Talk:List of cities in Australia by population
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
List of cities in Australia by population is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. |
| List | This page is a list and does not require a rating on the quality scale. |
| NA | This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale. |
|
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Canberra-Queanbeyan
On the Statistical Division/District list Canberra and Queanbeyan are (correctly) listed together but has no rank. Canberra is also (correctly) listed by itself with a ranking. Queanbeyan should also be listed by itself with a ranking. Ronan.evans 04:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Ronan. Canberra-Queanbeyan together is a statistical district, Canberra just by itself is a statistical division, but there is not a division or a district for Queanbeyan by itself as far as I can tell from the ABS's stats. They only count it as part of the whole conglomeration, so there's no figure for us to use. The note could be better written to state this more clearly. - ҉ Randwicked ҉ 05:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Which Year?
The Sydney figure is from 2004, yet Melbourne's population is close to the 2006 figure.
- Did Sydney's population drop from 1999 to 2004? The official population in 1999 (gathered in preparation for the Olympics) was rated as being just under 5million, and yet in the (apparently) 2004 based amount, the population had dropped. I don't believe that. What is the source of the figure? --lincalinca 04:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Townsville population
Shouldn't the Townsville Statistical Division include Thuringowa? They are seperate Local Government Areas however they are no more two seperate cities than Sydney is ten cities. See dicsussion in Townsville, Queensland. Alec mcc
Thanks for that edit Bongomanrae, however to be fair now that Townsville has been restored to 13th, Thuringowa should be removed from the list as its population is alredy counted, I have done this today, any objections please post here. Alec mcc (8 Oct 06)
[edit] Newcastle photo
newcastle can stay (even though there were no objections). i'm not that fussed. seemed really petty. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Theabsenceofgod (talk • contribs).
- I was simply trying to fill up the space we had there, and thought Australia's biggest non-capital city and 6th largest city would be a good inclusion - (soon enough, the Gold Coast will overtake Newcastle anyway, so you can replace the image when that happens). I'm happy for someone to take a better picture - the best photo of Newcastle is probably taken from Stockton on the other side of the river (you catch the ferry across). I thought that was the best that could be done on that side of Newcastle anyway. JROBBO 03:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thuringowa
Hi Thuringowacityrep, according to the ABS, Townsville and Thuringowa are part of the one Urban Centre (area), unfortunately you can't separate them like that anymore than you can separate Albury-Wodonga. They are a physically contiguous urban area. Please check this document: [1], it is the one used as a reference for the article. You will see Townsville-Thuringowa listed as one entity. They have two Local Government Areas (which is the bottom list on this page), but just on Urban Centre. Thanks! I will correct this. - Aucitypops
hi, like I said before, where I made the changes is correct but at the top of the page I left it like you had because it does say urban area but in the list I changed it needs to show both Townsville and Thuringowa (see this page for Townsville http://www.lgp.qld.gov.au/docs/corporate/publications/planning/demographics/profiles/demographic_and_housing/townsville.pdf and go to this page for Thuringowa http://www.lgp.qld.gov.au/docs/corporate/publications/planning/demographics/profiles/demographic_and_housing/thuringowa.pdf )and you will see that I was correct. im not some idiot that doesn't know the facts, it needs to be how I had it ...also the ref you used is old I will put a new ref link on this page soon. there are 2 urban centres you have the Townsville CBD and Thuringowa CBD, there was a gap a lot of years ago (like Ayr and Brandon) but with growth the two grew to touch they are not 1 city it is 2 cities that look like one due to not having a gap and it is about time people got to know this the Government know. so again I will change it back to the correct facts, please do some extra research before believing what you read in old ref links if you would like more info please ask I have it all here thank you Thuringowacityrep 04:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Thuringowacityrep, those figures you are giving are for the Local government areas, NOT the urban centres! That's why this list is divided into three parts. The figures for urban centre population have to represent those from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, or this list is meaningless!! They are not comparable! Please don't change them, Wikipedia should be about accuracy, why does it misrepresent the source? - Aucitypops
ok what ever ...fine ...again another user caome on here and knows everything by looking at old refs i will leave it like that for know but i will be back with new info and ref's ok .....very good Thuringowacityrep 04:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Redcliffe
Why isn't Redcliffe, Queensland listed?--149.135.46.1 12:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- For the same reason that Ipswich, Logan and the Redlands aren't listed, it's classed as part of Brisbane statistical division. Bongomanrae 02:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Freemantle
What about freemantle?
Looks like Freo is part of the Perth Stats District (On its own it is really small -- so is Perth on its own, LGA level -- that's local government area).
[edit] 2006 figures
Hi, the 2006 Regional population growth figures 3218.0 will be released by the ABS on tuesday 27th Feb 2007. Enabling this list to be updated. - Aucitypops 00:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I changed the figures in the 1st part. Major changes are Gold Coast surpassing Newcastle to become number 6, and Bathurst-Orange beings split into two (finally). - Aucitypops 04:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, those figures are estimates and don't match known residence figures reported in teh 2007 Yearbook: THE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES FOR 2006 DO NOT MATCH THE CURRENT 2007 YEARBOOK FIGURES: http://0-www.abs.gov.au.library.newcastle.edu.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/bb8db737e2af84b8ca2571780015701e/EF56710D9B64FFC2CA2572360000B7AA?opendocument
seems to me QLD wants to overstate its claims... in several places... The shift of the gold Coast was a result of a redefintion of the SD specifically in Southeast QLD (see the notes in 3218.0). The more directly comparable unit would be the Statistical Division, in which the Gold Coast - Tweed comes in at around 540,00 and the Hunter at 612,000..
- The latest Year Book 2007 contains only the 2005 figures, they're a year older than the ones in this article. here's a link: [2]
- And the most directly comparable units are the Statistical Districts, as they're designed around specific urban areas. - Aucitypops 21:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I think you need to read the documents you are quoting. From 3218:
'2 To meet the conflicting demands for accuracy and timeliness there are several versions of sub-state/territory population estimates. Preliminary estimates are normally available eight months after the reference date (i.e. February), revised estimates a year later and final estimates after the following census. The population estimates in this publication are final for 2001, revised for 2005 (denoted 2005r) and preliminary for 2006 (denoted 2006p). The first series of population estimates based on the 2006 Census will be released in July 2007.'
In other words, the 2006 estimates are preliminary estimates. That is precisely why they are not included in the Yearbook. There are several assumptions that have to be made to reach these estimates, including assumed rates of 1) percent of people overseas, 2) assumed rates of death and birth, 3) assumed undercounting from the 2001 census, etc... etc... You're jumping the gun, mate.
- So our choice for this article is 'timeliness' or 'accuracy'? I picked the most recent figures, they can be updated when they are confirmed. If you want to make the case to keep the older figures till then that is fine, but they should all come from the same source and everyone should agree on them. - Aucitypops 03:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
As to whether or not you should use districts or divisions. Both are based on specific urban areas -- you've ONLY includes preliminary district estimates (not more reliable figures) AND yet you claim to have also addressed both S Divisions and Districts. You've not.
Finally, esitmates for Divisions are inherently more stable due to the fact that they are larger. If your concern is about the degree of 'urbanness' within each area, perhaps you want to include population density figures (The Gold Coast is more dense at a LGA level).
- We should use districts for all the cities except the capitals because only the capital cities have statistical divisions (except I notice tyhis may have changed for the Gold Coast, but I'll wait till we know what is and isn't included in that division before we change the population there). Hunter SD includes the whole Hunter Valley and it would be ludicrous to try to include all of that area in "Newcastle". - Aucitypops 03:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
OR -- you could just wait until the preliminary estimates are confirmed. The main problem is both areas are undergoing substantial growth at the same time distircts and divisions in the southeast of QLD are being re-drawn.
Never thought I would contribute this much... I'll register so you can see me...
On another note: I see the Central Coast listed as part of the Sydney Stats District. Is that right?
Another trick for the Gold Coast - is that the local government area is actually bigger then the statistical division. Those living in the northern part of Gold Coast City are part of the Brisbane statistical division and those along the western edge tend to be counted as hinterland people in the beaudesert division. The Twin towns issue at the southern end is also difficult to resolve. The one shopping street is in two different states with two different time zones. But Tweed Heads is merging along the new Freeway into adjacent towns further south - so need to stop somewhere - state border seems a pretty important edge for counting people.
cheers
