Talk:Ipswich, Queensland

Multiple Entries
There seems to be two entries: Ipswich, Queensland, and City of Ipswich, Queensland.

Would it be better to reallocate information between them: City of Ipswich to have information pertaining to all Ipswich LGA, while Ipswich, Queesland pertaining to the suburb of Ipswich itself?

Or maybe Ipswich, Queensland and City of Ipswich to be merged into Ipswich, Queensland, and having a separate article called Ipswich (suburb), Queensland —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmcker (talk • contribs) 04:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, there now seems to be three articles referring to what could be called the City of Ipswich, Qld. Ipswich(suburb), Queensland; Ipswich, Queensland; and  City of Ipswich.  I basically agree but think Ipswich, Queensland should be merged into City of Ipswich, and leave Ipswich(suburb), Queensland as a separate page. Perhaps it's because the Ipswich, Queensland article almost presents itself as a suburb of Brisbane.  Ipswich is definately NOT a suburb of Brisbane!  The title of 'City of Ipswich' seems more correct and self-assured somehow.  When I figure out how to do it, I'll give it a go.  Unless someone else has some spare time, haha! Any thoughts?  Soozlepip (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * What would be best and in line with similar articles (eg. Newcastle, New South Wales) is to keep City of Ipswich for the local government area. The Ipswich, Queensland article should be about the suburb and the wider city. Once Ipswich (suburb), Queensland has been merged it should be re-directed to Ipswich, Queensland. - Shiftchange (talk) 03:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Now that makes sense. Given how much information there is, it would be a lot easier that way and like you say, it keeps it in line with what appears to be the standard.  I think I will look to other cities to see how they set things out.  Unless someone else is doing something?  I don't mind having a go, but I'm still feeling my way around, so it won't happen immediately!   (And now I know how to reply properly on a talk page...) Soozlepip (talk) 05:25, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Seems no-one has started on the Ipswich (suburb), Queensland article, and since that article is mostly duplicated from Ipswich, Queensland, I've started redirecting from the former back into the Ipswich, Queensland article. Sb617 (Talk) 15:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The articles are about separate subjects. City of... is about the LGA, Ipswich is about the connurbation/general location and Ipswich (suburb) is about the CBD/suburb, in line with similar topics elsewhere (all capital cities plus about half a dozen others when I last looked into this). The main issue is defining the connurbation/general location, as the ABS doesn't - it includes it as part of the Brisbane urban centre. Orderinchaos 09:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * So this means anything not about the central suburb needs to be excluded as off-topic. Most of the History, Economy, Housing, Sport sections and lists of schools has to be merged into the City of Ipswich article because when Wikipedia is talking about what people commonly consider Ipswich we refer to it as a local government area that is part of the Brisbane metropolitan area that we call Brisbane. We have to ignore any reference that says Springfield is in Ipswich a city in South East Queensland because in accordance with the alignment with ABS principle it is actually in the City of Ipswich which is part of Brisbane. - Shiftchange (talk) 03:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I would agree with this approach. Ultimately the difficulties in defining "Ipswich" as a connurbation according to any reliable source suggest that this article should be about the suburb, not the connurbation, which will require a few transfers of content if implemented. (Worth pointing out we infrequently have these sorts of problems elsewhere - Rockingham in WA is a classic example.) Orderinchaos 15:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

(od) I see problems. Forgive me if this seems a little disjointed, as I am inlcuding comments as I think of them. Like many Queensland cities and towns (including Brisbane) the name of the CBD suburb is the same as the name of the city/town itself. Ipswich (not the central suburb) is a city, and the central suburb is part of Ipswich, not Brisbane. In South East Queensland, the LGA and the city are almost synonymous. To put it a slightly different way, the city of Ipswich is the central city of the City of Ipswich. A distinction has been made between the suburb, the city and the LGA, but this article is about the city while putting the suburb's info in the info box (e.g. check the population). Regarding the conurbation, Ipswich has not been "absorbed" by Brisbane (neither has Gold Coast, Redlands, Pine Rivers, Redcliffe etcetera ). The cities have all grown together (indeed that I believe is what "conurbation" means). The cities not only have separate LG Authorities, but retain separate CBDs. Brisbane is one city in the conurbation, but the conurbation itself is not Brisbane, but is often called Greater Brisbane. It does not include the whole of the surrounding LGA's but only their contiguous urban areas. "The Greater Brisbane Region" usually includes the non-metro parts of the cities (and somewhere vague it transitions to "South East Queensland"). The ABS is not really the best authority for declaring Ipswich to be part of Brisbane, as they specify for statistical purposes rather than official status, for which one should look to the Queensland Government and the Local Government Authorities themselves. I am reluctant to edit the article myself, but I would ask the the above be considered. LowKey (talk) 11:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have reverted some changes stating that Ipswich is a suburb of Brisbane and has been absorbed by Brisbane. Both are innaccurate.  Ipswich is a suburb of Ipswich, and neither are a part of Brisbane.  The two cities (actually about 1/2 dozen or so cities) have grown together.  See my previous comment above for more on that.  LowKey (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Isis
The page Isis (disambiguation) says (among other things) that "Isis may refer to: Ipswich, Queensland, a city in Australia", but there's no mention of that in this article. Is this true? Thanks for the help! &mdash; Catherine\talk 22:25, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Images of Ipswich
No images are provided within the article. This is creating a less appealing state toward the article. Please anyone who have images add to the wikipedia commons database and add to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lav90 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

History of Ipswich
Mostly fine, except for the fact that the wrong century was put in one part; Collingwood Park and Springfield Lakes are less than ten years old. Only an idiot would think that in the 19th century (way back when 8 Mile Plains was still, in fact, plains) that land in Brisbane was fully developed and expensive. So I changed it. Have a look at www.greaterspringfield.com.au and www.qldgroup.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=81 if you don't believe me.

Reply to History of Ipswich
Even though you didn't sign your post (hmmm I'm thinking only an idiot wouldn't sign their offensive post), I don't know who you are, but I do know that you have to mind your manners. Who do you think you are? Only an idiot you say? Get over yourself please, it was a simple typo. --Orodreth 07:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Prominent Locals
Can the cleanup tag for this section need to be removed or does the information in this section need to be of higher quality, better organised, etc? If so what needs to be done?

Distance from Brisane
Not sure if I agree with the statement that Ipswich is located 40Km SW of Brisbane. Brisbane CBD maybe - but the LGAs border each other. I think the statement should be along the lines of "Ipswich is a sattalite city of Brisbane, located 40Km from the CBD" etc. Yes it is its own city but it is widely considered part of the Brisbane metro area - like Paramatta is in Sydney. There is no gap in suburbs between the two. 124.181.135.6 (talk) 03:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Given the two cities' respective histories "satellite city" is a misdescription. LowKey (talk) 04:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

History of Ipswich Section
There is misinformation in the history section regarding Queensland Rail.

It even has a reference! "Ipswich was an important river port for the Darling Downs in the 1840s and a regular steamer service from Moreton Bay was established in 1846. This service remained until the railway was extended from Brisbane in 1876 to take out the enormous coal deposits in the region."

Queensland Rail actually began in Ipswich extending west to Grandchester, with the intention of moving Darling Downs products into Ipswich, which were then transported to Brisbane via the Bremer and Brisbane rivers' steamers.

There's a lot more to it of course, and I think there should be a page especially for the Ipswich Railway Workshops, which I haven't found, yet, on WP.

I've only just joined, so I will do my best to correct this according to requirements, and advice is welcome...

Soozlepip (talk) 01:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I've re-written a couple of sentences in the history section, but as I haven't read '"Chisholm, Alec H.". The Australian Encyclopaedia. 5. Sydney: Halstead Press. 1963. pp. 100. Ipswich.', I'm not exactly sure what the reference was to; coal or the railway line.

Perhaps whoever put the ref in could put it back if it still applies?

Sorry.

New at this.

I've made a lot of little edits...

Soozlepip (talk) 23:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Oldest "provincial city" in Queensland
What exactly is meant by this uncited phrase/claim ? The oldest regional city ? Inland city ? (Brisbane would be the first of this). I think second oldest city might be more appropriate. --Biatch (talk) 01:55, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Largest Toxic Dump
How can a toxic dump be the largest in the Southern Hemisphere, but only the second largest in Australia? --Marathone (talk) 11:30, 24 Aug 2012 (UTC)
 * It can't. I already removed that before seeing this question, but note that the question has gone unanswered for a couple of months. LowKey (talk) 14:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

2011 Flood is Absent?
Firing up the machine for an addition. I have noticed that in the History section the most recent major flood event is listed as the 1974 Brisbane Flood but an appeal hosted by Ipswich in England to raise money for flood assistance in Ipswich Qld is linked in External Links. Clearly this is 2 years out of date. Before I just go ahead and shove something into the article to at least mention the event and provide a link - have I missed something? Am I just suffering Domestic Blindness or is there really no mention of the 2011 Flood in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZWM (talk • contribs) 22:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)


 * No, go ahead, it seems a serious omission. Kerry (talk) 23:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Reminder
I want to remind editors of this article that it is not here to promote the city. A promotional tone has crept in and the addition of trivia muddies the important facts. We only want the facts that will matter in the decades to come written in neutral prose with citations. - Shiftchange (talk) 07:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 19:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Map
Nice map. Not. Sadsaque (talk) 01:50, 11 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Great contribution. Not. Doctorhawkes (talk) 02:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ipswich, Queensland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706105041/http://www.ipswich150.com.au/proud_past/ to http://www.ipswich150.com.au/proud_past
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518194944/http://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/about_council/council_history/index.php to http://www.ipswich.qld.gov.au/about_council/council_history/index.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090929210335/http://www.history.qr.com.au/stories/ to http://www.history.qr.com.au/stories/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Ipswich vs City of Ipswich
Some of the content in this article seems to be confusing Ipswich (the urban area) which is the subject of this article with City of Ipswich (the local government area). This shows up in things like census data. I suggest that Ipswich Inner (SA3) is the best census data to use, not SA4 which is massively larger and doesn't really correspond to any article in Wikipedia. Kerry (talk) 08:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Content dispute regarding city status
A number of recent edits by TravelerFromEuropeanUnion have added maintenance tags or amended the lead paragraph of this article, indicating that the claim that Ipswich (the urban area) cannot be described as a city. These edits appear to arise from similar confusion to that described by Kerry above. I have attempted to clarify on the editor's talk page after reverting the first series of edits which contradicted the article's hat note and made the subject of the article ambiguous, while StellaAquila removed the inappropriate tags. I encouraged them to discuss their concerns here prior to making further changes, but they feel doing so will result in a conversation that is biased towards an "Australian point of view" and that the claim Ipswich is a distinct regional city is WP:OR and lacks WP:NPOV. They have again placed verification tags on claims that are supported by in-line references as well as the Queensland Place Names register. In my opinion, this borders on disruptive editing. However, assuming good faith, I am aware there may be a language barrier and that the definitions of what is a "city" in Australia may be quite different from Europe. I have once again removed these tags and cleaned up the lead, but I would welcome further discussion to reach a clear consensus on this issue. Dfadden (talk) 11:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for beginning this discussion, Dfadden. TravelerFromEuropeanUnion and I have been engaged in similar disputes on a number of other pages, including City of Ipswich (where I also started a discussion on the talk page), Scenic Rim Region, Somerset Region, and Lockyer Valley Region. I edited those pages simply to improve the wording of the lead sections (which did not conform to the grammatical standards of Australian English), to add citations, and to fix what I believed to be misleading information, such as those LGAs being part of Brisbane, rather than Greater Brisbane (which is considered a metropolitan area/region by a number of official sources). As I stated on the City of Ipswich talk page, I am happy to hear alternative views, and especially from the user in question. However, I do not believe that my edits contravened WP:OR or WP:NPOV. I undid the reversions to the aforementioned pages once, but have refrained from doing so again for fear of starting an edit war. StellaAquila (talk) 11:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Clarification (due to poor wording on my part): I do not believe that the Scenic Rim, Somerset or Lockyer Valley regions should be considered as being part of Brisbane OR Greater Brisbane. Perhaps it could be specified that these regions lie just outside of the Greater Brisbane region, or that they simply form part of the larger South East Queensland region, which I believe was originally the case. StellaAquila (talk) 11:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is the place to establish consensus on this article. I agree that Scenic Rim, Somerset, and Lockyer Valley are not part of Brisbane, and share the concerns raised about TFEU's edits mentioned. The Queensland Government has the authority to name places in Queensland and the Queensland Place Names database is where they document their place names, so it is a reliable source. However, one problem we have with the QPN is that it is a regularly updated website and does not always retain its history. As part of the Australia-wide move away from using towns for addressing (which are defined by their centrepoint but not precisely bounded) to suburb/localities which are precisely bounded, the QPN replaced the feature types of "city", "town", "township" etc with the more generic "population centre". Historically, when a town reached a certain population (and perhaps other criteria), it obtained city status. And Ipswich was Queensland's second city (see which is a reliable source, a project of the University of Queensland funded by the Queensland Government. I found the proclamation of Ipswich obtaining city status in December 1904 (see ). We no longer give city status to towns, so the places in Queensland that are referred to as cities are generally those which obtained that status in earlier times. I don't think it is unreasonable to describe such places as cities in Wikipedia, but of course we should make an effort to cite that status. Generally we know which towns achieved city status because it is reflected in their municipality name, some of which are retained as current local government names, e.g. City of Ipswich, City of Gold Coast, while some of the other cities when amalgamated in 2008 lost the word City in their LGA name, e.g. City of Toowoomba is now within the larger Toowoomba Region but Toowoomba itself is still a city. The list of the places which had city status but it's no longer reflected in their LGA name can be seen in Template:Queensland former LGAs in the first group labelled "Cities", e.g. Bundaberg, etc. Kerry (talk) 23:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)