Talk:Kings Cross, New South Wales

Similar page

There is also a page Kings Cross, Sydney, Australia Thortful 02:59, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Juanita Nielsen

Shouldn't this article have something about the disappearance of Juanita Nielsen, and the Victoria Street development in this area that was (allegedly) connected to it? It seems like a major incident in the history of this suburb. I would add something but I know nothing about the subject, I only heard of it a few minutes ago. --Vclaw 12:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Paul Kelly song

Paul Kelly had a song written about this town and its corruption in the late 1960's with crime, vice and corruption with the police and also in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidelias16 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Current Pictures

I think this article should have a picture of it today, the artcile states it has neon signs, so maybe post a picture of one of them. If anyone cares to show me how to post a picture (because I still don't know), that would be great, Thanks! Jackp 11:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Why the move?

Why was the page moved to "Kings Cross Sydney" from Kings Cross, New South Wales? Nomadtales 05:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

We run a not-for-profit information web site for this area and know that the most common search is for Kings Cross Sydney (Movieguy46 09:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

I'd keep it as "Kings Cross, New South Wales". "Kings Cross Sydney" is ambiguous in that "Kings Cross" (postcode 2011) and "Sydney" (postcode 2000) are technically suburbs, so one cannot be in the other. Sydney is also ambiguous in that it can refer to a city or suburb or metropolis. NSW is unambiguous. Finally there is the issue that Sydney the metropolis does not have a formal boundary. Do we have "Sydney, Sydney", "Kings Cross, Sydney", "Leichhardt, Sydney", "Parramatta, Sydney", "Blacktown, Sydney", "Penrith, Sydney", "Glenbrook, Sydney", "Katoomba, Sydney", "Lithgow, Sydney", "Broken Hill, Sydney"? My point being where do we stop. If there is a concern that "Kings Cross Sydney" might be a more popular search (debatable and a poor reason for a move), why not fix it with a redirect from "Kings Cross Sydney" to "Kings Cross, New South Wales". In my opinion the article should be retuned to "Kings Cross, New South Wales". John Dalton 11:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll correct myself based on further investigation. Kings Cross isn't a formal suburb, though it does have a PO box postcode (1340). I still think that "Kings Cross, New South Wales" more consistent. For example the article for the locality of Thompsons Corner is at Thompsons_Corner,_New_South_Wales. I've moved it back on the basis that the original move was done without consultation, allowing a consensus to be reached. For the record my feelings are that it should stay as "Kings Cross, New South Wales", but the consensus should rule. John Dalton 12:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The article has been reverted to "Kings Cross, New South Wales", as per the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sydney#Name dispute resolution, there is already a naming convention to adher to, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)#Australia. Nomadtales 02:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

El Alamein Fountain

We need some info on this icon. JackofOz 01:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Better late than never! Readin' Writin' (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Landmarks

Besides the Coca-Cola sign, which I'll start next, any suggestions for other Kings Cross landmarks?Readin' Writin' (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Butler's staircase? JcwDenno (talk) 16:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Clare Werbeloff

I believe that she is non-notable. I also don't believe she should be mentioned in this article. As a separate note, she really doesn't need any more fame. Mastercampbell (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Shes notable and even starred in Ralph Magazine. https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wa/chk-chk-boom-chick-clare-werbeloff-strips-for-ralph-ng-ff82a32e67e6598dcc9c5486dc3f9d8c

Probably she needs her own page.95.223.72.62 (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

The Perth Now article you linked to sums her up "Surely the Chk Chk Boom girl has had her 15 minutes of fame" --John B123 (talk) 17:08, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Can we also include the photos of her from the magazine? 95.223.72.62 (talk) 12:31, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

First of all you need to establish her notability. Please comply with WP:BRD, and not just keep adding the content about her back in. --John B123 (talk) 16:48, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

One should not be vandalising wikipedia and removing existing content about the article. Please stop your vandalism of the article. 95.223.72.62 (talk) 06:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

You need to establish notability if you want this content to remain. Both Mastercampbell and myself have expressed our concern that she's not notable. Of the 3 references you give, one is from the IMDb, which is not considered to be a reliable source, another describes her as a " D-list wannabe celebrity" and the third does nothing to establish she is notable. --John B123 (talk) 15:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

You are British and not Australian, so you dont have any idea what is notable in Australia. 95.223.72.62 (talk) 19:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Which is exactly why you need to establish notability by reliable sources. --John B123 (talk) 19:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

If you were Australian you would know that she is notable for a kings cross article. Have you ever been to Australia? 95.223.75.47 (talk) 13:54, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Someone in Germany telling us she is notable in Australia isn't the way it works. Unless you can substantiate your claim of her notability the content needs removing. --John B123 (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

How about you let the Australians decide about it, rather than a british person like yourself who has never been to australia, and doesnt know anything about the country? 178.203.224.231 (talk) 10:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

How about demonstrating notability with reliable sources as previously requested. --John B123 (talk) 10:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

There are a number of articles referenced. I've changed my tune on this. I think she's sufficiently notable to have a dotpoint in the Culture section, she's more well known than Justine Ettler, for instance. --Mastercampbell (talk) 09:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

King's Cross, Sydney?

Is King's Cross not considered a part of Sydney? To list it as NSW seems similar to listing ‘Manhattan Beach, California’ separate to Los Angeles even though it is considered a 'city' in its own right (even with a pop of 30,000). Sydney is a massive alpha city, surely King's Cross comes under the banner of Sydney.Zarcadia (talk) 12:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Early Subdivision Plans

I propose adding “Early Subdivision Plans” as a subheading in the History section of this article and including a gallery of images. Subdivision plans are maps that document the history and development of Sydney suburbs and fit well in the History section of such articles. Odysseus voyage14 (talk) 06:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

No, they really don't - big galleries are generally discouraged and this is especially so when they don't illustrate or complement the information in the article in any significant way. It makes absolute sense to have them in a folder on Wikimedia Commons so they're easily accessible for interested people, but they don't belong in the encyclopedia article itself. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Strongly disagree - if they are accompanied by text they work. If they are a gallery, there I agree, however that is one thing - otherwise if there is text with them about the context, and also includes items from trove that can elaborate the issues arising from the information provided - they are useful and valuable and do not need to be subjugated to commons. JarrahTree 07:08, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

But the proposal is to put them in a gallery, not accompany them with text about a subdivision, and there would need to be many paragraphs of related text to fit all the maps they want to add without adding them in a gallery. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:12, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

well we leave it to the proposer - I suggest that if text and good refs are added then there is no problem with the adding, in fact from my living adjacent to the cross in the early to mid 70s, I would be personally fascinated to understanding the underlying historical geography of what is such a small area but so full of history, I would support addition of material as it would provide a good understanding of the place. My regular walking between the cross fountain and taylor square through darlo might even inspire digging out some of the photos of the area from the early 1970s... if it is simply dismissed out of hand, I believe an opportunity for a more broader understanding of the historical geography of the area is lost over a misunderstanding about whether it is to be a gallery or not. Considering the unnecessary extra text that gets loaded into heritsge register main text articles, I believe this would be much more interesting. JarrahTree 10:50, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I understand the point made by The Drover’s Wife in relation to the use of galleries in articles: Big galleries are generally discouraged and this is especially so when they don’t illustrate or complement the information in the article. However, the plans I propose to include do illustrate and complement the information in the article. They identify streets, estates and mansions mentioned in the preceding History subheading “British Settlement”. The comments made by JarrahTree are helpful. Adding a paragraph of text that describes what the images are and their content will provide the necessary context. I will endeavour to do this.

Odysseus voyage14 (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Can you pick one or two that get the point across? These wouldn't be such a problem if you weren't trying to add so many of them, and JarrahTree wasn't big on a gallery either. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

I understand drover's exasperation - maybe in WP:AGF if there were only 4 with developed text rather than just identification text below the images - the context as given in the into can be impervious to a quick look at the article - more text below 4 items might be a better way to go - remove tusculum and basywater road items - and develope text

drover's has already created an article about Tusculum - that material really should go to that article

bayswater subdivision I couldnt find an easy trove ref for that

JarrahTree 11:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)