Talk:R Martin & Co Building

better title?
This is an awful name for the title, I doubt most people know or care that the SEQ Water Board occupied the building at the time of the heritage listing (which I think was the basis for the name). On the other hand, what is a better name, given it seems to have had many occupants over the years. I am not aware of a "common name" for this building. If I had to refer to it, I'd probably say "diagonally opposite the Port Office Hotel, the one with a cafe in the ground floor", which is hardly a title for an article. I could go with the first one "R Martin & Co Building" (since it probably is the earliest name it had and we do have a photo with that name on the building) or just call the article "41 Edward Street, Brisbane"? Kerry (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I was about to come here to say the exact same thing. I could maybe see the point if they still owned the building on current usage, but since they don't seem to, it's a weird name for it - and it's particularly unusual that there's no good alternatives that it seems to be referred by in the listings. (Geedeejay House is mentioned precisely nowhere in the article or on the rest of the internet, so who knows where that came from?) I'd be happy with "R Martin & Co Building" or "41 Edward St, Brisbane". The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 12:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I share your mystification re Geedeejay House. I imagine some organisation with the initials GDJ occupied it or owned it, but no idea who or when. Kerry (talk) 05:08, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Now renamed R Martin & Co Building Kerry (talk) 05:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)