I refer to the use of a locality name “Gabba Hill” for a large chunk of the Brisbane, Queenland, southside suburb of Wooloongabba.
I reside in Brisbane but have never previously heard of Gabba Hill.
My conventiaonal searches for many addresses in Wooloongabba do not work unless I use the Gabba Hill designation or get around it somehow. Gabba Hill seems to take precedence over Wooloongabba. This is a nuisance since I believe the official and commonly used name for the suburb is Wooloongabba which is often abbreviaed to Gabba.
I consulted a website of official Auatralian place names by the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping, viz:
With the “Administrative” Filter applied, it lists Wooloongabba but does not list Gabba Hill even without any filter applied.
It looks like there are a few other websites and community groups referring to the area as Gabba Hill. I think if it’s used locally to refer to the area than it’s okay to include, possibly you could change the name to be loc_name=* to indicate it’s a locally used name
place=neighbourhood seems to be the right tag for a named place within a suburb.
It need not be an official place name (which you could further specify with official_name=*) to be a common locally used name.
Thank you Andrew. I am not sure if I went about this the right way. As recommended, I noted Gabba Hill as a Local Name and added Wooloongabba as an Official Name but didn’t change anything else.
How do you get Wooloongabba to show up a the name of the whole suburb? I think it’s odd that typing in the name of such a well known suburb, even with it smack in the middle of the map field, returns no result.
Apparently there was (or still is) a Gabba Hill Community Garden at 3, Fleurs Street - probably the source of the name. Again The Gabba (stadium) is sometimes referred to as Gabba Hill.
With this background the name Gabba Hill appears to be legitimate for a neighbourhood, even if it may be difficult to locate an exact center spot for it. Besides that a neighbourhood does not do any harm to an address search in Woolloongabba area, so why remove it.
Additionally to the changes you have made already you can remove the tag name=Gabba Hill and also the website which is no longer existing.
I am not especially pushing to remove Gabba Hill as a locality name. I agree that the Gabba Hill Community as a recent special interest group might well have been the source of the name. I suspect it is not well known in the way that some smaller localities such as Clarence Corner are.
What I am trying to do is retrieve addresses throughout Wooloongabba the way most addresses are by typing in the name of the suburb, followed by the name of the street, etc. At present, if you type in Wooloongabba, a very well known suburb, you get almost no results returned, If you type in Gabba, you might get results covering a fraction of the suburb. Any directions for how to retrieve an address by typing in Wooloongabba followed by a street name would be gratefully received.
Another good example is NIle Street. This is right in the heart of Wooloongabba. Yet OSM indicates it is in Buranda which I doubt very much. Buranda is now said to be another locality within Wooloongabba which makes sense if is considered a former small suburb that was administratively absorbed into the larger Wooloongabba. I have not independently checked this but I do not dispute it.
Regarding your reference to the Gabba stadium, i.e. Cricket Ground, there used to be a “Hill at the Gabba”. This was where people could buy cheap tickets to sit on the grass on a hill inside the grounds to watch the sport. It no longer exists since a new grandstand has long ago been erected over the site of the old Hill. The Gabba Cricket Ground as a whole was never known as the Gabba Hill. The Hill was only a spot with cheap seating within it.
The result of any search depends on the application used. Using OSM standard map you will find Fleurs Street by searching it in Brisbane or Woolloongabba or Gabba Hill all the same:
The tagging of the neighbourhood “Gabba Hill” within the suburb “Woolloongabba” being part of “Brisbane” is absolutely fine. It is just a matter of the application used by yourself to extract a proper search result.
Thanks for the info - I did not dig that deep into the details. Anyhow the name of the neigbourhood may be derived from that hill.
Thank you very much for those screen shots Map_HeRo Mikke. My problem all along has been that I have been misspelling Woolloongabba, and have been for a long time. I was using only one letter “L” whereas the correct spelling evidently has two letter ”L”s. I am grateful for your help.
I agree that it is entirely plausible that the name of the neighbourhood Gabba Hill may be derived from the Hill at the Gabba. Sitting on the Hill to watch cricket certainly would have engendered a sense of camaraderie through sharing humorous insults of the players, etc.
I’d still advocate to use loc_name=* though. Probably in additional to name=* rather than instead of name=*.
My reasoning is that it’s helpful for data consumers to know a bit more about places and names. For example a government department building a map or search from OSM data might choose to only include official names, but a community map or search might choose to include all names, including very local, non-official names to aid in search and discoverability.
By only tagging name=* we don’t tell our downstream data consumers if that’s an official name, or just something the locals came up with and use.
I agree with your preference to use loc_name=* in addition to name=* . I think Gabba Hill is still in its infancy as a name. It might gain currency or it might not. It is possible that Clarence Corner began as a publicity vehicle for the Clarence Hotel but just as likely was invented for convenience by someone not associated with the Hotel.
I know that Buranda was once a suburb but has now officially been downgraded to a locality. Thus it is rather large in area.for a locality. I think a new locality without a special history like Buranda’s would be more appropriate if it were similar in size to Clarence Corner. My personal view is that Gabba Hill is too large to be of convenience to the general public, but I don’t hold that view strongly. I am not aware of anything that makes Gabba Hill significantly distinct from Wolloongabba as a whole. It might be more meaningful to call it West Woolloongabba and that probably is not warranted.
All I was looking to do was to get Woolloongabba returned in a search which wasn’t happening because I did not know how to spell it. I don’t especially care if some want to promote the name Gabba Hill but the term holds no meaning for me. Therefore I would not use it. But things tend to change.
If you want to make the edit you are suggesting regarding loc_name=* , that’s fine by me. I would rather you do it. You have a better idea of what to do than I do.
That does not make sense imo. name=* is used for a neighbourhood if this place is known all over the area (in the given case Brisbane) under this very name. If the people living there use the same name no need to tag that again as loc_name=* because it would just be a duplicate. Only if the local people use another name for their place then it should be tagged in addition.
In the given case one can hardly find any confirmation of the name “Gabba Hill” related to this place except in reference to the “Gabba Hill community garden” which appears to be a privte project, so I don’t see a name here. Instead “Gabba Hill” refers to a former place close to “The Gabba” which is on the other side of the M3 expressway. In such a case I would hesitate to tag it at all to avoid confusion - but if I would want to have it in the map I would definitely go for loc_name=* instead of name=*.
I don’t think we can say whether the “Gabba Hill Community Garden” is public or private. Often entities bearing the adjective “Community” receive small grants from the Queensland Government and, if so, they must open their membership to essentially all comers. I don’t have any further information about this project. I have never previously heard of it. I don’t personally know anyone who uses the name ”Gabba Hill”. If the name strikes a chord with many people, it could gain currency. If it does not strike a chord, it will probably lapse in the real world through lack of interest. It is a minor problem that it could live on in OpenStreetMap beyond its demise, but I acknowledge that it does no significant harm. I am not especially passionate about the matter. I don’t use the name because it does not mean anything to me nor to anyone I know. I don’t think I can oppose it on mere suspicion that someone might be using it to promote a public-good not-for-profit project. I compare it with the long established Clarence Corner locality. If the name serves a purpose, it will thrive. Otherwise, it will lapse.
I tend to agree that it is better not to confound the name with the somewhat distant former Hill at the Gabba but others may enjoy the nostalgic invokation. I think it is a question of personal taste.
Stumbling over a neighbourhood name like this I would surely not remove it. My only point is that this one does not qualify for name=* but for loc_name=* only due to lack of references found.
… sure, it is not the name of the neighbourhood.