Jump to content

Talk:Elizabeth, South Australia

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

Demographics

[edit]

Could we add some info about the uh, clientelle of Elizabeth? --Rachel Cakes 07:06, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV is a keystone of Wikipedia. I don't think anyone wants to read your obviously biased opinion of Elizabeth people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.43.227.18 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 7 June 2006
I agree with Rachel Cakes, information should be given on the greater northen suburbs (Elizabeth, Paralowie, Salisbury and Ingle Farm etc) and also the greater southern suburbs (Norlunga, Happy Valley, Hackham and Christies Downs etc) and some western suburbs. Both are infamous in Adelaide for being hubs of crime/violence/drugs especially the north & south. —Preceding unsigned comment added by You Are Here! (talk • contribs) 16:05, 24 July 2006
I wouldn't leave 'nice' areas like Kilburn and Croydon and Ferryden Park off either. I suspect you come from a place that isn't North Adelaide, Norwood or Hyde Park and have a misplaced sense of your own awesomeness.
and what possible relevance does Noarlunga's crime statistics have to the city of Elizabeth? Dill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.43.227.18 (talk) 01:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might find the statistics you need at the Australian Bureau of Statistics. I think their info is broken down to postcode level, so each unit will cover several suburbs. If you decide to cite The Advertiser, make sure you include the date of publication, as they often purge articles off their websites. You might also get help from participants in a recent discussion on the Australian noticeboard. --Scott Davis Talk 13:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you decide to cite The Advertiser, make sure the informaton is factual as there can be issues with their reliability. (Bobbo9000 01:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)Bobbo9000)[reply]
Most importantly we need to maintain a NPOV. However, this doesn't preclude us from including specific references to instances where the socio-economic status of the residents of Elizabeth has been brought into the spotlight. The Advertiser will inevitably be a poor source of information as its reporting is not based on the Wikipedian principle of NPOV, however we are entitled to make specific, non-judgmental references to the ABS's statistics. I agree with Scott Davis. - Eps0n (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the other posters, there really should be mention of the type of umm people that inhabit Elizabeth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.90.180.101 (talk) 06:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe some of the rubbish being posted here. What the hell has the southern suburbs got to do with subject matter of Elizabeth. NOTHING!!!! There are creeps living in every suburb, just because most people in Elizabeth don't have a silver spoon inserted wherever Rachel and You Are Here, does not make them all criminals. I get sick of the stereotyping that is occuring in society now. Just goes to show that the gap between the haves and the havenots is ever increasing.

To use and cite The Advertiser as a source will actually make your posts unbelievable to me. I have lost count the number times I have witnessed glaring errors found in The Advertiser and News Ltd publications. They are nothing more than opinion pieces written by underqualified journalists who don't know the meaning of research Oz Juice24 (talk) 00:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The population given is that of the Elizabeth Suburb, a small area bounded by Dauntsey Road to the North and Ridley Road to the South. This area is made up of reserves and the Main Shopping District, therefore the residential population is very small. By way of comparison, the main residfential areas as follows: postcode 5112, 18,973 residents on census night, postcode 5113 18,092, postcode 5114 (which extends farther East than Elizabeth into rural areas) 24,585. So the population of Elizabeth should be given as about 60,000 in 2006, quoting the same source, but updating the links to each of the postcode maps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.136.213.84 (talk) 05:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Social connotations

[edit]

Following from the topic above, and, fully observant of the need for NPOV, I think this article still does need some mention of the social connotations associated with the Elizabeth (and the suburbs centred around it), regardless of their veracity. For example, anecdotally I've heard of residents of the area omitting their home address from their Curriculum Vitae so as to not be excluded from a job interview. This isn't so much a point of view but a bunch of widely held connotations re Elizabeth and surrounds. Donama (talk) 05:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If they can prove they didn't get a job because of the suburb they live in then they should complain to the equal opportunity commission because they have been disciminated against. They have to tell the employer their address eventually so I don't think there would be much point hiding it.Yellow wiggle (talk) 16:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If we are to respect NPOV, then we should ignore "connotations" to the extent that they are unverifiable. Better still, it might be best to simply add crime statistics to every suburb article. That some suburbs have higher crime rates and some lower will be demonstrated verifiably, allowing the reader to form their own opinion. The same can be said for average household income and other social indicators.~ ~ : Lincoln Cooper : ~ ~ (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion between the city of Playford and suburb of Elizabeth

[edit]

Holden is in Elizabeth South and the DSTO is in Salisbury. I think the article confuses the suburb of Elizabeth with the surrounding area?Mirrabooka (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The city of Elizabeth as described here is a local government area (LGA) called City of Playford, whereas Elizabeth the suburb is smaller. Need to clearly distinguish these in this article and in the City of Playford article. Donama (talk) 01:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. ~ ~ : Lincoln Cooper : ~ ~ (talk) 07:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Once again people have confused the suburb of Elizabeth with the city of Elizabeth. As mentioned above the Holden factory was in the suburb of Elizabeth South not the suburb of Elizabeth and Jimmy Barnes never lived in the suburb of Elizabeth and neither did any of the other musicians mentioned in the article. That is why I deleted them. — Preceding [[]] comment added by BigFreeze (talk • contribs) 10:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Elizabeth, South Australia. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 18:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

@The Drover's Wife and Donama: Noting the edit comments about tracking the impact of the closure of manufacturing at Holden, we should really track the entire period from the establishment of Elizabeth, opening of Holden, RAAF, DSTO and other manufacturing coming and going, and be precise about where our numbers cover. Lee Odenwalder's quote about Elizabeth being distinct would not include postcode 5114 which has never been "Elizabeth" (until the most recent state electorate redistribution where part of it is now in the electoral district of Elizabeth). I'm not sure how useful it will be to track only Elizabeth's population and makeup to correlate it to Holden without including Salisbury area too. --Scott Davis Talk 04:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All good points. Sorry about being hasty here but I'm not sure people realise that historic demographic information is still verifiable information and still interesting because it shows how it changed in terms of modern history. Donama (talk) 05:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, absolutely - but it's much more useful if it's singled out in prose what is significant and what changed. If it's just the same demographic data that was in the article in 2006 and the first sentences are basically exactly the same as the current figures, it essentially buries the lede of what you're trying to demonstrate and looks like it's just been left there because no one has updated it. Incidentally, I might be able to help with some of the changes ScottDavis suggested - I stumbled across a history of Elizabeth in a church op shop in country Victoria and snapped it up because I thought it might prove useful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
After my last comment, I discovered that the Quickstats pages also include postcodes. 5112 increased by about 800 in those ten years, so did 5113. 5114 (historically Smithfield/Munno Para, not Elizabeth) increased by much more, probably due to the Blakes Crossing and Playford Alive (Munno Para) developments in that timeframe. I'm not sure what is meaningful as statistics for the entire period. Elizabeth SSC is too small as it includes the shops, council offices, TAFE and only a few residential streets. City of Elizabeth would work until it merged into Playford. Postcodes 5112+5113 might be helpful. I think Aus-born, English-born and African-born are likely to be interesting percentages/numbers to track. However we decide to handle Elizabeth is likely to translate to lots of other places too. --Scott Davis Talk 13:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is another permutation of the places-with-suburbs population issue that was discussed at WP:AWNB last week - the SSC may be small, but it's the actual gazetted boundaries of the Elizabeth suburb (thankfully the AEC stopped making up SSC boundaries). These articles really need to distinguish/explain and include both the suburb itself and the broader area, both in a geographical and demographic context.The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth,_South_Australia&oldid=1201726341"