Talk:Brisbane

Title Image Change

Hi IP editior 101.165.145.61,

Last time we changed the title image, it was only done after an extensive discussion and title images generally shouldn't just be changed like that.

I seem to remember it was decided at that point that a montage was undesirable as there were already many photos of different aspects of the city throughout the article.

I actually think however, that a montage could be a good idea.

I would ask you, though, to include more pictures outside the central city area. This article is about the entire Brisbane metropolitan area which covers 15 000 sq km, not just the CBD and Southbank.

How about changing the picture of a partial wall of GoMA (which looks like nothing particularly special in itself) to a scenic picture of a bayside beach like Sutton's beach at redcliffe or the Wynnum foreshore or maybe an even more scenic picture of a bay or ocean beach on Moreton or Stradbroke (Tangalooma wrecks perhaps?) as both are included in the Brisbane metro area.

The montage also includes two images side by side of early 20th century non-church sandstone structures with pillars in the CBD (shrine of remembrance and city hall front) which is probably overkill. City hall is certainly iconic in Brisbane but shrine of remembrance not so much. Maybe a natural feature out of the central city area like Mt Coot-tha for example? We have to be representing the whole metro area as this article is not just about postcode 4000.

Lastly, we discussed at this talk page previously the night skyline photo and decided it was no good as a title skyline photo as it is so pitch dark that the buildings cannot be seen. Could you replace it with an up to date (ie post infinity completion) daytime photo from Kangaroo Pt which we discussed extensively and most people believed to be the best vantage point?

Thanks for contributing!--Saruman-the-white (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Wow thanks Saruman for taking down my photomontage, sorry if it didn't look nice but its the first one I've ever done and it took me ages. :( But I am glad you agree with me that there should be a photomontage, the article Melbourne has one and looks great. There were actually a few other scenes I wanted to add but Brisbane has so many icons it was hard to figure out which ones to use and which ones to leave out. I think the following should be definitely added to any montage: Story Bridge, Brisbane City Hall, South Bank Parklands, Brisbane CBD

And I think these should be considered to be added: Kangaroo Point Cliffs, Brisbane CityCat on the river (The citycats are quite unique to Brisbane so I think it would be good to add this), Tangalooma Wrecks, Shrine of Remembrance, Nepal Peace Pagoda (Very unique structure and one of the few kinds in the world), Queen Street Mall, The Gabba, St John's Cathedral.

Not sure which ones to choose and which ones to leave out though :(--Empire of War (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey I'm sorry I took it down. That doesn't mean it won't go up though, just that there should be some kind of discussion beforehand, and it took a lot of discussion and someone actually asking a professional photographer to go out and take the photo last time based on the skyline view that we thought was most iconic. Actually I will have a quick stab at changing a couple of things and upload it and tell me what you think.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 02:53, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Okay have a look now and tell me what you think. No no it looks great (significantly better than Melbourne's actually). I just wanted to change two things: 1) make the skyline view from the angle that after extensive discussion last time we decided was most iconic and 2) add a couple of things from outside the inner inner core of the city as the article is about the entire 15 000 sq km metro area of brisbane not just the CBD area. Thanks! --Saruman-the-white (talk) 03:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I took awhile to reply, was away from my computer for a few days. And yes the photomontage looks great much better than Melbourne's, and remember we can always add new pics to the montage later on if we get better pics, its not set in stone. But I thought a photomontage of Brisbane was necessary since this page is viewed more than 2000+ per day, one image of Brisbane is not enough to represent her--Empire of War (talk) 01:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there any way the 'Mt' of Mt Coot-tha can be put onto the same line as 'Coot-tha' in the montage image captions? At the moment, the 'Mt' appears on the line above the 'Coot-tha' part of the name. Thanks. Figaro (talk) 08:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll have a go at fixing this.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 13:14, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Figaro (talk) 08:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Photomontage needs to be updated

When the G20 arrives in Brisbane in November this article will receive a huge amount of views. I think the photomontage should be updated before then to give readers a clearer view of Brisbane. For example many of the new skyscrapers that have been built in Brisbane do not feature on this image of the CBD, the image of the Tangalooma Wrecks is pathetic but could be so much better, the Story Bridge (Brisbane's most iconic structure) is barely made out and doesn't show off it's beauty, the Japanese Gardens in Mt Cootha Gardens are great but I can think of a dozen better icons that could replace it, Brisbane City Hall isn't given enough room to show the entire building. I think we need new photos of many of these structures.--Empire of War (talk) 13:10, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure there could be better photos of some of these things. The problem is that we have to use photos which exist on Wikipedia, or else they will be removed for copyright violation. Alternatively (as was done for the large skyline photo which is now almost a year old) someone could go out and re-take photos of Brisbane landmarks specifically to upload to Wiki, so that copyright will not be breached. A couple of years ago, knowing that there are great photos of many of these sites on the internet, I foolishly attempted to use from pictures from Flickr, I believe. They were of course speedily deleted for breaching copyright. The skyline shot is from the best angle by far as it shows its location on the iconic river, the entire length of the skyline, the most scenic side with the most iconic buildings, ... but you are right it will have to be replaced at some point when significant new buildings are completed ie 111+222 margaret street and 300 george street, making it all noticeably different. Having said that, the montage is by far more aesthetic than the uninspiring, dull montages used by other Aust cities (Melbourne's in particular fails to showcase any aspects of that city). My main concern is that there could be a tendency to include just images on the central core of the metro area ie the CBD and maybe one or 2 of south bank. A selection like this would better suit the article on Brisbane, Queensland (ie postcode 4000). This article is about the entire huge metro area which stretches from Caboolture to Beenleigh, from Ipswich to Stradbroke. As such, the images should showcase and reflect the content of the article. I feel that unique and scenic places like Mt Coot-tha, with its famous lookout and Moreton Bay, with its unique huge Sand Islands of Moreton and Stradbroke, both included in the Brisbane metro area, which are the most visited places by tourists in the metro area, should be included (also for aesthetic reasons). Otherwise, we risk making the place look like any other interchangeable modern city. (Melbourne's example, which is all man-made structures plus a totally dark, indistict 10 yr old skyline shot is a great example of how to make a unique city look boring and plain) Of course there is much room for improvement and if someone can take better photos as occured last year with the skyline I'm sure everyone on wiki would much appreciate. God knows there are many scenic and historical Brisbane places which don't even have a single photo, quality or otherwise, on wiki!--Saruman-the-white (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Well for example, the Infinity Tower currently Brisbane's tallest building would be visible from that angle of the CBD, yet it doesn't appear (therefore this image is already out of date). I agree with you on Mt Cootha and the Moreton Bay area, both places deserve a image in the montage but the ones in Wikimedia at present don't do it justice. Yes we really need a Wiki member to go out and take new photos. I think Brisbane City Hall certainly deserves to be in there, yet again it needs to show off the entire front façade not just it's Pillars. Story Bridge obviously has a place as well, since it is Brisbane's most recognizable landmark. We need a new image of that too. I would prefer we completed a new Montage before the G20 summit, like as I said before, the page will receive tens of thousands of hits so I think we should have a great montage to truly do Brisbane justice.--Empire of War (talk) 04:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Certainly I agree with all you've said here, and yes Infinity would be just visible on that skyline shot now despite being on the other side of the CBD. If anybody reading this has good pictures of any of these mentioned places, or is in a position to go and take some, or knows more about the Wiki copyright policies re images and can find Flickr or other online images of the places mentioned which are copyright-free, please help out. I am extremely busy for the next couple of weeks but when I get some time later on I will also see if I can find any better examples. :) --Saruman-the-white (talk) 11:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I have gone and taken what I believe to be an aesthetic photo of the Gorge Walk at North Stradbroke Island. I have long believed that one of the photos on the montage should be of an iconic sight at either Stradbroke or Moreton (Gorge Walk or Tangalooma Wrecks). I believe that one of these should be represented for the following reasons: these two islands are a very unique part of the Brisbane metropolitan area, which this article covers (stradbroke is part of redland council while moreton is part of brisbane city council). They are the second and third largest sand islands in the world (the largest being Fraser to our north). As such they really are unique to Brisbane and are something that other major cities can't claim. As such, they are very much among the top tourist attractions in the metro area. Anyone coming to stay in Brisbane for a few days will go to either Stradbroke or Moreton plus South Bank, the CBD, up Mt Coot-tha, etc. Aside from being such a very unique and touristically important part of the Brisbane metro area, they are also highly scenic, and not many large cities around the world could boast such beautiful scenery. My next goal will be to maybe take a good photo from the Mt Coot-tha lookout which is also way up there on the "to-do" list of iconic Brisbane things to do.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 07:12, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking that shot, Gorge Walk is truly beautiful and that image does justice for Moreton Bay imo.

I was wondering if the montage could be lengthened to include another two images?

1. 1 reason being I think that "Queenslander architecture", should be shown off in this montage. Queenslander houses are Australia's most unique architecture form and this style developed in and around Brisbane, with many of the most beautiful examples in Brisbane's metropolitan area. This type of architecture is also distinctively "Brisbane", and can be seen almost all over the city.

The other photo could range from various other Brisbane landmarks, the Treasury Casino, Brisbane City Cat, view from Mount Cootha, the Brisbane War Memorial, or even another photo of South Bank or the Cultural Precinct as that is not pictured.--Empire of War (talk) 06:08, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Jeez, could you guys please learn to indent properly? Comment from a non-Brisbanite here. Don't just add new skyscrapers. Every city has skyscrapers. They say nothing about your city. Find unique images. HiLo48 (talk) 07:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I like the Queenslander idea. I've actually seen some very pretty shots of colourful Queenslanders before. It is indeed iconic to the city, glad you thought of it. RE skyscrapers, I agree it shouldn't all be skyscrapers. The reason we have one shot of the skyline at the top of the montage is because a CBD skyline is iconic for a city and is instantly recognisable, which is why they are used to quickly tell a viewer the location in movies/TV shows. Also, Brisbane's skyline is picturesque and shows something of its geography and river so it's a nice photo. We shouldn't fill the rest with skyscrapers though, you are right that one is no doubt suffficient.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 00:42, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

What makes you think Brisbane's skyline is instantly recognisable? It might be to locals, but from reading above, that not who some of you are trying to impress. Only a handful of world cities these days have instantly recognisable skylines - Sydney, London, New York, Paris, maybe Hong Kong, but I'm running out of ideas now. Brisbane's isn't. HiLo48 (talk) 01:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Well it's certainly more recognizable than many other Australian cities including Melbourne and Perth. So I think it is good to have a view of the city skyline.--Empire of War (talk) 04:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Seriously? What's recognisable about it to a non-local? Note that I am from Melbourne, and I don't think Melbourne's skyline is in any way distinctive, even though Australia's tallest building is there. HiLo48 (talk) 05:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Tall buildings don't make a skyline iconic, otherwise Sydney and London would never even rate. It's the distinguishing features of a city that are unique or recognizable. Melbourne has the Flinders Street Station but it's not exactly "on the skyline". Brisbane has several, one from the Story Bridge overlooking the CBD, second from the Cliffs overlooking the river and CBD, third from South Brisbane overlooking the Riverside Express and CBD, and fourth from North Quay overlooking South Bank. Melbourne doesn't really have any major vantage points to look at from, you have the Eureka Tower but it's not showing the "whole picture", unfortunately Melbourne's skyline is not as dense as Brisbane's. The best vantage point of Melbourne imo, would be along the Yarra, probably from Princes Bridge, however even then most of your riverbank is covered in railway.--Empire of War (talk) 06:08, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it could also be argued Brisbane probably has one of the world's most beautiful night skylines--Empire of War (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Obviously you would argue that, but I cannot agree. There is absolutely nothing in Brisbane's skyline that leaps out at the viewer and says, "This is Brisbane!" Do try to see this from the perspective of someone who doesn't live there and isn't interested in your goal of promoting the place. Non-Brisbanites will neither know nor care about those cliffs, or South Brisbane, or North Quay. The Story Bridge itself works, but not the buildings. HiLo48 (talk) 21:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Well I think non-locals wouldn't care about many of the things in the image montage but one skyline shot is almost always included in these city articles because it is a photo of the heart of the city in question where much of the commercial activity began. In the case of Brisbane, the skyline also covers the area which was the site of the original convict settlement and has been considered the centre of our city since then. It is also quite unique in that it is formed by a large pocket of tall highrise inside the loop of a winding river. Most cities with skylines by rivers will just have the skyline by the riverside or with the river flowing through but Brisbane's geography is quite unique in that our river is so endlessly winding that the skyline and CBD are contained within a "loop" of it. Further, Brisbane's skyline is impressive. Indeed there are whole (very well populated) internet forums dedicated to the skylines of our cities. Australian cities have more skyscrapers per capita than the cities of any other country in the world (except I believe Singapore, Hong Kong and the UAE, which are basically cities). You would be very hard-pressed to find a city of Brisbane's size with such a large number of skyscrapers (150m+ buildings) or such a well-developed skyline. Indeed, in the entire continent of Europe, the only city which could possibly compete would be London, and in the US only a handful of much larger cities (NYC, Chicago, Seattle, Houston, Miami). US cities of sub 2.5 million look more like Adelaide than Brisbane skyline-wise! Another test would be to look at Brisbane's skyline (with 55+ buildings over 100m) and then look at Perths (12 buildings over 100m, from memory) - the visual difference is dramatic. I guess this is a difference of opinion thing, ie some people just love highrise buildings like the guys over at skyscrapercity.com and some people think they are a generic blight on the landscape. Still, for good or for bad, skylines are the most common way that a city is identified quickly in film or TV, so it mustn't be totally futile and evidently many people pay some attention to them. Also, they are usually the most visible feature of a city that can be seen from miles around.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the winding river is significant. If you could find a really high angle (probably aerial) shot showing the city within the giant river bends, that would be great. Low angle shots just show skyscrapers, without perspective. All cities look like that. HiLo48 (talk) 05:07, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Actually Brisbane is often compared with London, since both cities are renowned for their old winding rivers.--Empire of War (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Well I personally think our river is far more interesting (and curvy) and that our city is more beautiful and geographically unique as a subtropical city with mountains to one side and a bay to the other. But most cities have something, and in the case of London, it would be the historical built environment as with most cities in that part of the world rather than a modern glassy skyline or beautiful geographical setting. Skyline wise, however, ours is certainly more dramatic than London's or that of any other European city (although European cities are known for their pitiful skylines). Nonetheless I think our skyline is very much something to be proud of for a city of less than 2 and a half million as it dwarfs those of many cities which are many times larger throughout the world and it is rather dramatic in its location. So, like the wiki articles for just about any other city, I believe that the skyline shot should be retained on the montage, however I also agree that the article shouldn't be swamped with skyline shots which indeed would be boring and repetitive. Anyhow, I believe that many aspects of our city are well represented in the montage and this will only continue. For example we have a man-made garden on Mt Coot-Tha, the mountain that sweeps in close by the central city area, a scenic ocean photo on one of our large bay sand islands, the modern CBD skyline by the river, our iconic bridge, our largest cultural precinct (South Bank) and some historic sandstone buildings. This is much better than most city image montages which just focus on built environment entirely within the CBD. Indeed I'm planning to continue taking varied photos at moments which are opportune for a picturesque or iconic shot so this will only improve.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 04:40, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I have my doubts that you guys who love the place and want to promote are all that good at taking an objective look at your city. I'm not knocking it. It's a great place to visit (in winter), but the skyline? Really? Nah. HiLo48 (talk) 05:13, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Dymonym

Can someone add "The demonym of Brisbane is Brisbanite." to the table? -- Annonymus User 1000 (talk) 23:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Which table? Do you men the infobox at the top right of the article? That infobox is {{Infobox Australian place}} which has no provision for a demonym, although the generic {{Infobox settlement}} does. However, "Brisbanite" is mentioned in the last sentence of the lead's 1st paragraph. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Brisbane as a "global city"

I've re-removed this material from the lead largely as it doesn't seem particularly important or useful. There are lots of these kinds of city rankings (most of which aren't particularly scientific), and the one here is cited only to the university which produced its website. There is also the issue of why it deserves to be so prominent? Some city rankings are very positive about Brisbane (eg [1], [2]), but others aren't (eg [3], [4]). Why does this positive ranking deserve to be singled out in the lead, and not the less-positive rankings? This material doesn't seem very useful for readers, and the article should communicate the city's economy, lifestyle and other features anyway. Nick-D (talk) 02:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry Nick-D, the Wikipedia rules do not allow editors to argue with the reliable sources, Especially when you are unable to cite any serious scholarship for all these other popular newspaper rankings. . The definition of "world city" is pretty specific and widely accepted among urban scholars. You can read the 2600 Citations to GaWD in the scholarly literature at https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=gawc+Global+city&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C27. no other ranking system has the depth or prestige of the GaWD--certainly not the superficial studies that you mention. The GaWD is a worldwide collaboration of many scholars, and its main website is indeed hosted at a prominent British University. Basically the scholars compile lots of statistical data On multiple dimensions of international linkage on all the major cities in the world, and group them into categories. Brisbane is classified as a "Beta-minus" level (Which is level 7) of Global city, ranking between Rio de Janeiro and Geneva. Sydney is at level 2, and Melbourne is level 4. ["The World According to GaWC 2010". Globalization and World Cities (GaWC) Study Group and Network. Loughborough University. Retrieved 12 April 2015.] Rjensen (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with NickD. This should be removed. They're non-scientific, subjective lists, and ultimately meaningless. They don't add any useful info to the article. As you say, there are many more, but that only goes to show that we don't need any particular one. I also disagree with the poster's edit summary of "To erase a RS violates wiki rules on NPOV". This is not the case. Just having a source does not make the info pertinent. Selectively adding a single list does violate POV. --Dmol (talk) 04:21, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't think it belongs on the lead. Its interesting but I have no preference for inclusion or not. - Shiftchange (talk) 04:30, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I provided Evidence that thousands of scholars have cited GaWD -- that refutes Demol's assumption that it's somehow " non-scientific, subjective" --- His evaluation is not based on looking at any of the sources, but is pulled out of thin air. His comment is what " non-scientific, subjective " junk commentary looks like. Rjensen (talk) 07:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Not really - the searches seem to be picking up a lot of uses of the generic term "global city" based on the results, and Google hits alone aren't useful for much anyway (with WP:GHITS being somewhat relevant here). There are loads of these kinds of rankings, and there's no reason to cherry pick one. Nick-D (talk) 10:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Photomontage update

The current photomontage is both outdated (CBD picture - as many new skyscrapers have gone up since this image), as well as very ugly. My Photomontage list (From top to bottom from left to right) 1. Brisbane CBD 2. Queenslander (Architecture) 3. Southbank 4. Story Bridge 5. St John's Cathedral 6. Treasury Building 7. Brisbane City Hall All images for the Photomontage should also images during daylight, photomontages with night and day images look very messy. Mount Coo-tha Botanic Gardens and the Gorges Walk in North Stradbroke Island, shouldn't be included in the Photomontage. Images of those can be present later in the article.--Fiftyfires (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Still no answer I've been waiting for over a month!--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with the use of {{Photomontage}} before you attempt to change the lead's pictures. I would also recommend to present your proposal, here or in your sandbox, before implementing it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I presented my sandbox plan, NO ONE ANSWERED ME!--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I also have no idea why its not working, I'm not even happy with the images, no one takes any good photos of Brisbane, and all the nice ones are dated, the skyline has changed tremendously since the 2007s.--Fiftyfires (talk) 13:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

(ec) (Please consider WP:SHOUT & WP:Please don't shout.) No, you didn't. Your list above is malformed and consists of some descriptions, not actual images. The images you inserted 1) don't show because of syntax errors; 2) are ill suited because, even with proper syntax, leave white space around some images; 3) the parameter |foot_montage= is malformed. I suggest you revert yourself until a consensus for a new montage is found here.

"I also have no idea why its not working, I'm not even happy with the images" – but you insist on having this article with your not-working code. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't know, but please tell me! It does look so much better doesn't it!!! Can you fix it up so that there aren't huge white spaces?--Fiftyfires (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Well... the top skyline photo is not taken in 2007, but 2014. It depicts that angle as it appears today but will need replacing in the next couple of years once 1 William Street is finished, as that will result in a visible change. As for the picture of the ever burning flame, let's take that out as it's entirely unremarkable and is dwarfed by the war memorials in other Australian cities. Not really significant to Brisbane at large. Also, we had a long, long discussion about this before as the main problem was the montage was too focussed on the CBD area. All photos were of the inner 2km squared of Brisbane, when the article is on the entire metro area ie from Caboolture to Stradbroke to Ipswich to Beenleigh. As such, those images of Mt Coot tha and Stradbroke Island were included as they make it more representative of the actual content of the article ie the whole 15000sq km that make up greater Brisbane rather than just the 2km sqared at the centre. I like the idea of including an image of the Queenslander, which is an iconic style to the city. The South Bank image is very uninspiring though (just formless lowrise with a ferris wheel) and I feel that I photo of the artificial beach or the paths along the river would reflect the character much better than a macro shot from the air which could be any lowrise suburb. Also, it doesn't warrant being twice the size of the other images, which only the lead image of the Brisbane skyline really should be.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 06:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

The Queenslander house was my idea, that style of architecture is extremely common around the city and comes in all forms of eras, ie, Victorian, Federation, Interwar, Contemporary, and Modern Queenslanders. Yet the style is completely unique and really found no where else in the world. I agree about the South Bank image, I tried to include a different pic into the montage but I could never really get it to fit in. Do you think it would be best to shrink it down to one of the smaller images, giving us a fourth row? What could the last image be of?--Fiftyfires (talk) 14:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah Queenslander was a very good idea, being iconic to the city. Only thing that would look more "Brisbane" would be if it had a jacaranda tree in the foreground, but as you said it's always impossible to find exactly the picture you want from the ones available on wiki. Hmm, well I was thinking in about 3 years time, when the 1 William Street, 300 George Street and 222 Margaret Street towers are built, the "other side" of the skyline, ie the "North Bank", Riverside Expressway side of the skyline taken from South Bank will be almost as impressive as the iconic "Golden triangle" side facing Kangaroo Point, so that would be a good substitute for a full length image at the bottom once those towers have gone up. I have tried the idea of adding an extra pic so its another double row, what do you think? The picture is super old so it's not ideal either but I reckon that the South Bank beach is pretty unique to Brisbane, gives a very good feel of the city and South Bank itself and is something that people seem to remember about Brisbane if they've visited the city - "that fake beach in the city".. I'm trying a few images for the last one to see what fits dimension wise. Some ideas could be one of those "Riverwalks" which are pretty unique or otherwise New Farm Park with the jacarandas could be a good idea??? I've just left the last one as South Bank from across the river as there are no riverwalk photos that fit into the montage in terms of their dimensions. Have been trying to fit them together with minimal white space. There is a tiny bit of white space under the Queenslander image as its slightly less "tall" than the other images but barely noticeable so I think its fine. --Saruman-the-white (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Nah it's fine, barely noticeable. I'm really not sure about two images of SouthBank though. I had originally thought maybe an image of Parliament House, which would show Brisbane as the capital of Queensland. But all the images of the Parliament House are really "grotty", not very nice at all and once again all very old!! Perhaps an image of Queen Street Mall? This is a fairly famous attraction in Brisbane, and is Australia's most famous shopping mall.--Fiftyfires (talk) 01:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Btw, you're not on Skyscrapercity are you?--Fiftyfires (talk) 01:57, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I had the same thought about Parliament House and had the same reaction to the images on wiki. I agree that South Bank maybe shouldn't have two, but I left one of Cultural Centre from the river until someone can find something on wiki that looks better. Bound to be something we can use, you may be right even shrine of remembrance may be better although it's pretty unremarkable. As for Skyscrapercity, I have been lurking that forum about once a week since the year 2003! So bloody long that I remember when I was in high school watching the thread for Riparian when that was going up.... --Saruman-the-white (talk) 08:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow that's pretty long! I'll see If I can find a replacement, but in any case the montage we have now is far, far better than the previous one *shudders*--Fiftyfires (talk) 23:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Saruman can you please undo some of the edits the other user made, its not letting me for some reason. He has put back that hideous image of Brisbane CBD, along with an image of the Story Bridge which can be barely made out.--Fiftyfires (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

"The current photomontage is both outdated (CBD picture - as many new skyscrapers have gone up since this image), as well as very ugly." Firstly, you have to be joking, right? How does that image constitute as ugly? I've seen far worse, and very few better images of the Brisbane skyline on Wikipedia. It was taken in 2013, only two years have passed, there hasn't been a stupendous difference. Secondly, there isn't some written rule on Wikipedia that states a montage or even an image MUST be immediately updated as soon as there's a change. As long as the image is still an accurate representation of what it is depicting (i.e. Brisbane's skyline), it will be suffice. Thirdly, I don't mean to offend anyone (certainly not to the degree Fiftyfires (talk has offended the photographer of the CBD image!), but how is a suburban home notable enough to belong in an image montage? Look at infobox montages of other noted cities like New York City, Vancouver, Pittsburgh and Madrid. None of them contain an image of a residential home. Thirdly, your complaint about Story Bridge illuminated in blue as "barely made out" is preposterous. It's clearly a bridge, because it traverses over a dark body of water (adjust your brightness, monitor, or whatever), it's a really interesting atypical perspective/angle (something you rarely see on here, it's always the standard shot)... plus it actually looks nice. It gives the city some colour. Which brings us to the last, but certainly not least, feedback I'd like to put across: a man-made beach isn't something to be boastful about, nor is it something that belongs in the lead montage. We already have North Stradbroke, which is natural. Two bodies of water in the same lead is overkill. This infobox was fine for quite sometime. I have nothing against change, I also don't really mind if the CBD picture is replaced, even though it's lovely and taken at the best time of day (twilight). But I think my points about everything else are more than valid. Ashton 29 (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Apologies Ashton if you took offense. You make some excellent points and I must say I kinda agree with you on the man-made beach perhaps an image of the Cultural Centre would be more appropriate. The reason I decided to include an image of a residential home, is because of the architecture type. You must be quite informed already that "Queenslander" architecture is something that essentially evolved in Brisbane and is completely unique to this city. Whereas other Australian cities constructed homes made from stone and brick, Brisbane and its surrounding towns were unique in that they built almost solely out of timber, which came to be the Queenslander style.

I think it is appropriate seeming as how Gabled houses are typical of San Francisco, and latticed ironwork in typical of New Orleans, the same can be said for Brisbane. As for the image of the CBD, I still prefer the "cleaner" version I had originally posted.--Fiftyfires (talk) 02:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)