Talk:Kingswood Park, New South Wales

	Australia portal Kingswood Park, New South Wales is within the scope of 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Sydney.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Kingswood Park is not part of Cranebrook

It strikes me as strange that people try to dismiss Kingswood Park as being either non-existant or part of (alternatively) Cranebrook or Kingswood. It's just a small suburb that gets overlooked. It is recognised by the City of Penrith and is on current maps as a current locality. Please do not delete or remove this article without at least discussing it. AprilHare (talk) 05:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, as the area actually doesn't have boundaries I mistook it for being in the adjacent suburb, the Gazetteer's coordinates for it fall within Cranebrook (see [1]) but on closer examination the coordinates may be a little to the north of the actual location. I own recent copies of the UBD, Sydway and Gregory's and none of them have it "as a current locality", so your assertion on that ground is incorrect. Australia Post doesn't list it at all [2] (meaning it is not a legal mailable location), and Geographical Names Board of NSW lists it as an "Urban Place"^[1] and calls it a "neighbourhood", [3] not a suburb (like, say, Kingswood [4] or Cranebrook [5]). The Gazetteer of Australia called it an "unbounded locality" [6] (it appears to have been removed entirely from the 2008 one) - suburbs always, without exception, use either LOCB or SUB on the Gazetteer.

The Australian standard has always been only to have articles about official (i.e. gazetted) suburbs rather than undefined "neighbourhoods". This is because the latter have no boundaries and no confirmed existence. Whatever is there should be considered for addition to the article Penrith. Orderinchaos 12:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

¹ "A place, site or precinct in an urban landscape, the name of which is in current use, but the limits of which have not been defined under the address locality program." Glossary of designation values in the GNR, Geographical Names Board, 2009.

Australia Post can be forgiven for overlooking a small suburb and this does not preclude it from being a suburb. Government authority overrides Australia Post for a start. The limits have been defined by Council however it's small size has caused it to be labelled a 'locality' by some higher authorities - but it's still a suburb through local council. I contend it is still a suburb on that basis.

You are correct though that street directories are treating it as not being a 'current locality' or suburb. Gregorys treats it as a 'Local name'. Council should have this formerly addressed; it is one of the suburbs of Penrith and it's borders are well-defined.AprilHare (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Australia Post covers every last gazetted suburb - check out Medindie Gardens in South Australia, a suburb which is literally just two blocks, it's in there. It does not cover any non-suburbs. This is a simple matter - it is not a suburb, it is part of Penrith (I had previously mistaken it to be part of Cranebrook, as none of the maps mark it or give it a boundary - another sign that it's not a suburb - although Gregory's does note its existence in the index). Yes, if the City of Penrith went and got it gazetted as a suburb with fixed boundaries, then we could have an article on it. Orderinchaos 07:47, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something for RL discussion :) AprilHare (talk) 08:02, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]