Talk:Melbourne Voyage Tips and guide

Archived discussions Talk:Melbourne/Archive 1 Talk:Melbourne/Archive 2005-2012

Contents

Melbourne is most certainly a huge city, so I will attempt to divide the city into proper districts, moving information to its respective district. There appears to have been some kind of effort already, but it could be improved on. The following is what I propose:

• Central
• Parkville/Carlton
• St Kilda
• South Yarra/Prahran/Toorak
• Inner east (Fitzroy, Richmond, Collingwood, etc)
• South Melbourne (Albert Park, etc)
• Flemington (Ascot Vale, Kensington, etc)

Then, we move onto the suburbs:

• East (Kew, Doncaster, Box Hill, Ringwood, etc)
• North (Brunswick, Preston, Coburg, Tullamarine, etc)
• West (Williamstown, Yarraville, Sunshine, Werribee, Melton, etc)
• South-east (Brighton, Chadstone, Narre Warren, Cranbourne, Frankston, etc)

It is possible we could include these 2 districts within Melbourne:

• Mornington Peninsula (anything south of Frankston)
• The Dandenongs (anything east of Rowville)

So, it's only off the top of my head, but it's a basis. Any thoughts? If no one has anything to say, I might just plunge forward and do it myself. (WT-en) JamesA ^>talk 05:18, 13 May 2012 (EDT)

I'd put a notice on the page saying districting is in progress, and give it a couple of weeks, as some people may not visit that regularly. After than, I'd say go ahead. --(WT-en) Inas 20:49, 13 May 2012 (EDT)

Thanks for the tip. I've added the notice, and we'll see if anyone else wishes to contribute. My mapmaking skills are a disaster, so hopefully someone knows how to make a decent map around here. (WT-en) JamesA ^>talk 04:18, 14 May 2012 (EDT)

• Looks good JamesA - my suggestions are:
  • don't make the Mornington a subset of Melbourne. It should be a subdistrict of Victoria as it is a destination in its own right. The Dandenongs are arguable either way, so I'm not fussed.
  • I question whether Flemington needs its own article.
  • Does South Bank need its own article, separate to the city? It has enough destinations in its own right and is distinguishable even from "South Melbourne"
  • "Parkville/Carlton" might be better named "Inner North". (WT-en) JRG 09:13, 12 June 2012 (EDT)

Thanks for the comments, JRG. Great to have some feedback! I'd agree with Flemington not requiring its own article, but where does it belong? West Suburbs, North Suburbs, Inner north, Central? And Inner North is a much better name, and then we can chuck in North Melbourne. The Toorak area also needs its own name. I'm tempted to say "Wealthy inner suburbs", but that would be biased. :P Possibly "Stonnington", and expand it to include Malvern?

I was a little unsure of the Mornington Peninsula. Official sources say that coastal region down from Frankston to Portsea is part of the metropolitan area. But I wouldn't include places on the other side like Flinders and Hastings in Melbourne. A region of Victoria would probably be best.

As for Southbank, I feel that putting it on its own may not get it enough info. I know locally, it's regarded as a world of its own. But going by the Melbourne/Central article, there's not too much to say about Southbank. I guess if we listed many of the restaurants on the waterfront, got some shops from Crown and added attractions like the river tours and Eureka Skydeck, it could all add up. I'm happy to let it have its own district, and if it doesn't work, it can be merged later.

One last thing: should the large Suburbs articles be further divided into suburbs/councils? Eastern Suburbs is going to add up to be one huge article that isn't much use to the traveller, when it's talking about places that are dozens of kilometres apart. I think dividing them into their councils and moving articles like Melbourne/Werribee to Melbourne/Wyndham (including other places like the RAAF base at Point Cook) would work better. Okay, that's all I have to say. :) (WT-en) JamesA ^>talk 09:57, 12 June 2012 (EDT)

• Hi everyone. I'm a Melburnian and I'm pretty used to the districts. Whilst I do agree with splitting up the districts, I do have to say that splitting them up so much will confuse tourists. Isn't this just a tourist guide? We should just show some inner city suburbs and a couple of highlights. Maybe change up a couple of places and move around a couple of things. But by keeping it central, you are showcasing the city's highlights and making sure people don't have to move around far to see all the cities highlights. Brisbane doesn't have districts. It doesn't require them. However, if you people say that Melbourne requires districts then maybe we should keep it to about 3 or 4. That way tourists don't have to hunt around so often to find the places they are looking for. Most people coming to Melbourne are just interested in our highlights. If you want to split up the districts so much, then go back to Wikipedia. At Wikivoyage it is better to just show the cities highlights. You people may have experience. But what point are you trying to show that so many districts is the way to go? Geez!Springyboy (talk) 08:58, 18 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Agreed on fewer districts is better... but what are the major changes between this proposed split and the existing one? I'm not seeing a huge difference. Also, without a map defining the boundaries, any set of districts (including the current one) will be kind of useless. Jpatokal (talk) 08:11, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the comments. I understand that international visitors to Melbourne rarely spend more than a few days, and only want to see the highlights. But Melbourne is geographically a huge city, and even when just considering the inner city, there are so many districts that are culturally unique and separate from each other. If we want to just mention the highlights, then that is what the "See" section is for on this Melbourne article. It should mention the most popular attractions for itinerary ideas, and the districts should have listings with contact info.

We also need to remember that a lot of Melbournians themselves may use this guide, when discovering things to do in the city. That's why I've created articles for the respective quarters of suburbs, which cover huge areas with many attractions, shops and eateries.

If you want to see what a large number of districts looks like, take a look at London or even the old districts format for Melbourne. There were 14 districts in the inner city, along with numerous articles for random suburbs strewn across the city. I've halved this into 7 districts. We can further reduce it to 5 by merging City Centre and Southbank, and possible St Kilda and South Melbourne, although I don't think that is necessary. By the way, Jpatokal, I've already implemented the districts as listed above so there are no further changes, unless you guys think there should be. I have a rough sketch of the map borders if you'd like the general idea. JamesA ^>talk 10:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I am not affiliated with Lentil as Anything, but I think this is a great addition to the food section of Melbourne.

"Lentil as Anything is a unique not for profit community organisation. At our core are the pay as you feel restaurants where customers give what they feel the food is worth and have the opportunity to contribute towards a world where respect, generosity, trust, equality, freedom and kindness rule."

So basically there are three restaurants in the Abbotsford Convent, Footscray and St Kilda where the food has no price, so you pay how much you want or can. The foods they make are wordly (Italian, Indian, Morccan, etc.) and are vegetarian, with vegan, gluten-free, and dairy-free also available. The one in the Abbotsford Convent is the most popular one. Buffet dining, great atmosphere.

Here is their website for reference: http://lentilasanything.com/

I'd edit the page myself, but I rather have someone with English as their mother tongue for proper grammar to edit it.

Your English looks fine. You should do the edit yourself. Someone else can always edit your English if there's any improvement to be made. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello. As a Melbournian myself, I've also heard of Lentil as Anything and know it's a fantastic cause. I'm in the (slow) progress of updating all of the Melbourne district pages, so will get around to adding some good, well-known restaurants eventually. As it's in Abbotsford Convent, you should add the listing at Melbourne/Inner_east#Eat, maybe under a new header Abbotsford. I will get around to sorting that page out eventually, and will make sure Lentil as Anything is kept. All the best! JamesA ^>talk 07:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

It is unclear to me from the talk page whether districts have been finalized or not. There are a lot of listing that need moving down to district level, so we should conclude this.

It would be good to hear from User:JamesA, although he has been dormant for a couple of months now. Andrewssi2 (talk) 04:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'd like to know it too. Melbourne is one of those cities with districts but without a district map. James who is a local and is a member of the map making expedition perhaps would like to make the map as well. ϒpsilon (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it seems strange that Melbourne has had very little attention. I have lived there for a year, so I will plunge forward. Still happy for User:JamesA to jump in.

Just to be clear, I will assume the latest district discussion as final. Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Apologies for being quite inactive as of late; unfortunately I cannot put as much time into the wiki as I used to, though I am certainly not retiring and may take up editing again at some point. Just to clarify, Andrewssi2 and ϒpsilon, yes, the districts have mostly been finalised. I did start planning a map but never got around to it. What I have on my computer is an early design plot which I used to plan the current districts layout. Here is the (hastily drawn) map: [1]. Of course it is not perfect, but I used it to plan the inner districts. The suburbs I've not planned, but they're mostly unimportant, as there's little in the way of attractions that you'd bother visiting. In the final districts map, I'd highly recommend showing major streets with the district colours overlayed, so it is clear where the districts start and end. I'd also be happy to give a local's feedback on any map that is designed. Just send me an email so I can check it out here. James A ▪ talk 02:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I have just merged and redirected Brunswick (Victoria) to Melbourne/Brunswick as suggested, but this appears to need further merging with Melbourne/Inner north. Texugo (talk) 14:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Brunswick is a bit out of the city, so would actually be more appropriate in Melbourne/Northern as one of the northern suburbs, north of Brunswick Rd. I'm still unsure what to do about suburbs like these, though, as an article mixing areas as diverse as Brunswick, Broadmeadows, Preston, Moonee Ponds, Hurstbridge and the airport is not going to be helpful at all (some of these places are more than an hour apart by car). Would be interested to hear others' opinions of what they've done with other huge cities ringed by suburbs. James A ▪ talk 12:43, 18 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

@JamesA: Can you or someone else either update or remove the merge tag on Melbourne/Moreland? That article was tagged for merging more than two years ago, I performed the merge in April 2015, and the merge was reverted in August 2015. I have no insight into where or whether the article should be merged, but tagging an article for more than two years is excessive, so if it shouldn't be merged or it isn't clear where to merge it to the tag should be removed or replaced with {{districts discussion}}, otherwise I think the merge should be restored even if the redirect isn't perfect. -- Ryan • (talk) • 15:51, 19 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ryan, thanks, Melbourne/Moreland is the new location of all info about Brunswick and surrounding areas. It would've done the area and travellers a great disservice by merging it into a huge region covering the northern suburbs, and didn't quite fit into the inner north. I've removed the merge tag. James A ▪ talk 01:11, 20 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

In the Hebrew Wikivoyage we are currently using this banner instead of the one which is currently used here. Do you think too that this banner would would better than the existing one? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 02:48, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

The old one is striking and interesting, while the proposed new one is just yet another zoomed out cityscape that could be most anywhere. Texugo (talk) 02:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I am much less sure. I think that skyline is itself interesting, and some of those buildings definitely are not anywhere else. To me, they're both good banners, but as I said in Talk:Bhutan, they're so different from each other that I have trouble deciding why and on what basis to pick one over the other. And if I'm not sure, I guess that means I don't think any change is necessary. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:54, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Flinders street station is an iconic part of Melbourne. The proposed cityscape just shows a big city that could be anywhere. I would not change. Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:36, 5 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I also prefer the old banner. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 20:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Do the recent changes to the ownership of the Astor Theatre and it's potential redevelopment need to be taken into account when recommending it as a "thing to do"? Ausjackal (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

After many years of sitting there idly, I've decided to remove Template:Districts discussion and can happily say that the district formatting is complete. I'd just like to explain the new format here so everyone understands where certain listings and suburbs should go:

For Central Melbourne:

• Melbourne/City Centre - the CBD, Docklands, East Melbourne, Southbank (as far north as Victoria St/Pde, east to Hoddle St, south to Citylink but down to Domain Interchange, including Botanic Gardens)
• Melbourne/St Kilda - St Kilda and surrounds, including Elwood
• Melbourne/Inner south - Port Melbourne, Albert park, South Melbourne, Fishermans Bend, etc
• Melbourne/Inner north - Carlton, Parkville, North Melbourne (not including Brunswick however, border described in the guide)
• Melbourne/Inner east - Fitzroy, Richmond, Collingwood, Abbotsford, Clifton Hill (pretty much all of the City of Yarra east of Carlton and the CBD, far north as Brunswick Rd/Yarra River, but excluding East Melbourne/MCG area)
• Melbourne/Stonnington - everything in the City of Stonnington boundaries

For Greater Melbourne, I've decided to do something different. Taking a leaf from Sydney's book, four major regions will be listed on the Melbourne page, those being the Eastern, Northern, Southern and Western suburbs as current. However, these pages won't have guides, and in the brackets the local government areas will be listed, each of which will have it's on guide that describes all of the listings in that area. For example, Melbourne/Boroondara will describe everything in the City of Boroondara, including Kew, Hawthorn, Camberwell, Balwyn, etc. Werribee won't get its own guide, but Melbourne/Wyndham will. These guides will ensure coverage and completeness, but will probably be more aimed at local tourists rather than international visitors. Creating pages for Melbourne/Eastern just adds complexity and these pages will remain largely empty.

I will try and work on a regions map in the near future to clarify these new districts. Regards, James A ▪ talk 07:45, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi JamesA, thanks for putting time into cleaning up Melbourne. It must be a lot of work and thanks for all the new articles.

However, I have some concerns about the article hierarchy under Melbourne. On the one hand, a lot of the articles concerning suburbs of Melbourne that does not seem to be inside Melbourne proper (judging from the writing, you are the expert here) have the template {{IsPartOf|Melbourne}} , and are named as "Melbourne/[Name of place]". But a lot of them do not have the {{outlinedistrict}} template. According to Wikivoyage naming conventions, having the hierarchy in the name a la "Melbourne/[Name]" is typically reserved for Districts: Wikivoyage:Naming_conventions#Districts . I have some scripts that analyze names and types of articles, and as far as I can tell, the Melbourne article hierarchy is unique in this regard. I wonder if you could bring these into alignment with other article hierarchies?

As I see it, there are two ways to fix this:

1. Mark all the articles with the name "Melbourne/[Name]" as district articles, much like how Sydney and greater Sydney is done. I was tempted to go ahead and change all those Melbourne sub-articles, and have actually done a few. As I went about doing that, I realize this is more structural than a few mis-labeled articles. Hence this talk topic. Since I have no knowledge whether it is accurate to call all those cities and regions "districts" of Melbourne, I do not want to continue my changes, and would rather defer to you to make decisions.
2. Change some articles with the name "Melbourne/[Name]" to simply "[Name]", when those articles actually describe cities or regions that are outside of Melbourne proper. Then, you can mark them as {{outlinecity}} or {{outlineregion}} as appropriate, changing "outline" to whatever status they should be. Those articles can in turn be part of Victoria (state), or a new article describing the greater Melbourne metropolitan area or whatever the locals call it. A prime example is Chicagoland, which describes the vast area that people colloquially calls "Chicago" that includes a lot of towns and cities are not inside Chicago proper. This will likely be more involved, but it will give you more flexibility on applying the article types "region" and "city" to places outside Melbourne proper, not having to call them "districts" of Melbourne.

Thanks for your help. Best, Wiki9gel (talk) 17:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Can you point to those articles that do not belong in Melbourne proper?

I do see a lot of red links in the outer suburbs however, and given that those areas will have relatively little to see can I suggest merging them into larger areas where appropriate? Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi guys. Thank you both for the feedback; I really appreciate it because discussion has been pretty low in the past! In terms of the varied terms/templates/labels used on the new articles, that probably happened because I moved a lot of the old articles into the new district format and didn't check their templates. To clarify, 'all articles in Category:Melbourne are districts of Melbourne per the new format, apart from Melbourne Airport (for obvious reasons) and Melbourne/Yarraville and Melbourne/Williamstown which need to be merged into Melbourne/Hobsons Bay at some point. So go ahead and continue your changes if you wish. All these suburban municipalities that are undoubtedly part of Melbourne proper, so it'd be inappropriate to create say a Greater Melbourne article with separate hierarchies.

On the second point, there are a few red links after changing the format just a day or two ago, so a few places don't have articles yet. You'd think the outer areas would have little to see, but conversely, it seems they have quite a bit actually and it wouldn't work to merge them. I'd say they all warrant their own articles, apart from maybe Melbourne/Knox, Melbourne/Maroondah, Melbourne/Whittlesea, Melbourne/Kingston and Melbourne/Cardinia where content will exist but may be patchy. Volunteering in the city's tourism centre now, I'm amazed how many people ask for attractions in the suburbs, and merging these areas into huge districts won't do them justice (like I originally had it with Northern suburbs, Southern, etc. After I've tried to fill out the articles, I'll take a second look and see if any could fairly be merged with their neighbours. Thanks again for the help guys. James A ▪ talk 08:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Are you working in the tourist office in Federation square? I guess you should know the subject then :) Andrewssi2 (talk) 09:33, 3 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

That's the one! We have a lot of paper and online material, but also opportunities for professional development which is useful for updating our guides. James A ▪ talk 10:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Great, I go past there a lot (my office is down St Kilda road) so will check it out again sometime. Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Many of areas listed in the Southern suburbs are red linked, and I feel that does then a disservice. Specifically Melbourne/Frankston is a good article, but it is lost a bit between the relinks as well as being also listed as a suburb of Melbourne/Kingston (which is near empty).

Can we just create one article for Southern suburbs? It wouldn't stop someone coming along later and expanding on those districts properly. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

We had one article for Southern suburbs before, and I felt it was doing travellers a great disservice in describing an area which takes about an hour driving from end to end, and merging destinations that are fairly popular in their own right, such as Frankston and Brighton (in Bayside, not Kingston as has been mistakenly done).

Maybe we can have a compromise for Melbourne's suburbs, where major destinations such as Frankston keep their own article, while other smaller places like Kingston are merged elsewhere. I know Melbourne's suburbs/councils quite well, so think the following should fit nicely:

• Eastern suburbs
  • Boroondara
  • Manningham
  • Whitehorse/Monash
  • Knox/Maroondah
• Northern suburbs
  • Nillumbik/Whittlesea
  • Banyule/Darebin
  • Moreland/Hume (unsure about this, Brunswick is pretty significant to deserve own article and shouldn't be grouped with Sunbury)
• Southern suburbs
  • Bayside/Glen Eira
  • Cardinia/Casey
  • Kingston/Greater Dandenong (could possibly be merged into Cardinia/Casey if the article's are still pretty sparse)
  • Frankston
• Western suburbs
  • Maribyrnong/Moonee Valley
  • Brimbank/Melton
  • Hobsons Bay
  • Wyndham

Does that sound more reasonable? James A ▪ talk 09:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Looks good. I'm not as expert as you so naturally I'll defer to your judgment.

Just one question, I feel Brighton ( w:Brighton,_Victoria ) needs to jump out rather than hidden under Bayside. Any ideas on that? Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:05, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Completely agree. Maybe instead of naming it something generic like Bayside, we can name the article Melbourne/Brighton and Caulfield or something like that? I'd name it just Melbourne/Brighton, but that ignores the rest of the area and isn't particularly accurate. James A ▪ talk 11:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sure, Melbourne/Brighton and Caulfield sounds good! Andrewssi2 (talk) 22:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I don't know anything about Melbourne, so please say so if I am wrong, but given the rather large amount of "districts" listed under (cardinal direction) suburbs and the huge amount of outline districts that are part of Melbourne, maybe the districts should be reorganized or reduced in number? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I would say the 'Inner Melbourne' section is pretty good. The 'Greater Melbourne' section does seem a bit unwieldy, although the nature of a large sprawling city is that you will have a lot of sparse residential suburbs. My feeling is that they are better in this format than another 'sub dividing' region level below. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 20:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

We've discussed this extensively above. The fact is, Australian cities are understood differently from cities in say North America or Europe, where the surrounding suburbs are higher in the hierarchy. In this case, a place is either in Melbourne or it's not in Melbourne: there's no real middle ground. I think it does travellers a great disservice by merging far-flung and completely different areas which have no relevance to each other apart from cardinal direction. If people really think there are too many districts, sure, they can be further merged. There's scope to merge Cranbourne/Pakenham with Dandenong, Nillumbik with Manningham, and possibly some others. But having guides such as Melbourne/West, Melbourne/East, etc would be completely useless to anyone.

Comparatively Chicago has 35 districts (excluding the greater metropolitan area of Chicagoland, which Melbourne does include), Paris has 21 districts (excluding les banlieues/suburbs) and Sydney has over 30. Melbourne has 20 now and will reach a maximum of 22 when the last 2 redlinked districts are created. Thanks for the input, guys! James A ▪ talk 02:19, 25 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Two years on and there are still a bunch of districts ranked at outline. Is there just nothing in those districts or has it just not been listed? Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I agree that some of the districts should be consolidated. It has been a long time since I've been in Melbourne though, so I don't really know how it should be done. There are some single outer suburbs with articles in their own right, and they don't do a good job at explaining why it is a destination in its own right (they seem to be average residential areas). To be frank, it looks like Chicago has too many districts too and Sydney, to a small extent. If there was any city that needed over 20 districts it would be Paris, having a much larger population and being the one of the most visited cities in the world. Gizza ^(roam) 00:48, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

For a start can reflect the district list and map on the city page, single page for Western suburbs - Footscray, Flemington and surrounds, Sunshine and Melton, Hobsons Bay, Wyndham. Includes areas like Altona, Williamstown, Point Cook, Footscray in Maribyrnong, Werribee in Wyndham, Ascot Vale, Moonee Ponds, Caroline Springs, Sunshine, Melton, Keilor and Sydenham.--Traveler100 (talk) 23:17, 1 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ascot Vale and Moonee Ponds should definitely be merged together. They are adjacent single suburbs, a 5 minute drive or 1.8 km (1.1 miles) from each other. Even the Melbourne tourism website views Ascot Vale as part of the greater Moonee Ponds area [2]. Note that Sydney is a larger city than Melbourne by metropolitan area, population and tourist numbers [3]] so it's reasonable to expect Sydney to have more district articles overall. Gizza ^(roam) 00:50, 2 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Hi,

I have built a website which is useful for Melbournians that is also extremely useful for travellers.

The site is http://www.burgersofmelbourne.com.au - it is a blog that showcases all of Melbourne's best burgers and would be a great resource for those looking to eat this type of food. It displays a live list of top rated burgers as well as a list of top milkshakes and gluten free options.

I tried to included the to do section on https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Melbourne and it told me the link was spam.

Internally in the CBD page, I did see 2 burger joints displayed which is why I thought it would be a good idea to contribute to the whole state page.

Are you able to help?

I also tried to include a listing into the St Kilda area, which is La Roche - a well known restaurant for travellers which has great deals each day of the week, it kept saving but no confirmation which makes me believe it hasn;t been submitted.

I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

BL —The preceding comment was added by Lozpinch (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your post. Please look at external links#what not to link to. We don't link to blogs or other travel guides, unless sometimes when they're official (such as being produced by the local Board of Tourism). If you'd like to contribute to this guide, the way you can do that is by sharing information here, not by linking to your blog, however good it may be. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

There are many districts around Melbourne that could be moved into their related parts of the city (Western Suburbs, Eastern Suburbs, etc.) without us having to change the map. Since at least some of these are outlines it seems only sensible to merge them. Therefore, if I don't get any response about this within a few days, I will plunge forward and do this, since it would then fit the map and really doesn't seem to have any downsides. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 21:46, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Actually, I won't. It's too much work to do that. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have created Melbourne/Western Suburbs by merging a number of suburbs. Needs a little bit of work to restructure as have just copied over content. I think this is a good sized article and removes a number of almost empty articles. Have not yet redirected the original pages would welcome feedback before making this move. --Traveler100 (talk) 14:26, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

By the way, there’s a static map in the Melbourne article that is a good guide for how to divide the districts. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 14:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Ascot Vale, Moonee Ponds are listed under both Northern suburbs and Western suburbs, which should they be in?

I'm no Melbourne resident, but a quick Google Maps search puts them both in the northern side of the city and the western part. They're west of Melbourne Zoo but east of the Maribyrnong River. But looking at the static map and how far north they are compared to how far west of downtown they are, I think they belong in the North, barely. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 16:56, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Should I redirect some of the districts to Melbourne/Western suburbs where you've already merged but not redirected? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:17, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I was going to wait a little but you can if you think the new merge is good. But note need to move the entries for Ascot Vale and Moonee Ponds from Western suburbs to Northern suburbs. And redirect suggestion fixed. Need to create Northern suburbs first though. --Traveler100 (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Okay. I've created Melbourne/Southern suburbs and I'm working on a merge there from those districts. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:31, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Well, if you've already merged Ascot Vale and Moonee Ponds to Western suburbs, we might as well leave them there. Moving all those listings would be a lot of work that's not necessary. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:44, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘So I've now done Melbourne/Southern suburbs, it just needs organization and formatting. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 18:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have started Melbourne/Eastern suburbs, but going off line for a few hours, so if anyone else want to complete it before I get back feel free. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I made a dynamic map. Currently lacking the inner districts, which do not conform to government/Wikidata boundaries so I don't know how to do them. Ar2332 (talk) 20:18, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Moved here as does not match current district map --Traveler100 (talk) 20:51, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

On Talk:Melbourne is a dynamic district map I have been working on for the city. The outer districts are shown on the map, since they correspond to official government districts (present in OpenStreetMap). However, the inner WV districts do not correspond to official districts - they have custom shapes, as shown on each of the district pages. Is there a way of adding these districts to the dynamic map, short of adding them to OSM as a special category of boundary? (Which OSM might not appreciate) Ar2332 (talk) 20:56, 13 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Check e.g. Madrid. Basically you can create the inner map using geojson-commons map, and use wikidata for the rest....Wikivoyage:How_to_use_dynamic_maps -- andree.sk(talk) 04:57, 14 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Myki Card.JPG

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

The lines for Melbourne/Stonnington look to me to be drawn in the wrong place, apparently with the intent of including Chadstone under Stonnington, despite the fact it's much further out and lacks cultural or transit links with the region. Should this be modified? Vaticidalprophet (talk) 19:12, 22 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

interesting photos Pashley (talk) 15:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)Reply