Jump to content

Talk:Joondalup

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page appears to be an advertisement for Joondalup.

Changed it and removed NPOV label.--Evgeni Sergeev 10:57, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

ABS Data

[edit]

Can we use ABS data at Wikipedia without getting a permission. If not, please delete the statistics. Note, the information was retained, but the expression was changed. --Evgeni Sergeev 10:57, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Their copyright page says that people can use their data for personal and non-commercial use, as long as they are acknowledges as the source. ABS Copyright

Going by this I think we should be safe, but I'm going to send them an email just in case as their data is used for quite a lot of the Australian suburb/town articles on here. -- Meesham 14:29, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Split

[edit]

I decided to split Joondalup as an entity and a 1980s-1990s development project from Joondalup (suburb), its central suburb. There's probably quite a few anomalies left over but I think the end result will be a good one once both articles are completed. For those who don't know, there's an excellent local history section in the Joondalup library on Boas Avenue. Orderinchaos 14:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually, yes; also Kwinana. I keep meaning to do a series of articles on the development schemes of the 60s-70s as well, but haven't had the time to do the research necessary to complete them. Orderinchaos 09:53, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quick question, do you consider the entire Joondalup LGA (both north and south statistical areas) as part of the Joondalup urban centre? Should the southern suburbs be referenced at all in this article? Outrune (talk) 10:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nope - there's a bit of history to this, but the suburbs south were developed entirely separately. (I really need to have a marathon session at SRO/Battye and Joondalup local history collection sometime and finish all these articles - a lot of this stuff is floating around in my head rather than in print anywhere online...)
  • Warwick + Greenwood + Duncraig were part of the Hamersley Development Scheme which originated with the state government in the late 60s.
  • Sorrento + Marmion already existed as coastal communities and simply grew naturally. There was an attempt to have a Marmion Development Scheme (with skyscrapers about where the McDonalds on Marmion/Burragah now stands!) but it languished for years then got dropped because Hamersley and Whitford had diminished its usefulness.
  • Hillarys + Padbury + Craigie + Kallaroo were part of the Whitford Development Scheme from the early 70s (1971 I think?)
  • Mullaloo + Beldon + southern Ocean Reef + part of Heathridge were part of the Mullaloo Development Scheme from around 1973-74, although coastal Mullaloo already existed in some form. (There's some fun history in the naming of Beldon, I think I put it in the article but can't remember)
  • A Joondalup master plan was put into place at some point (State Government? council? not sure) but was very slow to develop. (I'd love to try and find this - it's probably either at Battye or SRO.) Kinross was not originally part of this plan, it was developed separately, as were the new parts of Burns Beach much later on.
With a complete lack of legal boundaries anywhere (other than the metro boundaries more broadly which can actually be found in legislation) the ABS Joondalup northern area seems a good approximation - all of the areas within it are connected to Joondalup by public transport and road, and it's increasingly becoming the primary shopping hub of the region as well. And it's not WP:OR to use (which is the problem with any other definition) :) Orderinchaos 11:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Great post, thanks. I look forward to reading your articles about these. Outrune (talk) 05:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joondalup. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:21, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I've changed the Wikidata sitelink for this article from Joondalup (Q605318) (the "city" which is not the same as the LGA) to Joondalup (Q6276044) (the suburb) because it seems from the language used in the article that it really is about the suburb. Actually, I'm a bit confused about the difference between the "city" and the suburb — the former is I guess the general idea of Joondalup, and probably extends beyond the boundaries of the suburb and maybe also doesn't include all of the suburb. I'm not really sure how to resolve that (and other similar LGA-cities like Fremantle), but as the intro sentence says that "Joondalup is a suburb of Perth", I think it's reasonably clear. Sam Wilson 12:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. It's another one of these cases where we've got an article on a place that has a specific locality or localities but also has a broader conglomeration that doesn't necessarily align with those boundaries. Usually, it winds up with the article covering the conglomeration, and a separate article for the individual locality; here, it might not be needed because the boundaries of the "city" (rather than the LGA) beyond the gazetted suburb boundaries are vague. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:44, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joondalup&oldid=1198565767"