Talk:Hobart/Archive 1

Map
I have added a map of Tasmania showing the Hobart City Council area to the article:



However, I'm sure if it looks right - due to the size of the council, and also because the article is more about the city, Hobart (about three times the size of the Hobart City Council area). I have only added it to complete the maps I am adding to other Local Government Areas of Tasmania. Suggestions? --Chuq 12:47, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

Naming of Local Government areas
You should use the correct (legal?) name for these areas - ie the 'City of Hobart', not 'Hobart City Council area'. The Council administers the area known as the 'City of Hobart'.

A more prominent colour would be useful.

Is this an up-to-date map, reflecting all the changes over the last decade?

I note that some of the Council names don't seem to be the current one.

New format
New format looks very good, well done! I'd probably change the Geography section to mention Greater Hobart including the eastern shore as well as western shore, don't want to forget about the people out at Howrah and Bellerieve --kudz75 02:52, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment Kudz, I'm glad someone noticed :) I've mentioned the Greater Hobart / City of Hobart deal in the Government section, but maybe it warrants it in Geography too.  I might include details of outlying towns as well.
 * Btw, have you checked out the Australian wikipedians' notice board? -- Chuq 03:52, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Population
For the first time in history Hobart's population has recently exceeded 202,000.

What is the ethnic make-up of Hobart? Why is this issue not addressed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.130.138.148 (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Image reversion
I will fix up the coat of arms later - just wanted to revert for now, due to Tasmanian Devil being todays featured article, Hobart may have higher than usual traffic. -- Chuq 10:00, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Sport Section
This section is more about Tasmania rather than Hobart. I think this should probably be moved to its own page, something along the lines of Sport in Tasmania. Jgritz 06:09, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

The four Hobarts
From looking through the ABS and RDPC websites the last couple of days, it appears there are four definitions of Hobart:


 * 1) Hobart city centre refers to the "suburb of Hobart" area - bounded by Battery Point, Sandy Bay, South Hobart, West Hobart, North Hobart, Queens Domain, and Glebe.
 * 2) City of Hobart refers to the Hobart City Council area. (pop ~50,000)
 * 3) Hobart urban centre refers to the area specified in this document - Granton to Taroona, Geilston Bay to Tranmere (pop ~125,000)
 * 4) Greater Hobart refers to the above area, plus Kingston-Blackmans Bay, Howden, Margate, Bridgewater-Gagebrook, Old Beach, Seven Mile Beach, Cambridge, South Arm, New Norfolk, Sorell-Midway Point (pop ~200,000)

Would it make sense to have an article on each of these?


 * 1) Yes, Hobart city centre - this is a pseudo-suburb article, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places
 * 2) Yes, City of Hobart - it is an LGA
 * 3) Probably not, but we may need articles on Kingston-Blackmans Bay and Bridgewater-Gagebrook - to differentiate them from Kingston, Tasmania and Bridgewater, Tasmania, which are suburb articles
 * 4) Yes, Hobart currently focuses on this - although I don't believe it currently includes places like New Norfolk and Sorell within its scope.

Note that my map in the article with the green City of Hobart and teal Greater Hobart is inaccurate - the "Greater Hobart" marked here is somewhere between 3 and 4 in this list by area.

Opinions/ideas? -- Chuq 01:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment: To compare 3 and 4, check the maps at the bottom of page 10 of this PDF. -- Chuq 02:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I think every city in australia has the same problem. Its good that chuq has brought this out into the open - as otherwise the misunderstandings waste so much time and talk page space.  If ths resolution works out here - I suggest that the WP Australia Places be alerted for possible resolutions in other capital cities with the same issues arising.   It requires some agility and dexterity on the part of eds to distinguish between the variations (maybe a box with links in each art?) but it would be worth it. SatuSuro 02:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * No city in Australia is particularly well defined, unlike European ones where they had a habit of building walls around things :P I'd agree with 1, 2 and 4 - but I'd say New Norfolk and Sorell (having been to both) are clearly distinct towns with their own activity separate from Hobart and are separated by some distance from the metro. In Perth the limit has been drawn by the Dept of Local Government and Regional Development where they say certain council areas are in while others are out, although I don't know how applicable this is to Hobart's situation. Orderinchaos78 02:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You sir, speaking as someone who Grew up in Sorell are wrong. Most people who live in the Kingbourogh and the Sorell/Midway areas work in the city and definitely consider then selves to be part of a greater hobart. This has been the way it has been for at least 10 years and those few gaps of land between the 'Satellite Towns' is quickly filling up with housing estates and industrial parks.

118.208.203.235 (talk) 09:17, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Here is a table which should complicate things even more explain things. Rows numbered 1 (towns/suburbs), 2 (LGAs), 3 (urban centres) and 4 (statistical boundary) show the four Hobart's as mentioned above. The "H" row shows the "commonly accepted definition of Hobart" as described by Orderinchaos (that is - Hobart urban centre + Kingston-Blackmans Bay + Bridgewater-Gagebrook). I think it is the definition that is the most accurate but, sadly it is the least encyclopaedic. -- Chuq 03:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with meanings 1, 2 and 4. But I also believe Sorell and New Norfolk should be counted in under No. 4. This should not be confused with the entire suburbs/towns which fall under these councils but only the ones that are included within Hobart's bus service(s), real estate guides and webpages that include these areas as part of the greater hobart area. Australian regions is also worth checking out in support of sorell being considered as part of greater hobart Wiki ian 04:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with pretty much all the meanings in the table above, but think Sorell-Midway Point should be included in Greater Hobart (level 4) possibly level 'H' Hobart too. I don't think New Norfolk should be included in any of these levels. It's part of Southern Tasmania but not Hobart! --TinTin (talk) 05:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

2nd Oldest City in Australia
The first line of the Newcastle NSW article is "Newcastle is the sixth largest and the second oldest city in Australia.."

However, the Hobart article also claims "Hobart is the state capital and most populous city of the Australian island state of Tasmania. Founded in 1804 as a penal colony, it is Australia's second oldest and eleventh largest city..."

Only one of these can be right. Which is it? --Mckinlayr 04:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I grew up in Launceston and was always taught that Launceston is Australia's third oldest city, behind Sydney and Hobart. I notice both Hobart and Newcastle's articles just state "1804" as the year of founding of their respective settlements. -- Chuq 03:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Google for 'australia's second oldest city' shows Parramatta, Newcastle, Hobart and Launceston among the contenstants! -- Chuq 03:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Population
It says in the main body of the article that it is the 11th largest, yet in the fact box it says 12th. Which is it? Maybe I will investigate later.....Cls14 09:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Famous Hobartians
I have a feeling this section will soon duplicate 50% of List of Tasmanians. What do others think? -- Chuq (talk) 01:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Is winning Big Brother enough to attain fame in Hobart?

Currently there is 12 Australian Rules Footballers and 13 notables who are not footballers. This seems a bit out of whack. Perhaps some of these footballers are not notable???? Also generally I think the list may be a little generous to non-notable people!--TinTin (talk) 05:55, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Media
Could someone write a health sub section in the transport section?  Aaroncrick  ( Tassie Talk ) 10:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Health as a sub section of transport? Something about ambulances? I'm confused... Barrylb (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh... Try this; Could someone write a health sub section in the Infrastructure section? Make sense now? ;)  Aaroncrick (Tassie talk) 02:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Red links
Yeah i can tell that you Hobartian's seem to like your red links, but are they really necessary?  Aaroncrick (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Aye we're already getting somewhere! I've never even heard of Mouheneener.  Aaroncrick (Tassie talk) 23:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Aye :) I've heard it quite a few times from politicians who often "acknowledge the traditional owners of the land" but I don't think much is known about them and I doubt we'll ever see an article. Barrylb (talk) 02:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Red links have now vanished! Hope they don't get re-added  Aaroncrick (Tassie talk) 02:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

C-class
Does anyone agree with me, when I say the article is only the equivalent to a C-class article? If there is no response in seven days I'll change the articles rating. Can people help with referencing?  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 09:51, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Its decidedly under referenced. So I'd be inclined to agree. Are you located in Launceston? Noodle snacks (talk) 10:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * He is - and most of Tasmanian articles are way under-referencd - by general Australian project standards - SatuSuro 10:54, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah I'm located in Launceston, but don't worry, it's not a North V South thing, I'm just in the process of cleaning up and rating articles from down here. For a capital city article, 13 refs is crap.  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 23:20, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It's now C-class.  Aaroncrick (Tassie Boy talk) 05:25, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Greater Hobart Panorama.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Greater Hobart Panorama.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 21, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-08-21. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks!  howcheng  {chat} 17:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Class review
It’s been a while since this article's class was reviewed, so I've read over it and decided that it no longer qualifies for C-class. I've therefore classed it as B-class. If anyone has any objections, please let me know here. Anjwalker  Talk 07:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There are so many unsourced statements in this article, it probably doesn't even quality as C class, but I docked it back down due to the unsourced statements. --CutOffTies (talk) 22:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems to have gone backwards since the time I changed the class. Might have to sit down and do a big pile of work on this one day. JTdale   Talk 17:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Hobart meetup
There is a Wikipedia Hobart meetup happening on September 8th. Everyone is welcome - for more details, see the box on the right! -- Chuq (talk) 02:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Lonely Planet top 10 cities in the world to visit 2012
Is this relevant ? It was widely reported in Hobart Media. I think so but am unsure. If so where abouts in the article should it go? In the introductory component? There isn't really a tourism section/sub-section to add it to.--TinTin (talk) 00:53, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, it's been added to the lead, which I think is fair enough, although it should be in the body of the article as well. The listing has been reported in the national media, too, and looks significant. StAnselm (talk) 21:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hobart's new climate record
Can people please stop adding it until it is added to the climate history page (cited source for the chart) or wait until there is a media release from the BoM. Observations page is never reliable due to a number of factors that can push temperatures higher (Dunalley is a good example as it reached 59.9c as the fires went by and in the past other records have had a few .0 or even a degree knocked off it due to factors which made it higher then it was), reason why the BoM do not state that it was a new record as it needs to be investigated before becoming an official record. Ignore the media reporting, whom seem to not be able to get it right anyway. Bidgee (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The new record has now been confirmed but the "Climate Statistics" page has not yet been updated. Still I think it warrants updating the article. 118.208.220.8 (talk) 20:21, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, sorry I'm not really familiar with using this, but I just wanted to note that the climate data appears wrong, with summer mean maximum temperatures of around 32C, when it is more like 22C according to BOM climate data for Hobart. Wenyewlee 12 Nov 2020 —Preceding undated comment added 08:20, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Rankings removed?
Can someone please clarify exactly which part of WP:Lead led to them removing half the lead paragraph because of 'insignificant rankings'? The lead paragraph is rather empty now and I don't see how the rankings for that insignificant considering they received national news coverage at the time. JTdale  Talk 12:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Late reply but from the guideline: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview". Being named Australia's 6th most sustainable city, by the Australian Conservation Foundation in 2010 is not an overview. The fact that the lead is rather empty is irrelevant.  --CutOffTies (talk) 22:26, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

CBD/city centre
I notice you made some edits regarding CBD/city centre - I'm not sure why the change was made - CBD appears to be an appropriate term? -- Chuq (talk) 12:35, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Same question here. City Center is a much more British term, CBD is most often used in Australia. In addition I will note, if you google "Hobart CBD", Google Maps knows what it is but Hobart City Center gives the Hobart City Council - Customer Service Centre. The census meanwhile refers to this place as Inner Hobart. There is also evidence of news usage of this term, such as "Christmas Pageant draws 20,000 to Hobart CBD", "Rebuilding the Royal at its current site on Liverpool Street in Hobart's CBD ", "Now it will build a purpose-built call centre (the industry term is ‘contact centre’) in Hobart’s CBD", "A short walk from Hobart CBD and Salamanca Place." etc.  JT dale Talk ~ 12:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Since Jjberkkhout is not responding, I'll fix the changes he made back to CBD.  JT dale Talk ~ 15:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Reclaimed land reference
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=g4y3BMtG5W8C&lpg=PA86&ots=OLYwFWldrU&dq=hobart%20reclaimed%20land&pg=PA86#v=onepage&q=hobart%20reclaimed%20land&f=false -- Chuq (talk) 22:30, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 5 June 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved, calling an early SNOW on this. No valid argument has been advanced. There don't even appear sources for the assertion that the official name has changed (appears entirely symbolic), and even if it has, we'd need sources to start using a different name for the title to be changed. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Hobart → Nipaluna – City was recently given a dual name in accordance with its First Nations name for the area Rudilouis (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:18, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * But still most people call it Hobart. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:19, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose - alternative names can be flagged by redirects and added into in the lead paragraph with explanation - to move hobart to the new name is not understanding how wikipedia works. It is not who calls it what - the common name - primary name - (like the edit wars of old about perth) -  show that the horrible thing called google hits would possibly not even have nipaluna register.  JarrahTree 12:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose - as above. Dreamy Jazz (talk) 13:18, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Population of Hobart
it states that Hobart has the smallest population of all Australian state capitals.....yet Darwin's population is smaller.

I am from the UK and have never been to Australia, however have spent the last few hours reading about it. Which is the smallest state capital, Darwin or Hobart? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.219.62.201 (talk) 12:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Good call, the source shows that Darwin is smaller. Cheers! -- irn (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The Northern Territory (NT) is just that, a territory, hence Darwin is not a state capital. For info on the distinction, see States and Territories of Australia. Fuse809  (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 01:27, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Melville Street
Is there any good reason why Melville Street is a redirect to Hobart? Downsize43 (talk) 01:46, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * This question also applies to Patrick Street. Downsize43 (talk) 01:48, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It looks like both Melville Street, Hobart and Patrick Street, Hobart redirect here. Both streets used to have articles but at some point in the past were deemed not notable enough to have their own article.  For some reason Brisbane Street, Hobart's article is still around even though it's notability is about the same as the other two.  I'll look at doing more of a cleanup later.  -- Chuq (talk) 03:32, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Good point, but note that the document used as a reference for the naming of various streets in Hobart, eg. Argyle Street, also provides details of the naming of Melville, Patrick and Brisbane Streets. A separate article for each street would be the best way to present this information to readers. Cheers. Downsize43 (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)