth doesn't take that into their hands (since mine wasn't good enough), it isn't going to harm anyone, or make this article bad, it will give people an insight on architecture in Sydney, which will make it better! Jackp 11:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Its a big deal that the soccer team is going to the world cup and its an historic event that happened in sydney, why was it removed?
the sydeny team that is going for its most famouse cup is the LBW
In the transport or history section it might be worth noting that Sydney was once well-served by a tram system, before that system was gradually but determinedly dismantled, to be replaced by noisy, slow, polluting, infrequent, overcrowded buses. My reasoning behind this proposed entry is not that I am a tram nutter but that I have noticed that the presence or absence of trams in a city is a major indicator of the quality of life afforded its citizens. A recommended source for Sydney history pictures (of trams, the harbourside and other landmarks) is the work of photographer Max Dupain.
--MJL
If the Melbourne entry is going to mention that city's distance from Sydney . . . Oh, and you might mention the city's namesake.
As an inhabitant of Sydney, I honestly can't see why its subway is considered interesting - some details please, or else excise the reference -- MB
Manning: You don't find Sydney's subway system interesting? You've obviously never gone on a tour of the disused tunnels off St. James station :) -- Simon J Kissane
Again, some discussion of Sin City's criminal past is worthwhile, but the article as it stands gives the misleading impression that the crime rate is extremely high in world terms, which is just not true. Not even Alan Jones can make it so.--- Robert Merkel 07:31 Dec 5, 2002 (UTC)
I agree - the crime section seems very out of place - wm
I just had a look at the Toronto city page and it seems to have more "stuff" and I think Toronto is good comparison city for Sydney. I might attempt to write some more stuff on Culture (isn't that with a K??) Film Festivals, Theatre (STC, Belvoir) Mardi Gras, Sydney Festival, SSO/ACO/Musica Viva etc etc any other thoughts?? Scotth1 08:33, 2004 Mar 17 (UTC)
links should not generally appear in headings of narrative articles (sometimes it's OK in "list of"-style articles) see: Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Headings, also WikiProject Countries and other templates (see my comment above), as well other articles use the Main article: convention. clarkk 12:39, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
How can Sydeny be the largest cityin the southern hemisphere? Isn't Rio and Sao Paulo located in the southern hemisphere also?
I added a list of local government areas...IMHO these are more important then most of the listed suburbs...only notable suburbs that aren't also LGAs should be listed, e.g. Bondi Junction, Chatswood, Cronulla. But the list is pretty long. Too long? I don't know how to format it into two columns. Maybe it's better to have a separate article, 'list of Sydney local government areas'.-- Randwicked 10:06, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I'm trying to develop the Australian section of the article on Chinatown, so no country will feel they're excluded from the list. Does Sydney also follow the old touristy urban Sydney Chinatown vs. the new surburban Chinatown pattern? If you have any local perspective, please add them to the article.
By the way, correct anything you feel is erroneous.
The ARL is a unique sport mainly played in Sydney. Someone wanna write something about that if they're interested?
I made a start in the Sports section. Needs a lot of work though.
I find no reference for this claim outside wikipedia mirrors. Its metro area is nowhere as big as LA's or New York's, and 'suburban' is a dodgy term. I changed it to 'one of the world's largest urban areas for its population', which is definitely true as the density is low. Randwicked 04:19, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It is true that Sydney is not the largest city in the world by area. This is not relevant. The claim being disputed is whether Greater Sydney has the largest suburban area in the world. I did not originate this claim and was curious about its veracity when I first came across it in this article. As it is, I found two references for it fairly quickly: [1] and [2]. Although one of them comes from a university website, I can excuse someone for not thinking that these are authoritative. But the assumption has hardly been pulled out of the air either. I have no inclination to want to argue the point, however. I am content that the claim has been withdrawn due to lack of evidence. -- Susurrus 08:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
What, you trust that piece of junk called Microsoft Encarta? The info is SO out of date it should have been used for school kids in 1900, not 2005. Take a look at Google Earth, and compare Sydney with New York and LA - it's just a tad smaller, doddipols. And I'm not being biased - I live in Johannesburg...
Two of the three largest cities on earth are in Australia. The first being the city of Kalgoorlie-Boulder which is in excess of 96, 000sq Kms and the second Mt Isa (which is 3rd in the world) at around half the size of KB. Sydney doesn't even come close.
However, I do recall reading on the ABS site a while back that Sydney has one of the largest CBDs in the world. Larger than London in fact. This relates to the specific area where all of the highrise buildings are which excludes what would be considered 'the suburbs' but extends past what is specifically the area governed by the Sydney City Council (which is a very small area).
Is there an article on this somewhere? If not there should be. The interesting thing I find about it is that the rivalry seems more prominent in Sydney than in Melbourne. People in Sydney have a dislike of Melbourne whereas people in Melbourne generally like Sydney but dislike its egocentricity, or at least that is my experience. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that Melbourne was for many years after the gold rush larger and more influential than Sydney. It was chosen as the first capital of Australia. Many federal government institutions were set up there and have gradually left for Canberra or sometimes Sydney. It had all the embassies and all of these factors were reasons for many companies setting up there. With the move of the capital to Canberra, Sydney was then much closer and this has been a factor in Sydney's rise, not to mention the weather and the harbour views. Interestingly, most people in Sydney are unaware that Melbourne was ever the capital of Australia. I suspect they have forgotten why they don't like Melbourne. I am sure there must be heaps of documentation from the time of Federation and both before and after. I am not a historian but surely this is an interesting topic for someone. -- CloudSurfer 23:25, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
As a Sydney resident for nearly 50 years, can I ask that the prominent reference to Sydney–Melbourne rivalry be removed? It's a parochial way to start an important text, and is ... kind of childish. Tony 13:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Cloudsurfer had better come down from the clouds. This silly rivalry is far stronger in Melbourne than it is in Sydney.(IMO).Some Melburnians seem a little envious that Sydney is better known. And I don't think Sydney people dislike Melbourne at all - they just dislike Melbourne's boasting about being the capital of just about everything.
FYI, there's another NASA satellite photo of Sydney here - much higher res (maybe too high?). Can be used under the PD-USGov-NASA image tag. - Nickj 03:34, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I really disagree with the list of regions of sydney, though I like the concept. Rather than Western Sydney, we should be talking about the Outer West and the South West. I also feel that the Sutherland Shire is a distinct (socio)geographical entity to Southern Sydney. Thought I'd sound people out before makign alterations.-- XmarkX 08:37, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
If I had to divide the city up into relatively cohesive and comparable regions I'd do it so:
Now I don't know if some other areas have regional names like St. George and Macarthur. Some sub-regions of these regions have names, like Wentworth is a part of the Eastern Suburbs. But is there a local name for the Inner South West? Non-pejorative I mean? - Randwicked 15:08, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hey, I have no idea how to change the inset that appears on all the Sydney pages listing the regions, suburbs etc. to match what I've done on this page. Would really appreciate knowing how.-- XmarkX 06:34, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I am interested why North Sydney is not mentioned as a major CBD area outside of the true Sydney CBD? In reviewing the North Sydney entry it is stated as the second largest CBD area in NSW. Any thoughts? -- Michael 07:31, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The latest figures on the page are misleading. The Sydney Statistical Division as defined by the ABS is about 12,000 sq km. What isn't obvious from this figure though is that it includes vast swathes of national park. The whole of the Central Coast, Hawkesbury, Blue Mountains and Wollondilly Shire are part of the SSD. It's nonsensical to compare this massive area to the 835 sq km of New York City, a figure which encompasses only the five boroughs, and not its massive metro area which sprawls across three states. The value for Beijing is as large only because that's the figure for the whole (defacto) province. I'm removing this section, but I'll try to get some comparable figures from some learned people. - Randwicked 23:34, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Re the last editing comment on what to call Sydneyites: Let's not get too carried away with the term 'neutral'. In some cases it is important to point out what is correct usage, and so pointing out is still NPOV. Lots of terms are "used" but it is sometimes important to point out what is and is not correct usage. A schoolkid needs to know that it is not correct to write 'New Yorican' or 'Noo Yawker' in a essay, e.g.; both are 'used'. Quill 21:12, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Just a note: I've lived in Sydney for 20+ years. From personal experience, I have never heard the term 'Sydneyite' *ever*. Sydneysider is quite common, you will see it in newspapers and hear it on the street/TV. I can't think of a formal way of saying a 'resident of sydney'. Novacatz 01:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
An anon inserts links to http://www.oceania.com/australia/photos/cities/sydney/ and similar to Australia and NZ related articles. If this is spam, keep removing. Zocky 01:33, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
If we're going to add the coat of arms then we at least should add the current version (see the City of Sydney website). Cursive 13:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
There are a few problems with the current opening:
Sydney is the capital city of the Australian state of New South Wales and Australia's largest and oldest city (founded in 1788). With a metropolitan area population of 4.3 million and a population of approximately 146,297 people in the city proper (known as the "City of Sydney"), the Sydney metropolis is the larger of the two main financial, transport, trade and cultural centres of Australia (the other being Melbourne).
It would be preferable not to cite the population count of the city proper to the very last person—such a level of accuracy belies the instability of the measure. Brisbane, Perth, etc, might be miffed at being classified as not being financial, transport, trade and cultural centres. Do we need to tip our hats to that silly Sydney-Melbourne rivalry? What's a transport centre? I'll fix these matters if no one objects. Tony 22:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
I have a problem with the time zones in the infobox. Sydney standard time +10 should not be given the same name as summer time +11. Australian Eastern Daylight (saving) Time (AEDT) is a different time to Australian Eastern Standard Time (AEST). Of course, it is confusing because sometimes the names Australian Eastern Time (AET) and Australian Eastern Summer Time (AEST) are used instead, so that AEST is ambiguous without knowing what system is being used, but we definitely shouldn't use it for both of them.
It is also a bit strange to me that the summer time name should link to UTC+10, although it is understandable if it is exlained there as a variation of AEST. However, I noticed that British Summer Time is listed separately at UTC1 and (North American) Eastern Daylight Time is listed as distinct from Eastern Standard Time at UTC-4, so perhaps AEDT, ACDT should be added to UTC11 and UTC10:30? JPD 10:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't "City of Sydney" get merged into here? City articles more or less usually cover the city proper. WhisperToMe 02:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I think there should be a section, maybe within the existing Culture section listing the universities and TAFE that are based in Sydney. At the very least there should be links to them in the "See Also" but they deserve to be talked about in the text. Sydney does have 5 universities (of which 2 are in the top 20 worldwide) and several TAFE institutes. These are significant assets to the city (both culturally and financially) and bring in tens of thousands of international students each year. What do you think? Witty lama 14:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
removed "crippling" and "The CityRail service has been named one of the worst in the Western world." - POV without source, you could hardly say its the consensus especially as the last editor says that "Sydney is said to have the best commuter rail network in the world" Astrokey44 09:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
When, the Rail Clearways project is completed in 2010 and the new trains arrive, with a new timetable in 2011 and station upgrades Sydney is said to have the best commuter rail network in the world, with new confortable state of the art trains...
Sydney should adopt a Melbourne style infobox user:Vox latina
have you people ever been to London, Paris or Milan?
Sorry but Sydney does not have what would be considered an 'Underground', 'metro' or 'subway' and nor does Melbourne. If you class what Sydney and Melbourne have to be 'Underground rail systems, then Brisbane also has one. I've been there too. I starts at bowen hills and continues to central station.
Actually I don't know enough about the London Underground to comment. So cheers. -- Sumple 00:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Put it this way. The closest thing you have to a london underground system in Sydney is the monorail. So take your monorail and make a whole network of monorrails running on... say 10 or 12 different lines and then put them underground. The underground carriages are not trains, they're much smaller than trains.
This is the london underground map... http://www.oxfordtube.com/assets/london/underground_map.jpg Looks much like a normal train network map but the difference is that the distance between each stop is quite small. They vary but generally speaking you could get off and walk from one stop to another in about 5-10 mins.
London also has a suburban train netowrk that goes underground when it reaches the city. If you were to catch the train from say Luton to London, the train takes you right into the heart of the city. You can get off at kings cross thameslink (train station) and you're already there. But maybe you want to walk along the river thames. You could walk there which would take about 30 mins or you can climb onto the tube and be there in 10 mins. So you'd get off the train, walk down a buch of stairs onto the tube at st Pancras. Jump on the mordon tube and get off at London Bridge station.
Does this make any more sense? Factoid Killer 14:19, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Oh and there's a tube carriage every 2 to 5 mins Factoid Killer 14:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I came here looking for almanac information about Sydney's climate, and unfortunately didn't find any (just that it was "nice"). -- Beland 03:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Would be great if the historical population of sydney was sourced. Just a thought because I noticed all the figures have been revised lately. -- Alexxx1 ( talk/ contribs) 01:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
I have converted the references for the transport section to footnotes, as a test of this citation method (used in the Australia article among others). Please let me know your thoughts on whether this system is appropriate for this article. - Randwicked 13:47, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that this section be deleted, or at least moved to a separate article. It doesn't work without a decent definition of "famous", and would get very very long. JPD ( talk) 11:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I would say it is a feat of engineering instead. the harbour bridge is almost identical to several bridges overseas, such as in Newcastle, UK, and in New York (i think)-- Sumple 11:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Agree. The 'Hell's Gate' bridge in the USA was built about 20 years before the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Sydney's bridge is an engineering feat all right, but it's hardly unique architecture. Mercurius 05:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Who or what is the reference for the nomenclature 'Emerald City' referred to in the first sentence of the page? I have lived in Sydney more than 20 years and have never heard it described as 'Emerald City'. Harbour City yes, but never Emerald. Mercurius 22:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
BTW, Melbourne is not the sister city of Sydney, as a previous edit stated. The website of the City of Sydney Municipal Council lists six cities which have 'sister city' relationships with Sydney, and Melbourne ain't one of them....see: http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/Business/ProgramsAndInitiatives/SisterCityProgram.asp Mercurius 23:24, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The bit about it meaning little village or whatever in Danish has been edited out. But I'm' pretty sure that's not true. Sydney is named after Sir Whatshisname Sydney, the Colonial Secretary at the time. Sydney is an English name, and while it may have come from Danish, I'm pretty sure the city name doesn't directly derive from that. -- Sumple 22:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the name "Sydney" was intended to refer only to the Sydney Cove itself, with the city around it intended to be named something else which never cought up with people. I'll try to find the source (I think it's Bill Bryson's "Down Under" but will have to verify).
Penedo 06:45, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
About the origin of the name (for whatever it was intended to be refered to) I found the following link, which seems to me to be pretty authoritative: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/elect/eldivnam.htm. It says:
Sydney (New South Wales) Locality name - city named after Viscount Sydney, Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1787.
The landmarks section is a little jumbled... I'm thinking perhaps the landmarks mentioned there should be categorised? Also many of the landmarks are also tourist attractions, while some of the tourist attractions are major landmarks but not mentioned in the landmarks seciton. The Universities are not so much landmarks as cultural sites (as in, should probly belong under culture?) -- Sumple 04:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess it could be appropriate to describe some of the main shopping centres/areas/markets, but phrases like "the most popular X would be" aren't particularly verifiable. JPD ( talk) 19:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Since Sydney is the biggest and best known Australian city, I think its time to get it in shape to be a featured article. These are the areas that I think need improving and will be working on, statistical data needs to be sourced and the ABS is the best source, help is appreciated -- nixie 00:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite comfortable with the paragraph on water shortages being included in the climate section. Water levels are affected by climate, but there are other factors, and it's really a broader topic. JPD ( talk) 15:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I was planning on shifting and rewriting that bit when I get a section about the city's utilities started.-- nixie 22:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Who agrees with Petaholmes' reversions on the basis of there being "too many pics"?? I don't. I think having lots of pictures is good. (And no, they weren't my additions being reverted) -- Russell E 06:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Ideally images complement and enhance the text, the images that keep getting added do neither, they are simply cosmetic, they increase the loading time and break up the flow of the text. If someone has images that demonstrate something about Sydney other than the harbour and skyline by all means add them, images showing what the suburbs and other parts of Sydney look like would be good additions too.-- nixie 00:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
The geographical coordinates in the infobox appear to be corrupted, but I don't know how to fix this. -- Shantavira 17:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I've just added up all of the area and population in Sydney's LGA, With exception to Hawksbury.
The area's add up to 3,971,851 and population add up to a surprising 4,906,618 with a density of about 1,235km²
Why do these numbers vary so much to the stats given in the info box? How big is Hawksbury city council area? cheers.
203.109.166.220 09:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I had a major stuff up, The numbers I collected was 3,971.851 not the info I gave, I interpreted it wrong.
But back to the topic, even with Hawksbury the Area is only 5,771km² far off the 12,145 km² in the article, Where did I leave out? I used every LGA listed in the article plus the city of Sydney.
203.109.166.220 23:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't the national parks be included in Hawksbury, Ku-ring-gai and Sutherland total areas?
I have repeatedly removed lists of "sister cities". A verifiable list of sister cities of the City of Sydney is already in that article, and doesn't belong here. It seems to me that this confusion might be more easily avoided a link to City of Sydney occured near the start of the article, either in the text or the disambiguation line/. Any ideas on the most natural way to mention it? JPD ( talk) 19:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, there are other uses as well. I was going to put
at the top - any comments? JPD ( talk) 10:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Im not sure, but perhaps the lead photo could be changed to a daytime shot? the wide night-time photo is a beautiful image but doesnt seem right for the initial photo - a standard sized daytime shot might be better like Image:PortJackson_2004_SeanMcClean.jpg, Image:Sydney_opera_house_and_skyline.jpg or even Image:Sydney_harbour_bridge_nye2004.jpg -- Astrokey44| talk 09:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Someone has added some extra LGAs to the list. Some of them (Gosford, Wyong) have already been mentioned as being in the Sydney statistical division used by the ABS, and so are relevant to the stats in the article. I don't know whether the others (Blue Mountains, Wollondilly) are in the SSD or not, and I'm not going to check right now, but none of them are part of what it usually referred to as "Sydney", including by the NSW government. In any case, I think we should decide and make clear what area is covered by the article, and change whatever is necessary to make sure that all the stats and prose refer to the same area. JPD ( talk) 19:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
Where is the coat of arms and flag for Sydney, every other city has one....well why not Sydney!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????? Everytime I add one it dissapears!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jackp ( talk • contribs) .
I'm about to create a portal on Sydney-AGAIN!!! As the other time I did it it was removed..this time if there is something wrong please don't remove the page, just edit it!!!!!!!!
Well-of I go and creat the portal:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackp ( talk • contribs)
I fell that the Sydney article needs to be updated....the page needs to be extended and more pictures need to be added, and because Sydney is an important city it needs more info (like I've said). Anyone agree??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackp ( talk • contribs)
Jesus Christ!! I tried to add more info to this article on Sydney and get flamed for it!! I just can't believe some people on this website...I mean it's ludicrous that cities like New York City, London and LA get pages with over 100000 sections and other cities get reduced to the minimum of bloody 13 or 12!! I think every article should be at the same length, just because London is a great place doesn't mean it needs like 18 sections of articles (some of which aren't even relevant)….if this isn’t stopped, I’ll do something about it myself, and Darklight what is so bad about adding Independence Day to the list of Sydney films…DID IT HARM ANYONE-NO….and I’m sorry, but I didn’t know that the Emerald City is no longer a name for Sydney, why don’t you take away my right and arrest me for adding back in Jackp 07:03, 18 April 2006 (UTC)!
I removed the Sydney in film list, but it was reverted. I just wanted to see what a few more people here thought. --
darkliight
[πalk]
05:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the infobox be placed above the image? It looks like it has been thrown in as an afterthought where it is now /shrug. Also, I thought the panorama shot at the bottom of the page would probably look good in place of a square image. It would fill out some of the white space created by TOC. Just a couple of thoughts. -- darkliight [πalk] 09:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I was interested in creating a portal (as I stated in the a previous comment)...but I'm not sure how to, anyone willing to help Jackp 04:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
When I ever I try to the edit never appears??? Why is this 202.6.138.33 04:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
An anon added this link * Sydney Travel Blogs and Travel Reviews. Is it spam, do you think? Skittle 19:18, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I took my time and researched that information about fashion in Sydney, and then all of a suddent the article is romoved *ROLLSEYES*, it makes editeting articles on Wikipedia seem pointless, if it isn't replaced, then I'll do so myself, because I'm not going to go out of my way and then suddenly find my work removed!!!!!!!!!!
Was it sourced? I vaguely recall making changes to the fashion section as it had been hijacked by melbournites. But that was a while ago. Factoid Killer 11:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
While high-profile cities such as London, Milan, Paris, and New York are traditionally regarded as the fashion centres of the world, these days Australia's unique style and creativity mean Sydney is also mentioned as a 'must-visit' centre on the international fashion circuit. When it came to fashion, Sydney used to be seen as isolated and out-of-touch. That notion is now out-of-touch itself, as designs from Australians such as Wayne Cooper, Collette Dinnigan, Akira Isogawa, Lisa Ho, and Easton Pearson are seen all around the globe. In fact, around 60 Australian labels are currently exporting their designs to boutiques and department stores in Asia, Europe and the United States.
Sydney hosts Spring/Summer Mercedes Australian Fashion Week (MAFW) held annually (April/May) in Circular Quay. The event involves over 100 designers from Australia and Asia Pacific that present their collections to some of the world's most significant buyers. Some designers that parcicipated in MAFW: Jayson Brunsdon · Jeenenun · Jimmy D · Josh Goot · Joshua Granath · Joveeba · Jozette · Jtah · Juliannne · Kate Sylvester · Leona Edmiston · Lisa Ho · Lorena Laing · Lover · Mad Cortes · Marnie Skillings · Melissa Polynkova · Milich & Morton · Milk & Honey · Mimco · Miok Kang · Mjolk · NA by Nicole and Aaron · Natasha Gan · Nicola Finetti · Nookie. Other fashion events are also hold bi-annualy by David Jones and Myer.
Looks like a whole lot of unsourced Point of View and original research to me. Factoid Killer 11:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I noticed these have vanished (again). I was going to add a few links to QTVR projects (ahem - not by me). So... what's the policy / consensus? Other Wiki city entries have a few links to city-related photo webpages, why not Sydney?... -- Andrew N - Monday , May 15, 2006 at 03:17:13 (UTC)
If they are commerical websites, then there is no reason to include links on this page. See
Wikipedia:External links for guidelines on what kind of links to include on article pages.--
Peta
03:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Understood. Three of the links were definitely non-commercial though:
All of these feature candid photographs of Sydneysiders. Surely these and others like them can be added under a separate "Picture Galleries" heading? After all, a city is more than just a collection of buildings :?) -- Andrew N - 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
If you want to see your images on Wikipedia, why not release some under a compatible licence, some of them would make good additions to exisiting articles. Your site does have adds, so it does count as a commercial link. The council link is probably ok, better for the history article. I'm ambivalent about the other artists gallery - seems like promotion.-- Peta 09:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted the addition of an extra 4 rows of data to the climate table, it is far more information than is necessary or useful in an article of this type.-- Peta 12:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
At the very least cloudy days are crucial for a reader to ascertain and compare the weather of various cities. It gives a much better indication than total rain days. If something has to go i'd agree to rain days and clear days. Factoid Killer 12:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Recently I had language such as hot, warm, cool and mild removed from the London article providing the argument that use of such language to describe weather conditions is both vague and Non-NPOV. Londoners believe they have 'Mild' winters.... so do Brisbane people even though Brisbane's winters are like London's summers which were described as warm. Sydney's winters in this article are described as 'cool'.
I received very little argument from London article editors and my edits still stand. I believe use of such language is un-encyclopedic because it is open to wild differences in interpretation. I wanted to offer some discussion on the topic before I go changing the climate section any further. Does anyone have any comments? Factoid Killer 15:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
OK. My first attmempt at searching for a definition has lead me to the American Meteorological glossary here. They don't include the terms hot, cold, cool, warm or anything similar. Dictionary.com has various definitions but there is no specific meteorological definition. American national weather service climate glossary has nothing on any of these terms here. Australian Bureau of Meteorology climage glossary has none of these terms here. The closest i've been able to find is this here which uses the terms hot, warm and cold within other definitions but stops short of actually defining hot, warm and cold. Factoid Killer 13:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
I know of a forum where I could put this question to an experienced Australian meteorologist. I'm going to post a question there and see where that leads me. Factoid Killer 13:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Aha! - Bureau of Meteorology in Australia says there is NO international standard for use of these terms. They define the terms in the context of their own use. Because these terms mean different things based on the point of view of the reader, use of these terms qualifies as non-Neutral Point of View and therefore should not be used...
Also in notes - down the page a bit;
..No international definitions have been laid down for the terms hot, warm, etc. The above table has therefore been developed in the Bureau to serve as a general guide only.
Factoid Killer 14:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
The fashion section on Sydney, I was told "violates the neutral point of view", so does anyone want to consider writing a new article on the fashion in Sydney?? Since Sydney is the fashion capital of Australia, and is home to some important lables, I think Sydney deserves at least a good article on the fashion in Sydney, so I'd like to see an article about it, anyone agree??? Jackp 10:45, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm always trying to make this article on Sydney a little more detailed and contribute more, but it get's removed! However, I have said over and over again (and no one seems to listen) that this article needs more info, it's totally ridiculous that cities such as New York City, London, Los Angeles, Toronto ect get pages with sections going over or up to 14 or 15!! And wikipedia's pages about Sydney, Paris and Tokyo are reduced to a tiny 11 or 12, either add more sections and IMPROVE this page or make them all equal!!! Jackp 06:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
A few things that could be added:
Well, maybe these things can be created on a seperate page? Jackp 07:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I agree now...but, every time I add that little tibblet-"Sydney Harbour Is Commonly Refferd To As One Of The Most Beautiful Natural Harbour in The World", it gets removed...but it's ture, and even Wikipedia states that it is on the Sydney Harbour page, so I think that should stay, also when I add "Sydney is an important finance centre for Asia-Pacific"...it is removed once again, but that is all true, Sydney is certinly an important place for finance, so that should also stay....I'll also add a link next to the fact to state, now please I don't want to see them removed, either! Jackp 07:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but how come that the info regarding Sydney Harbour is suitable on that page, but not on the page of Sydney? Oh, and about the tourism thing (which also keeps getting removed) how come it is ok for there to be info on the tourism in London, Tokyo, New York City and Melbourne ect. But not in Sydney’s article. I mean, if the tourism section I wrote isn't good enough, does anyone want to consider re-writing it, to meet Wikipedia's standards (which would be the best idea), the same goes for everything else that keeps getting removed??? Jackp 09:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I understand!! But I'm still wondering why it's ok to have a section about the tourism in articles on Tokyo and London Jackp 11:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
oh, I'm sure that will happen!! AND KNOW ONE HAS SAID WHY THIS CAN'T STAY-"Sydney Harbour Is Commonly Refferd To As One Of The Most Beautiful Natural Harbour in The World" and "Sydney is an important finance centre for Asia-Pacific", and they are both %100 true!!!! So until, someone can prove there not, they will stay!! Jackp 06:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Jack, time to give up with the games. You've been overruled so many times. The difference between an encyclopedia and brochure should be clear. The beauty of wiki is that it cuts through all the self-promotion s**t of the rest of the web. In this way it is unique but your edits seem determined to reduce wiki to the garbage level of most of the rest of the web. Seriously, what is so hard about this??? And stop REMOVING this stuff from pages like London 1 min after adding it to Sydney. What a stupid game. --
Merbabu
09:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I think we should!!! I mean Sydney's skyline is very recognizable nationally and internationally, especially with the Sydney Opera House and Sydney Harbour Bridge in the picture, which are certainly the most prominent. Many of its buildings are unique and there are many gothic style churches ect. So I think it deserves one, if anyone wants to consider on doing this...since I don't think I could. Agree??? Jackp 08:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, I would certainly consider the Sydney Opera House unique, maybe not so much the Sydney Harbour Bridge...but they certainly are famous structures, oh and the Queen Victoria Mall, is a rare Victorian building...so I think that we should consider writing an article about the architecture Jackp 12:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I don't agree with that, the sydney article deserves one on it's architecture hands down!
I don't think the article needs a separate architecture section. If there are any well referenced things to say about Sydney architecture, then they could be added to the urban structure section. As Merbabu says, many individual notable structures have articles of their own, and are already mentioned in the article. JPD ( talk) 10:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
What is so wrong with this?:
Sydney’s skyline is widely recognizable. Sydney also possesses a wide array of diversity of architectural style. They range from the simple Francis Greenways Georgian buildings, to Jorn Utzon’s expressionist, the Sydney Opera House. Sydney also has a large amount of Victorian buildings, such as the Sydney Town Hall and the Queen Victoria Building. The most architecturally significant would be the Sydney Opera House, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, among many others. Skyscrapers in Sydney are also large and modern such as the Sydney Tower, which dominates the Sydney skyline.
It keeps getting removed, I don't really see what's so bad about it! Jackp 10:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
The area of Sydney was wrong. (Area x density = population)...
What is the name of the article about the famous sydneysiders?? Jackp 10:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Is this ok to put into the Sydney article? "Sydney is home to some of the Australia's most prominent universities, theaters, and museums.", I really don't see what's so wrong with it, so why does it keep getting removed from the article ! Jackp 05:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, yes sure! It's positively fine if the article on London (just using that as an example) states "London is a leader in international finance, politics, education, culture, entertainment, fashion and the arts and has considerable influence worldwide." Well, I'm sorry but all of your actions are a little strange, and ridiculous, because you state it isn't alright to say that "Sydney is home to some of the Australia's most prominent
universities,
theaters, and
museums."...what can't the article on Sydney have that??? Or are all of you against the article and believe it shouldn't have that kind of info on it, none of you have managed to state why London or any other city can have it and Sydney can't...so either you don't have a good enough reason or your all just plain stupid!!!
Jackp
09:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, I certinly wouldn't if it was left in this article! Jackp 09:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Why are they not worth inspiring, what is Sydney not as big and internationally influential, I think not!! Sydney' article should be equal to London's or Sydney's, not cities that are only known in there nations, because Sydney is a globally influential city, it's article shouldn't be reduced to a size as small as cities which you mentioned (I.E. Ann Arbor and Canberra)!!!!!!!!!! Jackp 12:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
And while we're on the topic of your latest attempted additions, Jack, your reverted section on shopping was copied verbatim from http://www.discoversydney.com.au/sydney/shopping.html which is in violation of copyright. Steve 23:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I see. But, if there is soemthing wrong with my edits, I really don't understand why anyone doesn't take time to fix them up...instead of just removing them? Jackp 12:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
I see now, I just wish that people would make them better instead of deleting them all together, it is just really annoying. Also, I'm a little puzzled on why everytime I put culture and finance into the sentence "notable for its climate, beaches, and architectural landmarks like the Sydney Opera House and the Sydney Harbour Bridge" it is constantly removed, I mean Sydney is Australia's cultural capital, so it's feasible for that to stay and since Sydney is an important place for trading and finance in the Asia-Pacific...then that can also stay!! Jackp 07:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
You said it was "Australia's main financial centre"...not an important centre for finance in the Asia-Pacific.Oh, and yes I do have a verifiable fact, from the website "About Australia" it states that Sydney and Melbourne share the status of "Australia's Culture Capital- [5] Jackp 09:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but I have seen on countless websites, books ect. that Sydney is renowned for it's culture, it even states on Culture of Sydney that it's diverse and multi-cultural!! I'll try to find a better source in the meantime, though. Oh, and why was the Asia Pacific thing removed, it had a reliable and appropriate source. Jackp 12:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be better if the article said something a little more high-brow about the finance in Sydney. Not just "Sydney is Australia's man financial centre"...because that is obvious when it is the countries largest city, it needs to state something more important!! Jackp 11:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, I have added a section about Film and Fashion (an improved version) in the "Culture" section, I don't think there is anything wrong with it...but if there is, I'd really appreciate if you could just improve it, instead of removing it all together! Jackp 12:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Because, there is a lot to say about film in sydney, and what I wrote would be too long to be merged into the "arts" section...so there is nothing wrong with it where it was. So can it stay? Also, why couldn't you easily fix the fashion section like I said? And, I think it would be relevant if this article had a section about Tourism in Sydney, since it's a vital part of the sydney economy. Jackp 09:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
If you think it is so bad, then would you care to explain what is so bad about it. But I think the tourism section is fine there, and I've already said why! Jackp 12:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
(SORRY, CAPS KEY BROKEN, ONE KEY DOESN'T WORK) PERHAPS JACKP COULD ADD STUFF ABOUT FOX STUDIOS. IT IS NPOV AND NOTEWORTHY. JACK, THIS IS HOW YOU NEED TO DO IT. ADD LINKS TO
FOX STUDIOS AUSTRALIA,
http://www.foxstudiosaustralia.com/, AND LINK TO 2 THINGS SHOT THERE, BUT YOU HAVE TO SAY IT IN ONE SENTENCE.
129.94.6.28
05:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC) (PS GUESS WHICH LETTER KEY IS BROKEN) (XZJQ)
I still think the tourism section belongs in the article, it doesn't need to be cutting edge or a long section, we only need a couple of sentences to direct the reader to the main article, cause the link to the tourism article isn't bold enough in the "see also" section. So it deserves a section on it's own since it's a vital part of the sydney economy. Jackp 06:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, how about a sub-section in the tourist section...otherwise, it's gonna need to stay as its own article...because most of the economy is related to tourism, or does someone want to cosnider writting a long section about tourism, maybe similar to the one on New York City's page, either way we need a tourism section. Jackp 11:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Above I was 129.94.... sorry, really was at a bad key board. Anyway, though someone else seems to have written in the point that I wanted JackP to write, I still think you could try my solution. Have JackP write something into the article which is wanted, and maybe he can learn about how to be constructive that way. The only thing I can see atm is getting rid of the list of local government areas, because that's already included in the template at the bottom; please, nobody do it just yet. A J Hay 00:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
How do you know it is only Sydneysiders? And A J Hay, what is wanted in the article, the only think I think we should do is to have an article on tourism, it doesn't have to be about the toruism and how it helps the enconomy, it could be just about what the main tourist attractions are and remove the other sections that alreay state what they are...something similar to London's: Tourism in London, but make it a little shorter. Jackp 09:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it works quit well. I'm not saying we should totally rip it off, but co-operate and make a version of it, that would go well and work on the Sydney page. I've written a new version of the tourist section, if it doesn't work, please feel free to fix it or extend it (I don't really care if that involves removing most of my content)...as long as it is there and it works well, Here it is:
Jackp 12:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I think the article needs a tourism section because it will make Sydney's even with all the other articles on cities that have tourism sections (i.e. Melbourne, Cape Town, New York City ect.), also it will give readers an insight on what the tourism is like in the city, and what are the most notable. It also directs the reader to Tourism in Sydney. If you still don't agree, then why don't we have it in a sub-section under culture or economy? Jackp 03:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Also, What is so wrong with saying "Sydney is the nation's centre for fashion, education, mass media and buisness"? Because Sydney is cleary is that. And the sport section isn't really culture, it is more a leisure activity, so that should stay in it's on section. And I have made the sub-sections under "Arts and Entertainment" bold, so they can be easily read. Jackp 11:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for telling me in a calm way! Also, I mean "even" as in it will be divisible by the two, like Sydney's article will be on an equal level to Melbourne's ect. Jackp 15:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
And, if you want to know why I keep adding culture, then I'll awnser that! When people think of culture in Australia, they think of Sydney. Everyone knows that Sydney is more than the Wild West of the Southern Hemisphere- it is a cosmopolitan, modern center of fashion, commerce and culture. I've added links next to my added sentence...but it is always removed! Jackp 03:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think Sydney's article is brilliant yet, I mean we still need a section about Sydney's architecture. Why on earth doesn't take that into their hands (since mine wasn't good enough), it isn't going to harm anyone, or make this article bad, it will give people an insight on architecture in Sydney, which will make it better! Jackp 11:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)