Talk:Eastwood, New South Wales

Main page google earth map

The Google Earth image of Eastwood is kind of vague isn't it? There should be a photo of the streets or at least a closer view of Eastwood from Google Earth - Hj47 | Talk 08:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Use the GE controls to get closer and move around. If this is not what you are after, can you provide another Wiki page that shows what you are after? Anubis1975 10:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not vague - it shows where the suburb is in relation to the rest of Sydney. The map is also not from Google Earth - it's from a free satellite NASA image of Sydney that is in the public domain. Google Earth images are copyright and can't be reproduced on Wikipedia. (JROBBO 13:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC))

Ok sure, but the tiny red circle around Eastwood is hard to see. Maybe there should be a larger, more defined circle, or an arrow? Hj47 | Talk 05:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not a circle, it's in the shape of the suburb outline - it was very hard to trace! It is a thumnail, mind you, so it is a lot more visible when enlarged. I'd be happy for it to be put in another more visible colour if you would like though. (JROBBO 09:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

I think the outline of Eastwood should be more clearly defined. I had difficulty finding the outline. Chickenjohn 12:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I figured out why I found it hard to find the outline on the map; and also 33% of the male population would too, because of red-green colour deficiency (aka colour-blindness). Please change the colour of the outline to something other than shades of red and green. The red outline on the mostly green background is quite difficult to see. Thank you. Hj47 11:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I could see it clearly, although I too am diagnosed with colour-blindness. Unfortunately we can't do much about the satellite image itself, as Google Earth is copyrighted and hosting images captured from them is by convention forbidden on Wiki. Orderinchaos 20:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this is getting annoying, and for a start, it isn't a Google Earth image (see above). Surely SOMEONE can change the outline of Eastwood?! 211.30.200.127 12:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Good — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.9.151.254 (talk) 03:48, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

To Do

• A better description of the Granny Smith Festival.
• Pictures of Rowe St mall and railway station.
• Churches, Schools and Parks listing?
• List bus numbers that come and go to Eastwood
• Famous people from Eastwood?
• Expand on history before 1905
• History after 1905? (The sub-division date)
• Eastwood Rugby Union club.
• Ryde-Eastwood Rugby League club.
• Ryde Hospital
• When did the rail go through Eastwood?

Streets of Eastwood

This is where the streets on Eastwood are listed. I envision the history of the street and any obvious landmarks (parks, churchs, etc) be detailed. The history should cover how & when the street got its name and anything notable the street has to its fame. --Anubis1975 07:13, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The Chinese/Korean retailing

It isn't true that Chinese retailers exist on one side of the railway line while Koreans are on the other. Both ethnic groups have a significant number of shops on both sides. I think this small detail should be deleted.

on the contrary I would agree with this statement, especially from a historical point of view, the first wave koreans moved into the eastern side and then the second wave hong kong chinese moved into the western side, as this was where the school with the special classes was. the initial moving in by the asian community was because of the affluent families who provided smart children which then resulted in these special clasees. but nowadays these are becoming slightly mixed on the western side with the japanese and koreans moving in--Hatgreg (talk) 06:04, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hills District

The local Telstra Hills District phone directory includes Eastwood as part of it. It is therefore partially located in the Hills District. (JROBBO 10:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC))

I've reverted your edits. Telstra isn't the authoritative source on geography. This article states that Eastwood is in the City of Ryde and also partially in the City of Parramatta. According to North Shore (Sydney), the Ryde LGA is part of the Lower North Shore. In the City of Parramatta article, it is stated to be in "Western Sydney". I don't think we should be at a situation where there is inconsistency amongst several articles. When definitions for Lower North Shore are changed, by consensus, then this article's info can change too. By the way, the Hills District definition does not include the City of Ryde. JSIN 13:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Eastwood is not all in the City of Ryde - as I said above, a part of it is in the City of Parramatta. The Hills District page states that the northern suburbs of the City of Parramatta are in the Hills District. The back of the Hills District Telstra directory from Telstra has a map of the area, which includes suburbs from Eastwood west to Parklea and northwest from Eastwood to Annangrove. This information is sourced from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. I wouldn't believe it if it were just Telstra, but the ABS has to be a far more substantial and reliable source. I might email the Geographical Names Board and ask them just to check. In any case, Eastwood should be considered as part of Lower North Shore and part of Western Sydney, if it is not classified as Hills District. (JROBBO 03:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC))

I know a bit of time has passed since we discussed this, but I stumbled upon [1]. It seems to say that the City of Ryde is entirely within the Statistical Division of Lower Northern Sydney, so we have a source for that. JSIN 14:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eastwood, New South Wales. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705163831/http://www.ryde.nsw.gov.au/ryde/history.htm to http://www.ryde.nsw.gov.au/ryde/history.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposal: Combine "Heritage listings" and "Landmarks" sections

Currently the article has a section "Heritage listings", which has just one entry, and another "Landmarks" section which contains a longer list of mostly heritage listed places. It would make sense to combine these, removing the duplicate entry for Brush Farm. Comments? --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:23, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done Nobody commented either way on the proposal, so I went ahead and did it. The one entry in "Heritage listings" was just a duplicate of an entry in "Landmarks" anyway.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Eastwood County Road

Why was the text of the Eastwood County Road article not included in this article when the former article was changed to a redirect. Downsize43 (talk) 00:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

The article "Eastwood County Road" was nominated for deletion. The outcome of that discussion (here) was to replace it with a redirect to the current article, which was done. If you think there is material there that should be saved, you could just go to the history of that article (which is now the redirect) and copy any pertinent material into the current article. But only do this if you can find reliable sources to cover it - the problem that had the old article removed in the first place was the lack of any reliable sources. If it copied into here without sources, it will be removed from here as well.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:36, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to ping Downsize43 --Gronk Oz (talk) 08:37, 8 February 2022 (UTC)