text:
Talk:List of Sydney suburbs

Older comments
No offense to efghij but see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (city names). There will be suburbs in Sydney that exist not only in New South Wales. For example, Auburn is also a place in South Australia. Alex.tan 02:25, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * We should use the current policy for the moment. The page can be changed if the [City, State] format becomes official. Incidently, if you are going to move pages from on namespace to another, please use the "Move this page" link on the left side of the screen, so that the page's history is moved as well. - Efghij 02:36, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Question: How was this list determined? How far does "greater Sydney" extend? Does it extend, e.g. as far as Katoomba or Gosford? What about Wiseman's Ferry (which is not on the list, but which is part of Baulkham Hills Shire?)

One possible solution is to define "greater Sydney" as the "County of Cumberland", but the County of Cumberland is something that just about no one who lives there has ever heard of (unless they like to look up Government surveying records...)

Also, what constitutes a suburb? Is it a postcode? In which case, both the University of Sydney, and Macquarie University, and I assume (but don't know) several other universities, are all suburbs, since they all have separate postcodes... -- Anon.

I think that this article should be moved to "Sydney Metropolitan Area", and information would be added to the article to make it relevant.. e.g... list all subdivisions before the city (just like how U.S. cities are in counties)

I also think that the suburbs should be listed by population, if possible. WhisperToMe 05:58, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

 * Circular Quay and Goat Island are suburbs? Moriori 07:53, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)

naming conventions
(moved from user talk:clarkk 05:02, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC))

Hi Clarkk, I changed the Regions of Sydney template slightly, to better differentiate between cities and other types of LGA. See my changes to the Sydney page. Do you think I shoud just place the Regions template in the article in place of the long list that I've put there? --Randwicked 10:30, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * hmm, not sure about putting the template in the article, let me think about it. thanks for your updates, by the way.  i have been doing some updates to the the LGA of NSW article, trying to get things straight there as well, if you're interested.  cheers clarkk 22:24, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Right, I'll take a look. Also, you've moved Randwick and Tamworth, is (town), New South Wales the standard? Because it's been done pretty randomly all over the place. It might take a while to redirect every article that's currently at (town), Australia.--Randwicked 04:46, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * i think it's better and safer to use (Town), (State) format, rather than (Town), Australia, because so many towns names are reused in different states and contributors from one state will only be familiar with the one's from their states. using town, australia, privileges one state's town above another one.  obviously some are well known, or are unique, that they can be know without qualification, e.g. Sydney is simply Sydney, not Sydney, Australia or even Sydney, New South Wales, and Wagga Wagga only exists in australia, but for most towns, using the state for the disambiguation is better, ihmo.

 * although it's not a standard per se, it is in wide use (for example most US towns, use town, state, rather than town, usa), so it could be proposed as a formal standard. i move pages when i see them, but haven't done a systematic search yet.  also for some where (Town), (State) already exists and is a redirect to (Town), Australia the redirect needs to be deleted by a sysop before the move can take place. clarkk 08:21, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Naming is important. I mass changed the list of sydney suburbs when it first came out to say (suburb), New South Wales (see old revision instead of just (suburb) but that change got reverted ... now it's in a mess of (suburb) or (suburb), Australia or (suburb), New South Wales ... *sigh* Alex.tan 10:48, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * i agree it's a bit of a mess. if a suburb is unique to nsw, then it's fine to have it without disambiguation, because it facilitates serendiptious linking, e.g. there aren't too many other warrawee's in the world, if there is more than one anywhere else in the world, then suburb, nsw should be used, but i agree that it should never be (suburb), australia because there are just too many overlapping town/suburb names in australia, and contributors are invariably unaware (myself included) of town/suburbs outside their own states.   none of the us towns use (town), united states.  so what i'm saying is that a mix of (suburb) and (suburb), nsw is ok, but never (suburb), australia.   maybe a sysop could help out with fixing Newtown, Australia back to Newtown, New South Wales.  clarkk 12:21, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * With the LGAs of NSW, it might look better to say Albury, City of; Ashfield, Municipality of, etc. so the names are all in a neat column down the left hand side. I changed the As and Bs so you can see what I mean.--Randwicked 05:24, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * good idea, fine by me. clarkk 08:21, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, I may have messed things up: I was doing something unrelated and found 'Camden, Australia'; I thought that was silly because no one would find it there, never mind that there is probably more than one Camden in Australia, so I changed it to Camden, New South Wales, but it looked clunky so I changed it to Camden (New South Wales) thinking that would be a better place for a stub.  Should it be Camden, New South Wales?  Quill 23:22, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * yep, it should be, but it can easily fixed by moving the page (see move a page), i have gone ahead and done it. clarkk 22:58, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Good for you--thanks! Quill 01:05, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Nothing to do with any of the above, and I didn't want to come in and suddenly change anything -- but why is Elanora Heights listed as Elanora on this page? It redirects, but I always thought it was E. Heights. Maybe it is listed that way in some source? Xenobea (talk) 20:00, 19 January 2012 (UTC) Because wrong here is official source. Crusoe8181 (talk) 04:48, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Hi Crusoe8181, thanks - but that source lists Elanora as the Trig station (hopefully you know what that is) and Elanora Heights as the suburb.Xenobea (talk) 07:02, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Broadway
Somebody removed Broadway saying "not a suburb." Is ther still a PO and postcode for Broadway?

Broadway is a locality, it has postcode 2007. Ref: 1998 Gregory's Sydney Street Directory; Suburn and Localities list --darkov

Separate pages for LGAs and suburbs that share the same name
I would like to bring up the pages on the Local Government Areas in Sydney. Of the 38 LGAs, there are 34 that share their name with a suburb. The exceptions are Botany Bay, Ku-ring-gai, Pittwater and Warringah. I would like to suggest that for the remaining 34, that there be a page about the LGA and a page for the suburb itself.

At the moment, there is Baulkham Hills Shire and Baulkham Hills, New South Wales; Hornsby Shire, New South Wales and Hornsby, New South Wales; Municipality of Strathfield and Strathfield, New South Wales; Sutherland Shire and Sutherland, New South Wales; City of Sydney and Sydney central business district. I have also, in the last couple of days, separated "Botany Bay" into Botany Bay (the bay itself), Botany, New South Wales (the suburb) and City of Botany Bay (the LGA).

So out of the 34, only 5 have separate pages. This means there are 29 pages which combine information about the LGA and the suburb itself.

Melbourne have separate pages about their LGAs but only a handful share the name.

I think its important to clearly state the difference between the two.

Please add any thoughts or comments -- Ianblair23 01:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for taking this issue up. How should we distinguish between LGAs and suburbs?  Should we use something like "City of Bankstown, New South Wales" and "Suburb of Bankstown, New South Wales"? Should we also have guidelines on what sort of material should be included in one or the other? -- Newhoggy 06:59, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

 * All Australian localities - bar capital cities and a few extremely well-known places - must follow the "{Town/Suburb}, State" convention. The way to differentiate LGA's that share a name with a suburb/town is to use its official name. Thus, "City of Bankstown" or "Sutherland Shire". I believe, like Ianblair above, that LGA's should always be found at the official name, rather than the associated town. This is what is done for SA LGA's. There may be some exceptions, which would need to be defined, but I think this should be standard. I also think I remember there being a discussion about this some time ago, but I may be wrong. Probably best leave notices on WikiProject Sydney and AWNB before finalising anything.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 08:56, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 100% agree. It's kind of the only sane way of organising things. However, Sydney is always changing suburbs and amalgamating LGAs, so page moves and merges are going to be needed as these things happen. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a very good idea... I've already done this for Strathfield - the LGA is Municipality of Strathfield. In order to sort out overlapping history I made an article call the History of the Strathfield area. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:32, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Below are listed the official names of each of the 38 LGAs. This was taken from Local Government Areas of New South Wales and reconfirmed by each of their websites.
 * Municipality of Ashfield
 * Auburn Council
 * City of Bankstown
 * Baulkham Hills Shire
 * City of Blacktown
 * City of Botany Bay
 * Burwood Council
 * Camden Council
 * City of Campbelltown'''
 * City of Canada Bay
 * City of Canterbury
 * City of Fairfield
 * City of Holroyd
 * Hornsby Shire
 * Municipality of Hunter's Hill
 * City of Hurstville
 * Municipality of Kogarah
 * Ku-ring-gai Council
 * Municipality of Lane Cove
 * Municipality of Leichhardt
 * City of Liverpool
 * Manly Council
 * Marrickville Council
 * Municipality of Mosman
 * North Sydney Council
 * City of Parramatta
 * City of Penrith
 * Pittwater Council
 * City of Randwick
 * City of Rockdale
 * City of Ryde
 * Municipality of Strathfield
 * Sutherland Shire
 * City of Sydney
 * Warringah Council
 * Waverley Council
 * City of Willoughby
 * Municipality of Woollahra
 * The question that I put before everyone is should we put the articles under these names or should we add ", New South Wales" after each as we do for the suburbs. -- Ianblair23 23:56, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think the "state" clause is necessary for LGAs; they are distiguished enough by their official names. Also, it would be aesthetically hideous.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:18, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with you. Ok I will go ahead and start separating them out. -- Ianblair23 03:43, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

As can be seen by the list above, I have just finished creating pages for the LGAs. Two points - "Hornsby Shire, New South Wales" was changed to "Hornsby Shire" and "City of Canterbury" is at "City of Canterbury, New South Wales" due to the City of Canterbury in Kent, England.

Both the Sydney regions template and the Local Government Areas of New South Wales page has been updated with the correct links. -- Ianblair23 14:21, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The "City of Liverpool" is now at "City of Liverpool, New South Wales" and "City of Liverpool" is now a disambiguation page. -- Ianblair23 06:05, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I would argue that LGAs would take priority over Suburbs. In my case of Campbelltown, people more easily identify the name "Campbelltown" with the wider city than with the suburb itself, and I'd suggest that would be the case with most LGAs. I think it would make more sense to have "Campbelltown" (to use my example) as the LGA article and "Suburb of Campbelltown to refer to the small suburb in the middle of the LGA. Braue 15:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Help requested to add a least a stub entry for every Sydney suburb
Folks, I've made some updates to many Sydney suburb articles. Here's what has been done:
 * Added stubs for many missing suburbs (still need to do 'B' to 'H' inclusive, otherwise have tried to add stub).
 * Added map links to almost every suburb (still need to do 'B' to 'H' inclusive, otherwise have tried to add maps).
 * Added Sydney suburb categories where required.

In the process of doing this though, there were some questions I had that I cannot answer. I'm asking for your assistance in solving these, because when B-H plus these last these few things are done then we should have at least a stub, with map links, for every suburb in Sydney. This would be a great position to be in, as those stubs will provide the basis onto which people with local knowledge will be able to build, and will have an entry in the Wikipedia for every single Sydney suburb.

These are the questions and problems that remain to be solved or done:

I could not find longitude and latitude information for the suburbs below. Firstly, can we please check that they really are suburbs (and if they aren't, can we please remove them from the List of Sydney suburbs). And if they are suburbs, can someone please find longitude and latitude info, and add this to the pages using the Template:Mapit-AUS-suburbscale (see most Sydney suburbs - e.g. Arcadia, New South Wales - for an example of how to use this). http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.751&y=-33.782&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.751&y=-33.715&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6
 * Warringah Mall -- Is this really a suburb? Thought it was a just a shopping mall. (e.g. does it have it's own postcode?) Have removed this from list of suburbs for the time being.
 * Town Hall, Sydney, New South Wales. -- Is this really a suburb? (e.g. does it have it's own postcode?) Have added as a Australian building stub for the time being.
 * Quarry Hill, New South Wales. - Location information seems to be wrong, cannot see on this map:
 * Pendle Hill South, New South Wales. -- Is this really a suburb? Not listed on the long / lat search sites.
 * Mount Pleasant, New South Wales - is this a suburb? Description seems to indicate is a housing estate, not a suburb.
 * Newbury, New South Wales. Cannot find co-ords on the Geoscience Australia web site.
 * Kingswood Park, New South Wales. - Location info may be wrong, could not see on this map: http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.718&y=-33.732&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6
 * Lemongrove - Location info may be wrong, could not see on this map:

Other questions:

Should these be removed from the list of suburbs of Sydney?
 * Warragamba, New South Wales - describes itself as a town of NSW. Therefore, question is whether it is a suburb of Sydney?
 * Kings Cross, New South Wales - describes itself as a "former suburb that is now an inner-city locality" - should be removed from list of suburbs?

Removed as already pointed to an existing suburb:
 * St Ives Chase. - is "St Ives Chase" a distinct suburb from "St Ives" ?

Added, but want to double-check:
 * Maroubra Junction, New South Wales - is actually a suburb?

Other things found whilst going through the articles:

Badly needs to be cleaned up and made less POV:
 * Macquarie Fields. -- E.g. the current text be reworked, and the stuff on the talk page be incorporated into the main thing?

Admin action required:
 * Can an admin please swap Illawong and Illawong, New South Wales ?

Could not suburb see at the map co-ords I found, so no additions have been made - please check co-ords (and update if necessary) and then add their appropriate suburbs: http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.94387&y=-33.94969&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.81667&y=-34.10000&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.82267&y=-33.77287&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.77702&y=-33.34061&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.92040&y=-33.93059&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.66439&y=-33.80745&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6 http://www.street-directory.com.au/sd_new/genmap.cgi?x=150.88944&y=-33.76920&sizex=800&sizey=800&level=5&enlarge=1&star=6
 * Anzac Village, New South Wales
 * Rosemeadow, New South Wales
 * Oakhurst, New South Wales
 * Mulgrave, New South Wales
 * Mount Pritchard
 * Kingswood, New South Wales
 * Kings Park, New South Wales

-- All the best, Nickj (t) 08:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Also, if your suburb is missing from this list, then please add it (e.g. there are some suburbs listed on Template:Sydney Manly suburbs and Template:Sydney Warringah suburbs and Template:Sydney Pittwater suburbs that do not appear on this list). Looking to either add any missing subrubs to this list, or remove them from the different regional suburb lists if they aren't suburbs. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 08:59, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know what source you've used for coordinates. The one I use is Geoscience Australia place name search. Type SUB is a suburb, LOCB is a town (many are now suburbs anyway), and LOCU is much the same, but doesn't have gazetted legal boundaries. Abbotsbury is listed as LOCB for example. --Scott Davis Talk 10:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for that - I was using a data source which came via the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and it sometimes had omissions or errors (so does Geoscience Australia from the looks of it, but not so much). I've added the suburbs I can now (so the only things listed above are questions that are still open), and will also add the link to this data source to the mapping information section. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 03:01, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey Nick, wow what a great job!! Now that all the LGAs have been created, I think that the opening sentence should read something like:
 *  is a suburb in the  in the  of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia.
 * For example:
 * Randwick is a suburb in the City of Randwick in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia.
 * or
 * Quakers Hill is a suburb in the City of Blacktown in Western Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia.
 * or
 * Mona Vale is a suburb in the Local Government Area of Pittwater Council on the Northern Beaches of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia.
 * I think we need some sort of consistency across the board on this.
 * Also, I have created the Sydney Blacktown suburbs template which has been placed on all the suburbs in the City of Blacktown. It would be great if we could create a template for each of the other LGAs.
 * In regard to the Sydney regions template, I have removed it from all of the suburb articles and placed it only on the LGA and Sydney region articles.

 * Now in regard to your queries Nick. I know this has been asked several times but what is the "official" boundaries of Sydney. For instance to the west, is Kurrajong in Sydney? Is Emu Plains in Sydney? Is Mulgoa in Sydney? To the south, is Narellan in Sydney, is Waterfall in Sydney? To the north, is Forrest Glen in Sydney, is Brooklyn in Sydney? Is there a boundary at all?
 * My answers to the questions above is I don't know. So who is to decide whether we include a suburb in this project or not. Perhaps we can start a list of questionable Sydney suburbs. My suggestion is that we do not let that stop us writing about them.
 * Now another question which I sure has been asked before is how is a "suburb" defined? What is the difference between a "suburb" and a "locality". Again I don't know the answer. However, I do know that just because an area is assigned a postcode, that doesn't mean it is a suburb or even a locality. So Warringah Mall is definity NOT a suburb.
 * It may not be the absolute best source, but the newly released 2006 UBD Sydney and Blue Mountains Street Directory (42nd Edition) lists all the suburbs and localities. It states that "with the help of the appropriate authorities we have differentiated between suburbs and localities." They also have a third category, "local name or railway station". So using this:
 * Town Hall is listed as a locality.
 * Quarry Hill is not listed at all.
 * Pendle Hill South is NOT a suburb. Nor is "South Pendle Hill" for that matter. One has to be careful when "North", "South", "East" and "West" is being used as either a prefix or suffix in suburb names.
 * Mount Pleasant is listed as a "local name".
 * Newbury is currently not listed. However, Newbury will eventually become a suburb. It currently falls within the boundary of Stanhope Gardens just off Old Windsor Road. It is a massive housing estate similar but larger than Glenmore Park, near Penrith.
 * Kingswood Park is listed as a "local name".
 * Lemongrove is listed as a "local name" under "Lemon Grove".
 * Kings Cross is listed as a locality.
 * St Ives Chase is listed as a suburb.
 * Maroubra Junction is listed as a locality.
 * In regards to Illawong, I have informed Ambi, an admin, about the requested page move.
 * Please add any thoughs or comments. Regards -- Ianblair23 05:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree that it would be good to have a definition of what counts as a suburb i) to go on this page; ii) to be called a suburb on it's page (not necessarily the same thing). I wouldn't have called Wolli Creek a suburb, having lived near there for quite some time, but apparently the Geoscience Australia list calls it a locality and Australia Post call it a delivery area, so maybe that's enough to put it on the list. Should it really be called a suburb, though? (and as an aside, was it even a locality name before the station was built??) JPD 16:52, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you both for the great feedback and info! Some notes below: -- All the best, Nickj (t) 01:33, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Pendle Hill South, New South Wales has been removed from the list, as it's not a suburb (had no article, so no article to delete).
 * Quarry Hill, New South Wales has had speedy deletion requested, and has been removed from the list of suburbs.
 * Added an attempt at a definition of what can and cannot be included to the top of the list, as follows: Definition of what can and cannot be included: A suburb or locality can be listed here if it is included in the "Suburb and Localities Index" of the most recent edition of the Sydney UBD street directory, as either a suburb, or as a locality which is shown on the map. Localities not shown on the map, and "local names" should not be included in this list. Does that seem reasonable? It basically matches 99% of what's already on this list, and the 1% in which it differs from the list is the dubious stuff that we're already trying to work out what to do with. For example, the three "local names" listed above (Mount Pleasant, Kingswood Park, and Lemongrove) would not make the grade, but the listed localities (Kings Cross, Maroubra Junction, and Town Hall) would make the grade. It's also a simple, qualitative, and unambiguous test, plus it makes it much easier to work out what's missing.
 * Some possibly missing suburbs / localities: For 'W' to 'Z', in my old copy of the UBD (32nd edition), it lists the following suburbs & localities: Yellow rock, New South Wales, Yarrandale, New South Wales, Wynyard, New South Wales, Wisemans Ferry, New South Wales, Winmalee, New South Wales, Werombi, New South Wales, Webbs creek, New South Wales, Warumbul, New South Wales, Warrimoo, New South Wales. Are these also in your more recent edition? If so, and if you're happy with the definition of what to include, can you please add them to the list of suburbs?
 * Wolli Creek, New South Wales is not in the list of suburbs in my old copy of the UBD, but I don't know if that's because it has been added since. Can someone please check if it's include in a more recent edition? If not, maybe we should remove it (if you're happy with the definition of what and what not to include).
 * I don't feel that using a particular street directory's listing is an appropriate way to define it. Also, even if localities (eg Wolli Creek and Marrickville South - probably many more) should be listed in this list of Sydney suburbs, I don't think they should be called "suburbs" on their pages. As for your listed missing suburbs - I'd gues most of them are at best borderline Sydney. Winmalee and Warrimoo are both in the Blue Mountains. JPD 09:50, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Agreed, because there will never be agreement on which street directory is to be taken as authoritative. The mapit links in Wikipedia seem to use street-directory.com.au which is based on Sydway (my personal favourite), but in Sydney more people use Gregory's/whereis.com.au - we don't need religious wars about which street directory to use. Maybe Australia Post's postcode list, ignoring anything that is a Mail Centre, GPO/PO Boxes only, etc.? Haven't looked at the list to confirm feasibility of that, will do so at a more civilised time of day. --Paddles 15:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Definitions - OK, but rather than a negative ("don't feel that"), can you please express a positive - e.g. "I would suggest that we define a Sydney suburb as X", where X is some criteria that would be acceptable to you. I know it's harder to do that, but the point is it's much more constructive because it gives us something to work with.
 * I've changed the first line of the Wolli Creek and Marrickville South articles to say they are localities, not suburbs. I have not altered their suburb stub status or their suburb categories, simply because I'm not sure what to do with these - i.e. should these stay as is, or should we make up new stubs / categories for Sydney localities?
 * Which suburbs to include as part of Sydney is a subset of the whole definition problem. Provide a good definition, and it will automatically tell you what counts as a suburb and what doesn't, and what counts as part of Sydney, and what doesn't.
 * For my 2 cents, to the north if it includes Gosford and surrounds it's gone too far, to the south if it includes Wollongong and surrounds it's going too far, to the east is ocean so that's easy, and towards the Blue Mountains the western-most suburbs we have currently seem to be Leonay and Emu Plains (maybe we should say if you're west of the City of Penrith you're part of the Blue Mountains, rather than a suburb of Sydney?). Far north-west and far south-west may need some similar semi-arbitrary cut-off point. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 00:00, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I have rethought my position, and now think that we should only include places classified as "suburbs" by the Geographical Names Board. I apologise about Wolli Creek - it has been classified a suburb since 2002. The GNB also lists "localities" (eg Town Hall, North Homebush) and "neighbourhoods" (eg Marrickville South), but I don't think these need to be included. The question of boundaries of Sydney is a bit hard - the LGAs of Sydney box uses the lgas classified as Sydney by the Dept of Local Government, but I don't think the LGA boundaries are always helpful. City of Penrith is a good boundary, but IMHO Richmond should be inside the boundary although Hawkesbury LGA isn't counted as Sydney. In the absence of anything better, I'd use the Hawkesbury/Nepean River in the north/north west, and then the boundaries of City of Penrith, Camden Council, City of Campbelltown and Sutherland Shire. (does this go too far south?) JPD 11:45, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I have compiled a list of the differences between the current list, and a list using my proposed definition at User:JPD/suburb. This might make it easier for anyone to comment on the definition. JPD 18:56, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I like your list, and I like your definition. How about the following as a suggestion: Thoughts / comments / ideas / suggestions ? -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:17, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Anything with "???" gets deleted both from the list, and gets speedy deleted as an article (i.e. Anzac Village, Chatham Village, North Cronulla, North Engadine - all of which are either stubs, or don't exist yet). From previous discussion somewhere above, Newbury seems to be an exception, because it's so new, and so it should probably be kept.
 * From comparing my old UBD to a current web map, Anzac Village, New South Wales is slightly north of Wattle Grove, and now called Greenbrook village. It is at best a locality, plus it's not included in the Geoscience Australia or the GNB databases, so I reckon kill it.
 * Also from comparing my old UBD to a current web map, Chatham Village, New South Wales is slightly east of Wattle Grove, and now called Steele Barracks. It's a barracks, so it's not even a locality, plus it's not included in either the Geoscience Australia or the GNB databases, so I reckon kill it.
 * There is no North Engadine in either the Geoscience Australia or the GNB databases. (It is however listed as a locality in my old copy of the UBD.) To avoid it being recreated, I'm leaning towards making this a redirect to Engadine, and removing it from the list. That way if we change our minds, or if it later becomes an official suburb, that edit can always be reverted.
 * There is no North Cronulla in either the Geoscience Australia or the GNB databases. (It is however listed as a locality in my old copy of the UBD.) To avoid it being recreated, I'm leaning towards making this a redirect to Cronulla, and removing it from the list. That way if we change our minds, or if it later becomes an official suburb, that edit can always be reverted.
 * Anything in bold gets added as a suburb (both to the list, and I'll add suburb stubs when I get around to it).
 * Anything in that's an Urban Place / Neighbourhood / Locality / Point / Port / Hill / Island / Historical Locality / Urban Locality, we keep in the list, but we put (Locality) or (Neighbourhood) or whatever after their listing, so that people know they're not technically a suburb, but we still retain all the usefulness of having them in this list. The articles are updated accordingly so that the description doesn't say "is a suburb of Sydney", but instead says "is a locality / neighbourhood / whatever of Sydney". This also prevents people from re-adding them to this list. I know this suggestion is likely to be the most contentious.
 * We do the four article moves suggested by the list (Tennyson -> Tennyson Point, South Strathfield -> Strathfield South, West Strathfield -> Strathfield West, and East Balmain -> Balmain East).
 * For Flemington and St Helens Park, which can't decide if they're suburbs or neighbourhoods, we give them the benefit of the doubt, and treat them as suburbs.
 * The definition of what can listed on the list is updated to say it must be on the GNB website + be within the boundaries suggested. Any localities / neighbourhoods / etc can be listed, but must be clearly marked as such in the list. Also we let people add these as they come across them, rather than trying to be exhaustive about it (as we probably should be for suburbs) - for example, I don't intend on adding stubs for things in these categories, but I do intend on doing so for missing suburbs.

 * Sounds good to me. My only resevations are about the "most contentious" suggestion. Putting (Locality), etc would clutter the list a lot. Would it be better or worse to put all the non-suburbs in italics, with an explanation at the top? I think I have seen that style used in street directories somewhere. As for including them in the list, your suggestion (can be added if on GNB, but no need to be exhaustive) sounds reasonable when thinking of the list as a whole, but I don't think there needs to be a separate article for some of the places already listed - mainly those are contained in a suburb. When I get round to expanding Marrickville, New South Wales (I am a bit far from my reference materials for my liking at the moment), I should include everything that could possibly be in Marrickville South, New South Wales. Maybe the solution is to leave it on the list as a neighbourhood, but make the article a redirect? I am also a bit worried that too many Points / Ports / Hills / Peninsulars / Islands might be added - maybe there should also be a condition that these (or non-suburbs in general) should only be included if they are used as a locality name in a modern street directory. Same goes for Historical Localities - some are more "historical" than others. Looking forward to your thoughts - we seem to be getting somewhere! JPD 13:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

That all sounds fine to me. I've done my best to put the above into practice, because I think we're basically in agreement: Please don't hesitate to update/edit any of the above if I've missed anything or if you think there's a better way to do it. Also having redirects from locality names to suburb articles sounds fine to me, assuming that the suburb article includes most of what would have gone in the locality article if they had been separate. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:41, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * removed the 4 duds from list
 * added the missing bolded suburbs to the list
 * put any non-suburbs into italics
 * did the 4 moves and updated the list
 * updated the definition of what's on or can be added to the list

Tennyson Name clash?
Tennyson Point, New South Wales and Tennyson Point. Same name, yet one is near Glossodia, and the other is near Gladesville. Is there a better way to name these, so as to differentiate them? - All the best, Nickj (t) 08:41, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Based on http://www.ga.gov.au/bin/gazm01?placename=tennyson&placetype=R&state=NSW and the map linked from Tennyson Point, New South Wales, that one (on the Hawkesbury) should be at Tennyson, New South Wales, and the article currently at Tennyson Point should be at Tennyson Point, New South Wales. I also verified that with reference to List of postcodes in New South Wales (N-Z). --Scott Davis Talk 09:49, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Tennyson, (on the Hawkesbury) has the official name Tennyson, but is outside the boundaries described earlier (NW of the Hawkesbury). According to the GNB, Tennyson Point, near Gladesville has the "Point" added to differentiate the two, but Tennyson is also listed as a variant name. JPD 17:55, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you both, with the help of Ambi the changes described above have been made, and everything should now be in the right place. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Strathfield West
When I was compiling my list earlier, I didn't notice that the Strathfield West neighbourhood desgination by the GNB was withdrawn in 1992. I haven't found the name on any maps, so unless it is in a modern edition of a street directory, I would suggest removing it. JPD 11:10, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Done, and I've made Strathfield West, New South Wales redirect to Strathfield, New South Wales (if anyone disagrees with this please feel free to revert this edit). -- All the best, Nickj (t) 07:02, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Accuracy of the GNB Register
According to the GNB Register (as referenced in this article), Snapper Island is in the LGA of Leichhardt. But the planning brief from the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust for the same island explicitly states ''Snapper Island is unincorporated. This means that it does not fall within any particular Local Government Area.''. Makes me wonder how accurate the register is. -- chris_j_wood 10:16, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

 * "You may notice that there are references to 'old' LGA names, topographic maps and parishes in the database. This is because the geographical features were originally gazetted against these old names." Basically, the register is a register of gazettals, not of the current details. Taken in that way, it's quite accurate. JPD 11:01, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Bankstown Airport
The GNB lists 'Bankstown Airport' as an aerodrome with previous name 'Bankstown Aerodrome'. It also lists 'Bankstown Aerodrome' as the current name (assigned 1994) for the suburb surrounding the airport. I agree that this doesn't match common usage, but it is what it says. JPD 09:23, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

 * OK - I was initially trying to use the existing Bankstown airport article for both the suburb and the airport, but do you reckon two separate articles, one on the airport called "Bankstown Airport" (with all the current airporty stuff including Airport call signs), and a new one on the suburb called "Bankstown Aerodrome" (initally a standard suburb stub plus a link to the airport article) is the correct way to go? -- All the best, Nickj (t) 00:42, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

If the suburb were bigger than the airport, I'd make another article, but it looks like it's at most the airport and a park. Maybe the article should mention that the suburb name is officially Aerodrome. The only question remaining is which name to use in the list, which is difficult, since most maps use "airport" as the name of the suburb as well as the airport. JPD 10:55, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I'd use the common usage, I think - that's generally what we've done elsewhere in similar situations. Noting the official name would be a good idea, though. Ambi 07:41, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I grew up in Condell Park, and never heard the terms "Bankstown Airport/Aerodrome" used in the sense of a "suburb". Most people think of residential areas when the term "suburb" is used (maybe that is just my own error?).  On the other hand, there are plenty of other accepted "suburbs" which are almost entirely industrial areas, and uninhabited at night.  What can I say, "accepted usage" isn't always logical nor consistent.  I had always thought the official name of the facility was "Bankstown Aerodrome", even though we referred to it casually as "the Airport".

 * The GNB Glossary Of Designation Values In The Register defines suburb as "A bounded area within the landscape that has an 'Urban' Character" — which isn't particularly helpful.

 * The 2006 UBD (42nd edn.) definitely lists Bankstown Airport (not Aerodrome) as a "suburb"; but I have an old 26th edition (no publication year) which depicts it on the map in bold mixed-case (locality) rather than all-caps (suburb) or non-bold (c.f. Riverwood Golf Course). Another notable difference is that the old map only has a Postcode boundary drawn around all the 2200 suburbs, wheras the new one has a Suburb boundary around Bankstown Airport: surely this boundary must have been officially defined somewhere?

 * The Geographical Names Register Abstract for Bankstown Airport gives "Designation: Aerodrome" (not suburb) [as JPD noted]. Businesses within the area would give "Bankstown Airport 2200" in their delivery address, though.

 * I'm not sure how much this illuminates the question "what is a suburb?"; more likely it emphasises the difficulties that can arise.

 * Personally, I'd be inclined to put a section in the airporty article commenting on its questionable status as a locality (or "Urban Place", ergh) vs. suburb, rather than creating a separate entry. But keeping them separate might prevent an aviation-centric user from deleting the toponymic information?

 * [forgive me for any faux pas, I'm new at this]
 * Pelagic 12:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

 * There's no faux pas, so no need to apologize. You're welcome to add something to the Bankstown Airport article if you can think of a better way of explaining that it's officially sort-of-considered to be a suburb, although to the local inhabitants it's considered more of a locality. As for the definition of what is a suburb and what isn't, we went through a number of definitions (e.g. using street directories), but they had problems (using street directories relies on an external commercial source; not all are online, such as the UBD; what to do if street directories differ?), so we settled on the current definition (which basically passes the whole problem off to the GNB, but since it's basically their job anyway, and they put their data online, it seems to be the best/easiest/least-ambiguous definition of what a suburb is at the current point in time). So, for the time being, the GNB says that Bankstown Aerodrome is a suburb (and the entry looks current from the "Status" field), but then confuses the whole issue by saying Bankstown Airport is classed as an Aerodrome, and that the previous name is Bankstown Aerodrome! -- All the best, Nickj (t) 06:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Some questions
-- All the best, Nickj (t) 09:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Should we add Iron Cove to list of suburbs / localities? (has an article)
 * Should we add Yarra Junction, New South Wales to list of suburbs / localities? (no article, but is in list of suburbs in City of Randwick)
 * Should we add Milson Island to the list of suburbs / localities? (has an article)
 * Should the currently non-existent Broadway article use and expand on the Broadway, Sydney article, which is currently just about the road?

 * I wouldn't add Iron Cove, since to me it seems to refer to the bay, not to a land area next to it.
 * OK.
 * Add Yarra Junction if you can find it on a map, or other evidence of significant use of the name, otherwise remove it from City of Randwick. I left it at Randwick because it is in the GNR, but its status is given as decision deferred.
 * I can't readily check it at the moment because the most useful mapping website has just died, but I will look at this again later, and either add a stub or remove it from the list.
 * I have removed it because on the map I can see a Yarray Bay, a Yarra Point, and a Yarra Road, but no Yarra Junction. It can always be added back later if its status changes. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:34, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * GNB has Milson Island as part of the suburb of Milsons Passage, but it has it's own postcode - that seems significant enough for a listing to me.
 * Done.
 * I think the road and suburb can go together. JPD 09:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Cool, done. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 12:57, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Yay, no more redlinks! On to cleaning up LGAs...
Yay, there are currently no more redlinks on the list of Sydney suburbs!

I'm thinking now we should clean up the Local Government Areas of Sydney. Doing this will find any missing suburbs or useful localities, and also allow us to strip out the bad data from the LGAs. Some of the lists of suburbs may have come from the department of local government, and unfortunately they are often a little bit too generous with their definitions of what counts as a suburb.

I've had a look through the LGAs and the suburb templates (for those LGAs that have them), and made a list of those that have redlinks left. The ultimate aim being that all either LGAs should have no redlinks or that their redlinks should also be listed on the list of Sydney suburbs.

The following have a few redlinks:
 * City of Fairfield - done.
 * [[Municipality of Kogarah done by J Bar.
 * Municipality of Mosman
 * City of Sydney - should add the Macdonaldtown urban locality, the Chinatown urban locality, probably St James, and maybe Golden Grove. - done.
 * City of Canada Bay - 2 localities to add, I'll add these another day. - closure by removing them instead.
 * Municipality of Woollahra - done.
 * City of Liverpool

These LGAs have lots of redlinks:
 * City of Blacktown - done.
 * Camden Council - done by Braue.
 * City of Campbelltown, apart from Sherwood Hills -- (I've removed sherwood hills Braue 06:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC))
 * City of Canterbury, New South Wales - done J Bar.
 * Hornsby Shire and Template:Sydney Hornsby suburbs Done by Dankru Yay!! I finished it
 * Municipality of Hunter's Hill
 * City of Hurstville - done by J Bar.
 * Municipality of Lane Cove complete except for "notable residents" Xenobea (talk) 23:38, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * City of Liverpool Have revised and fixed list
 * Manly Council and Template:Sydney Manly suburbs
 * North Sydney Council
 * City of Parramatta
 * City of Penrith - done by Nick81.
 * Pittwater Council and Template:Sydney Pittwater suburbs
 * City of Rockdale - done by J Bar.
 * City of Ryde - done by Dankru.
 * Sutherland Shire - suburb list & template cleaned, some suburbs' articles still have redlinks within them. - done by J Bar.
 * Warringah Council and Template:Sydney Warringah suburbs - done.

Can I please ask people to have a look at the LGAs they know or care about to help clean them up? Basically we should be able to get all the above LGAs updated to:
 * Favour removing any entries which are not suburbs (as defined by the GNB's name search).
 * Remove any localities which show as status "deferred" using the GNB's name search.
 * Favour removing any localities which are not well known.
 * Suggest leaning towards removing any localities which are redlinks, unless they are well known.
 * Do not remove any items which are suburbs and which are redlinks.

Things to check also are:
 * Check against the list of Sydney suburbs for misspellings of the suburb names.
 * Check against the list of Sydney suburbs for variants of suburb names, especially those that start or end in North, South, East or West. For example "St Ives North" was redlined, but is listed under "North St Ives". In these cases suggest changing the link to point to the right article, and adding a redirect (e.g. from "St Ives North, New South Wales" to "North St Ives, New South Wales"), to help prevent confusion or duplicates in future.
 * Quick update: the suburb table listed below will help with locating missing variant suburb name redirects. -- Nickj (t) 04:00, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

If after the above you do think a suburb or locality that is redlined should be kept and added, can you please add it to the list of Sydney suburbs, as this makes it easy to see what still needs to be done.

-- All the best, Nickj (t) 07:55, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I've noticed some templates are suburbs and localities whereas others are only suburbs. I think they should be suburbs only as localities hardly get articles. What you think?? Dankru 13:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm fairly sure some of the areas in the Sutherland Shire list are fictional, Bangor Heights and Menai Heights I've never heard of but Menai East is occasionally used to describe part of Menai. Granted my knowledge of my own local area is slightly limited, but the Bangor/Menai reigon is the part I know best. Quolnok 05:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Two redlinks currently (may be recent additions? Gregory Hills and Lower Hawkesbury. Xenobea (talk) 21:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Extensive table of Sydney suburbs added
Howdy all, An extensive table of Sydney suburbs (and their different possible names) has been added at List of Sydney suburbs/table. The quick primer on using it is this: Ideally everything in columns 1, 2, 5, and 6 should be blue; and everything in columns 3 and 4 should either be red, or if it is blue it should be checked to make sure that it is either a redirect page, or a disambig page that includes a link to the Sydney suburb of the same name, or includes a "see also" link to the Sydney suburb of that name. Currently only the two rightmost columns remain to be done (everything should be blue in these); All the other columns I think should be done now. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 05:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Now split between List of Sydney suburbs/table (A-M) and List of Sydney suburbs/table (N-Z), although pretty much everything in those tables is now done I think. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Localities v suburbs
One thing giving me the shits on Council pages in Sydney is that many of the "suburbs" are not suburbs at all! I had to change the City of Ryde list and move all the non-suburbs onto a list of localities. Even then, I would debate a few of them even exisiting as I grew up in Ryde/Hunters Hill area and have never heard of many of the localities referred to.

For example, Monash Park, New South Wales. This is a post office with PO Boxes and a cricket oval. THAT'S IT. No one calls it Monash Park and if they do, they're merely referring to the cricket/soccer ground.

I am sure this is the case for many other Council pages. I have fixed up Municipality of Hunter's Hill and City of Ryde but I know many others need work. Dankru 14:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * You want to know where they come from? You sitting down? Ready for the awful truth? From here. That's right. The NSW Department of local government, who maintain a list of what suburbs are in a council, which was the starting point for many of our lists: but it turns out their lists are woefully wrong, and list many suburbs that no sane local resident would say exists. So the very government department responsible for saying who's responsible for what suburb, knows nada / zip / zilch / nothing. Reassuring to see our tax dollars hard at work, huh? Hence the desire to clean up the LGAs. -- All the best, Nickj (t) 23:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Town Hall
OK, this is a confusing one, and hopefully I haven't added to the confusion. There seems to be a proliferation of pages about Town Hall, including two building stubs for the building, so I'm trying to clean it up a bit. I removed it from the List of Sydney suburbs and Suburbs of Sydney nicknames on the basis that it isn't a suburb, and isn't shown as such in my street directory (Sydway) - or in the list Nickj mentioned above as it turns out (although I didn't find this page until afterwards). If consensus is deleting the references to it as a suburb was a bad idea, feel free to replace them, I'm not going to get into an edit war over it - but I am going to try and keep working on the conflicting Sydney Town Hall building pages. --Paddles 15:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's included in my very old (1996) UBD under the "Suburbs and Localities" index as a "Locality". I agree it's not a suburb, and agree with removing any references to it as a suburb; but it may be worth still including it in the list of suburbs, as this list includes many other localities too (basically anything in italics is a locality). Essentially, Suburb: no, Building: yes, Locality: maybe. I don't feel strongly about it either though ;-) -- All the best, Nickj (t) 02:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * A lot of "suburbs" in Sydney started because it was too far to walk to the next Cityrail railway station... So if Town Hall isn't a suburb, what suburb is it in? Garrie 04:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Station names don't have to reflect suburb names. Town Hall is in Sydney 2000, as is Wynyard Station. Central Station is in Haymarket 2000. Green Square Station is in Alexandria 2015 (the area is also a locality Green Square, but not a suburb). Similarly, if we look at a couple of small streets near Town Hall, Druitt Lane and Mullins St, they are listed as being in the suburb of Sydney, not the "suburb" of Town Hall. Paddles 11:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I came back for another reason - the comment by Paddles is pretty obvious to anyone who looks in any of the sources for suburb names but it is nice to have it spelt out by someone who cared to get the details correct. Thanks Paddles (however late this is!) --Garrie 00:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Photos
You blokes have done a great job with these suburbs. I've been adding my photos to them lately, as well as expanding the text here and there. If there are any shots you could especially use, you could let me know and I'll see if I've got anything. Never know your luck.

Sardaka 10:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Suburbs
I see there has been a great deal of debate about whether certain places are suburbs or not, eg Town Hall. you could probably settle most of these debates by getting in touch with the local council, in whatever area it is.

Another resource that might come in handy is the Department of Local Government, Parliament House, Sydney.

Sardaka 10:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Sydney suburbs. 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/20081226184724/http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/name_search to http://www.gnb.nsw.gov.au/name_search

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:47, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of Sydney suburbs


text:
Robin Cooke, Baron Cooke of Thorndon

Robin Brunskill Cooke, Baron Cooke of Thorndon, (9 May 1926 – 30 August 2006) was a New Zealand judge and later a British Law Lord and member of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. He is widely considered one of New Zealand's most influential jurists, and is the only New Zealand judge to have sat in the House of Lords. He was a Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong from 1997 to 2006.

Early life and education
The son of the Supreme Court judge Justice Philip Brunskill Cooke and his wife, Valmai, Lord Cooke was born in Wellington and attended Wanganui Collegiate School. He graduated with an LL.M. from Victoria University College, and subsequently studied at Clare College, Cambridge as a Research Fellow. While on a travelling scholarship, Lord Cooke was awarded an MA in 1954 from Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge and subsequently a PhD in 1955.

In 1952, he married Annette Miller, with whom he had three sons. One of their sons, Francis, was appointed to the High Court in 2018 and the Court of Appeal in 2024.

Legal career
Cooke was admitted to the New Zealand bar in 1950, and was also admitted to the English bar as a barrister of Inner Temple in 1954. He practised law in New Zealand as a barrister for almost twenty years, and was appointed as a Queen's Counsel in 1964. At age 38, that was the youngest appointment of a QC in New Zealand; the young age record had previously been held by his father, who had been appointed aged 43.

In 1972, he was appointed as a Judge of the (former) New Zealand Supreme Court (now High Court). He held this position until 1976 when he was elevated to the New Zealand Court of Appeal (at that time the country's highest local court). In 1986, he was appointed as President of that Court – a position he was to hold for the next 10 years. On his retirement from the Court of Appeal in 1996 Cook was granted a British life peerage as Baron Cooke of Thorndon, (a suburb of Wellington) in New Zealand and of Cambridge in the County of Cambridgeshire, becoming a member of the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords where he sat as a Lord of Appeal (Law Lord) until his retirement in 2001.

He also sat (from time to time) as President in the Courts of Appeal of Samoa, the Cook Islands and Kiribati; as well as being a Non-Permanent Judge on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and a Judge of the Supreme Court of Fiji.

Cooke was the only Commonwealth judge in the past century to sit in the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords on United Kingdom appeals. He adjudicated on nearly a hundred cases in the House of Lords and the Privy Council; his final case before retirement was Delaware v City of Westminster, in October 2001.

Cooke died in Wellington on 30 August 2006. His wife, Annette, Lady Cooke, died in 2024.

Legal philosophy and influence on the law
Cooke is New Zealand's best known jurist, and is regarded as perhaps the finest judge which the country has produced. He is most widely known for his contribution to the development of administrative law (both in New Zealand and internationally) and his influence in the development of legal recognition for the Treaty of Waitangi.

Cooke was a champion of the need to develop independent jurisprudence for New Zealand. In 1956, having recently returned from the United Kingdom, he criticised New Zealand's judiciary for its "unquestioning compliance" with English case law. By 1988, Lord Cooke was pleased to be able to report that "in virtually every major field of law New Zealand law is radically, or at least very considerably, different from English law". This change was thanks in part to his own efforts. Yet Lord Cooke did not believe that different jurisdictions had nothing to learn from each other. Rather, he believed that "[c]ommon denominators may be usefully sought, as long as the process is not compelled from outside and the national ethos is allowed its own weight."

Administrative law jurisprudence
Lord Cooke took what could be considered a natural law approach to public law, often seeking to assert a right for the courts to intervene where none was prescribed in legislation. In Fraser v State Services Commission he famously made the comment that "it is arguable that some common law rights may go so deep that even Parliament cannot be accepted by the Courts to have destroyed them." This view contradicted the dominant parliamentary supremacy theories of A. V. Dicey, which had guided common law courts since the late 19th century. However, Cooke's position recalled a similar opinion expressed by the famous 17th century English jurist, Sir Edward Coke.

In Bulk Gas Users Group v Attorney-General, the then Justice Cooke delivered the leading judgment of the Court of Appeal. Cooke held that a privative clause in the Commerce Act 1975 did not prevent the courts from reviewing a decision made by the Secretary of Energy. He observed that "the Courts of general jurisdiction will be slow to conclude" that they are not permitted to rule on a question of law. This reluctance to accept the ouster of the court's jurisdiction was characteristic of Cooke's views on the importance of the courts' role in upholding the rule of law.

He took a similar approach in 1985, when he delivered the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case of Finnigan v New Zealand Rugby Football Union allowing the appeal of lawyers seeking an injunction against the NZRFU's proposed tour of South Africa. The proposed tour followed the controversial 1981 Springbok Tour, and was cancelled after the High Court re-heard the case in light of the Court of Appeal's judgment.

Perhaps the most famous public law case which Cooke decided came before him when he was President of the Court of Appeal. In Simpson v Attorney-General (commonly referred to as Baigent's case), the Court held that it is implicit in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 that breaches of human rights by public officials could result in a claim for damages — even though there is no such provision in the Act itself. In the case, the Police had mistakenly carried out a search warrant at the wrong address. Because the occupant of the house was not charged with any crime, there was no obvious remedy for the Police's illegal search (exclusion of improperly obtained evidence being the usual remedy applied in Bill of Rights Act cases). In delivering the leading judgment, President Cooke remarked that "we [the Court] would fail in our duty if we did not give an effective remedy to a person whose legislatively affirmed rights have been infringed".

Treaty of Waitangi jurisprudence
In 1987, Cooke delivered the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the landmark case of New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General, which sought to clarify what Parliament meant by section 9 of the State Owned Enterprises Act 1986. The Act stated "Nothing in this act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi", but what those principles might be was left to the courts to decide. The principles elicited by President Cooke gave legal recognition to the special relationship between the Crown and Maori. Cooke held that "the Treaty created an enduring relationship of a fiduciary nature akin to a partnership, each party accepting a positive duty to act in good faith, fairly, reasonably and honourably towards the other". This principle of partnership continues to shape the legal relations between the Crown and Maori to this day.

Legal commentary
Lord Cooke's often bold views occasionally drew criticism. In one noteworthy example, some of Australia's most senior judges co-wrote the Preface of Meagher, Gummow and Lehane’s Equity, Doctrines and Remedies, where they blamed "Lord Cooke's misguided endeavours" for what they saw as the Court of Appeal's unprincipled decisions concerning the merger of common law and equitable doctrines in New Zealand. The authors went on to remark "[t]hat one man could, in a few years, cause such destruction exposes the fragility of contemporary legal systems and the need for vigilant exposure and rooting out of error". However, not all their colleagues shared such concerns. Justice Kirby (of the High Court of Australia), in his 2008 W A Lee Lecture, noted that Lord Cooke's supposedly "heretical" views had in fact been accepted by many prominent jurists in the United Kingdom, including the House of Lords. He took issue with the tone of the Meagher Preface, remarking that "those familiar with the successive 'rooting out' of heretics in England under the later Tudors will recognise the genre of this denunciatory writing. Burning at the professional stake would seem too kind a fate for such doctrinal rascals."

Cooke himself had a formidable extrajudicial and academic presence. From 1992 until 1996, Cooke was General Editor of The Laws of New Zealand and selected the original authors for the different titles. He was also a prolific contributor to legal journals, including the Law Quarterly Review, Cambridge Law Journal and New Zealand Law Journal.

In 1996, Lord Cooke delivered the 47th Hamlyn Lecture Series, entitled Turning Points of the Common Law. In each of his four lectures, he focused on a single major case (covering public law, crime, tort and company law) and the influence of that case on the development of the common law as a whole throughout the Commonwealth.

Honours and awards
Since 2002 the Law School of Victoria University, Wellington has held an annual lecture in his honour, predominately in the area of constitutional and administrative law.
 * 1955: Yorke Prize
 * 1977: Knight Bachelor in the 1977 New Year Honours
 * 1977: Appointed to the Privy Council of the United Kingdom
 * 1977: Queen Elizabeth II Silver Jubilee Medal
 * 1986: Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire (KBE) in the 1986 Queen's Birthday Honours
 * 1982: Honorary Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge
 * 1985: Honorary Bencher of Inner Temple
 * 1989: Honorary Doctorate of Laws (LLD) from the Victoria University of Wellington
 * 1990: New Zealand 1990 Commemoration Medal
 * 1990: Honorary Doctorate of Laws (LLD) from the University of Cambridge
 * 1991: Honorary Doctorate of Civil Law (DCL) from the University of Oxford
 * 1993: Appointed to the International Commission of Jurists
 * 1996: Created a Life Peer
 * 2002: Additional Member of the Order of New Zealand in the 2002 Queen's Birthday and Golden Jubilee Honours

Cases, articles and books

 * Notable cases
 * Finnigan v New Zealand Rugby Football Union [1985] 2 NZLR 159
 * New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General [1987] 1 NZLR 641
 * R v Baker [1989] 1 NZLR 738
 * Trevor Ivory Ltd v Anderson [1992] 2 NZLR 517
 * Taylor v New Zealand Poultry Board [1984] 1 NZLR 394
 * Flickinger v Crown Colony of Hong Kong [1991] 1 NZLR 439
 * Bulk Gas Users Group v Attorney-General [1983] NZLR 129
 * Fraser v State Services Commission [1984] 1 NZLR 116
 * Horsburgh v NZ Meat Processors Industrial Union of Workers [1988] 1 NZLR 698
 * Taupo Borough Council v Birnie [1978] 2 NZLR 397
 * Notable articles
 * Cooke, Robin "An Impossible Distinction" (1991) 107 Law Quarterly Review 46
 * Cooke, Robin "The Supreme Tribunal of the British Commonwealth?" (1956) 32 NZLJ 233
 * Cooke, Robin "Fundamentals" [1988] NZLJ 158
 * Cooke, Robin "The Struggle for Simplicity in Administrative Law" in Michael Taggart (ed) Judicial Review of Administrative Action in the 1980s: Problems and Prospects (Oxford University Press, Auckland, 1986)
 * Cooke, Robin "Fairness" (1989) VUWLR 421
 * Cooke, Robin "Divergences – England, Australia and New Zealand" [1983] NZLJ 297
 * Lord Cooke "The Dream of an International Common Law" in Cheryl Saunders (ed) Courts of Final Jurisdiction: The Mason Court in Australia (Federation Press, Sydney, 1996)
 * Lord Cooke "The Common Law Through Commonwealth Eyes" (1998) 2 Inter Alia 45
 * Cooke, Robin "The New Zealand National Legal Identity" (1987) 3 Canta LR 171
 * Cooke, Robin "The Changing Face of Administrative Law" [1960] NZLJ 128
 * Cooke, Robin "The Harkness Henry Lecture: the Challenge of Treaty of Waitangi Jurisprudence" (1994) 2 Waikato L Rev 1

 * Books

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Robin Cooke, Baron Cooke of Thorndon


text:
Skort

A skort is a pair of shorts with an overlapping fabric panel made to resemble a skirt covering the front, or a skirt with a pair of integral shorts hidden underneath (also can be called sport skirts). Skort is a portmanteau of skirt and shorts.

History
While some garments sold as culottes resemble short trousers, to be skorts they need to look like skirts. They are distinguished from trousers or shorts by a fuller cut at the bottom (hem) than at the waist.

Initially called "trouser skirts," skorts were developed to provide more freedom to do activities (such as sports, gardening, cleaning, or bike riding), and give the appearance of a skirt. At first, skorts were not deemed appropriate to be worn during any non-athletic activity.

Montgomery Ward claimed in their 1959 Spring/Summer catalog to have invented the garment they called a skort. It was a short knife or accordion pleated skirt with an attached bloomer underneath. Years later, the term was applied to a pair of shorts with a flap of fabric across the front (and often the back) making the garment appear to be a skirt. In recent years, the term skort has been given to any skirt with an attached pair of shorts.

Predecessors
The origins of skorts may be related back to earlier garments like bloomers and jupe-culottes which grew in popularity in the late 19th century and early 20th century, despite common public disapproval for women wearing pants. In 1911, Paul Poiret produced several designs that were a combination of skirts and trousers, and they became known as jupe-culottes or as harem pants. Similar to skorts, culottes involve various styles that may appear as a hybrid between pants and skirts. Skorts are distinguished by their construction as a pair of shorts with material over it to make it appear as a skirt.

Women's sports
Skorts are popular in sports such as field hockey, tennis, golf, ten-pin bowling and camogie, and are often part of girls' athletic uniforms.

The first noted skort-like clothing to be worn as tennis attire was done so by the Spanish player, Lilí Álvarez, who wore a pair of culottes which had been shaped to resemble a skirt during her Wimbledon match in 1931.

Skorts continue to be popular in sports such as tennis, golf, and field hockey, but have also gained popularity in casual and athletic wear due to brands such as Lululemon. Lululemon's "Speed Up" skort, for example, has gained a following for its comfortable, moisture-wicking fabric and built-in shorts that provide coverage and protection during athletic activities.

In addition to their practicality, skorts have also become a fashion statement, with many brands offering them in a variety of styles and designs. High-waisted skorts, skorts with ruffles or asymmetrical hems, and skorts made with patterned or textured fabrics have all become popular options.

Overall, skorts have evolved from being a practical uniform option for girls in sports to a versatile and trendy clothing item that can be worn for a variety of activities.

title: Skort


text:
KOH

Koh or KOH may refer to:

Chemistry

 * Potassium hydroxide, formula "KOH"
 * KOH test, a procedure in which potassium hydroxide is used to dissolve skin and reveal fungal cells under the microscope

People

 * Koh (surname), a surname with various origins, including:
 * Xǔ (surname), a Chinese surname sometimes spelled as Koh based on its pronunciation in Southern Min dialects
 * Ko (Korean surname), occasionally spelled as Koh

People with the given name Koh include:
 * Koh Gabriel Kameda (born 1975), German-Japanese concert violinist and violin teacher
 * Koh Kojima or Kō Kojima (born 1928), Japanese manga artist
 * Koh Masaki or Kō Masaki (1983–2013), Japanese gay pornographic film actor
 * Koh Traoré (born 1989), Burkinabé born Ivorian football player
 * Koh Yasuda (1907–1943), Japanese ophthalmologist, first director of Amami Wakoen Sanatorium, a leprosy sanatorium in Japan

Places

 * Koh (កោះ Kaôh ), a Khmer word meaning 'island', found in names of islands of Cambodia
 * Koh (เกาะ), a Thai loanword from Khmer meaning 'island', found in names of islands of Thailand
 * Koh (کوه), a Dari word meaning 'mountain', found in names of mountains of Afghanistan
 * Koh (کوه), an Urdu loanword from Persian meaning 'mountain', found in names of mountains of Pakistan

Other

 * Koh the Face Stealer, a character in Avatar: The Last Airbender
 * King of the Hammers, an off-road race in Johnson Valley, California, United States

title: KOH


text:
UL (safety organization)

The UL enterprise is a global safety science company headquartered in Northbrook, Illinois, composed of three organizations, UL Research Institutes, UL Standards & Engagement and UL Solutions.

Established in 1894, the UL enterprise was founded as the Underwriters' Electrical Bureau (a bureau of the National Board of Fire Underwriters), and was known throughout the 20th century as Underwriters Laboratories. On January 1, 2012, Underwriters Laboratories became the parent company of a for-profit company in the U.S. named UL LLC, a limited liability company, which took over the product testing and certification business. On June 26, 2022, the companies rebranded into three distinct organizations that make up the UL enterprise.

The company is one of several companies approved to perform safety testing by the U.S. federal agency Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). OSHA maintains a list of approved testing laboratories, which are known as Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratories. According to Lifehacker, UL Solutions is the best known product safety and certification organization globally.

History
Underwriters Laboratories Inc. was founded in 1894 by William Henry Merrill. After graduating from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) with a degree in electrical engineering in 1889, Merrill went to work as an electrical inspector for the Boston Board of Fire Underwriters. At the turn of the twentieth century, fire loss was on the rise in the United States, and the increasing use of electricity in homes and businesses posed a serious threat to property and human life.

In order to determine and mitigate risk, Merrill proposed to open a laboratory where he would use scientific principles to test products for fire and electrical safety. The Boston Board of Fire Underwriters turned this idea down, perhaps due to Merrill's youth and relative inexperience at the time.

In May 1893, Merrill moved to Chicago to work for the Chicago Fire Underwriters' Association. His task was to inspect the city's fire alarm systems. He was also sent to the 1893 World's Fair to inspect the Fair's electrical installations and the Palace of Electricity. In order to determine and mitigate risk in his role as an electrical inspector, Merrill found it necessary to conduct tests on building materials and electrical components. Upon seeing a growing potential in this field, Merrill stayed in Chicago to found Underwriters Laboratories. He received initial funding from the Chicago Fire Underwriters' Association and the Western Insurance Union, a local insurance organization. With $350 of equipment, he opened a small laboratory on the third floor of a local fire insurance patrol station, signing UL's first test report on March 24, 1894.

Merrill soon went to work on developing safety standards, conducting tests, and uncovering hazards. In the early years, UL tested three main types of products: devices meant to stop fire (such as fire extinguishers), devices meant to resist fire (such as fire doors), and devices that frequently caused fire (like wires used for electrical installations). This work soon expanded, and throughout the twentieth century, UL certified many pivotal consumer technologies, such as vacuum cleaners, televisions, microwaves, personal computers, and more.

UL published its first standard, "Tin Clad Fire Doors", in 1903. In 1906, UL established a Label Service for certain product categories that require more frequent inspections. Products that passed UL's testing and regular inspections were given a UL label, which eventually evolved into the UL Mark. From 1905 to 1979, UL Headquarters was located at 207-231 East Ohio Street in Chicago. In 1979, the organization moved its headquarters to a 153-acre campus in Northbrook, Illinois, 25 miles north of its former downtown Chicago location.

UL Solutions has evolved from its roots in electrical and fire safety to address broader safety issues, such as hazardous substances, water quality, food safety, performance testing, safety and compliance education, and environmental sustainability.

On January 1, 2012, Underwriters Laboratories became the parent company of a for-profit company in the U.S named UL LLC, a limited liability corporation. The for-profit company took over the product testing and certification business.

In 2022, the company revised their go-to-market strategy to include three separate organizations - UL Solutions, UL Standards & Engagement, and UL Research Institutes.

UL Solutions became a public company via an initial public offering in April 2024 raising around $950million, valuing the company at about $7billion. The company is listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Sustainability Standards

 * UL 106, Standard for Sustainability for Luminaires (under development)
 * UL 110, Standard for Sustainability for Mobile Phones

Standards for Electrical and Electronic Products

 * UL 50, Enclosures for Electrical Equipment
 * UL 50E, Enclosures for Electrical Equipment, Environmental Considerations
 * UL 153, Portable Electric Lamps
 * UL 197, Commercial Electrical Cooking Appliances
 * UL 244B, Field Installed and/or Field Connected Appliance Controls
 * UL 410, Slip Resistance of Floor Surface Materials
 * UL 796, Printed-Wiring Boards
 * UL 916, Energy Management Equipment
 * UL 962, Household and Commercial Furnishings
 * UL 962A, Furniture Power Distribution Units
 * UL 962B, Outline for Merchandise Display and Rack Mounted Power Distribution Units
 * UL 970, Retail Fixtures and Merchandising Displays
 * UL 1026, Electric Household Cooking and Food Serving Appliances
 * UL 1083, Household Electric Skillets and Frying-Type Appliances
 * UL 1492, Audio/Video Products and Accessories
 * UL 1598, Luminaires
 * UL 1642, Lithium Batteries
 * UL 1995, Heating and Cooling Equipment
 * UL 2267 Standard for Safety - Fuel Cell Power Systems for Installation in Industrial Electric Trucks
 * UL 6500, Audio/Video and Musical Instrument Apparatuses for Household, Commercial and Similar General Uses
 * UL 60065, Audio, Video and Similar Electronic Apparatuses: Safety Requirements
 * UL 60335-1, Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 1: General Requirements
 * UL 60335-2-24, Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2: Particular Requirements for Motor Compressors
 * UL 60335-2-3, Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2: Particular Requirements for Electric Irons
 * UL 60335-2-34, Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2: Particular Requirements for Motor Compressors
 * UL 60335-2-8, Household and Similar Electrical Appliances, Part 2: Particular Requirements for Shavers, Hair Clippers and Similar Appliances
 * UL 60950, Information Technology Equipment
 * UL 60950-1, Information Technology Equipment – Safety, Part 1: General Requirements
 * UL 60950-21, Information Technology Equipment – Safety, Part 21: Remote Power Feeding
 * UL 60950-22, Information Technology Equipment – Safety, Part 22: Equipment to be Installed Outdoors
 * UL 60950-23, Information Technology Equipment – Safety, Part 23: Large Data Storage Equipment
 * UL 62368-1, Audio/Video, Information and Communication Technology Equipment – Part 1: Safety Requirements

Life Safety Standards

 * UL 217, Single- and Multiple- Station Smoke Alarms
 * UL 268, Smoke Detectors for Fire Protective Signaling Systems
 * UL 268A, Smoke Detectors for Duct Application
 * UL 1626, Residential Sprinklers for Fire Protection Service
 * UL 1971, Signaling Devices for the Hearing Impaired

Standards for Building Products

 * UL 10A, Tin-Clad Fire Doors
 * UL 20, General-Use Snap Switches
 * UL 486E, Equipment Wiring Terminals for Use with Aluminum and/or Copper Conductors
 * UL 1256, Fire Test of Roof/Deck Constructions

Standards for Industrial Control Equipment

 * UL 508, Industrial Control Equipment, superseded by UL 60947-4-1
 * UL 508A, Industrial Control Panels
 * UL 508C, Power Conversion Equipment, superseded by UL 61800-5-1
 * UL 61800-5-1, Adjustable Speed Electrical Power Drive Systems

Standards for Plastic Materials

 * UL 94, Tests for Flammability of Plastic Materials for Parts in Devices and Appliances
 * UL 746A, Polymeric Materials: Short-Term Property Evaluations
 * UL 746B, Polymeric Materials: Long-Term Property Evaluations
 * UL 746C, Polymeric Materials: Use in Electrical Equipment Evaluations.
 * UL 746D, Polymeric Materials: Fabricated Parts
 * UL 746E, Polymeric Materials: Industrial Laminates, Filament Wound Tubing, Vulcanized Fiber and Materials Used in Printed-Wiring Boards
 * UL 746F, Polymeric Materials: Flexible Dielectric Film Materials for Use in Printed-Wiring Boards and Flexible Materials Interconnect Constructions

Standards for Wire and Cable

 * UL 62, Flexible Cords and Cables
 * UL 758, Appliance Wiring Material (AWM)
 * UL 817, Cord Sets and Power Supply Cords
 * UL 2556, Wire and Cable Test Methods

=== Standards for Alarm Systems, Installation, and Monitoring ===

 * UL 294, Access Control System Units (ANSI Approved: May 24, 2023)

 * UL 365, Standard for Police Station Connected Burglar Alarm Units and Systems (ANSI Approved: January 31, 2018)

 * UL 464, Audible Signaling Devices for Fire Alarm and Signaling Systems, Including Accessories (ANSI Approved: April 28, 2023)

 * UL 497, Protectors for Paired-Conductor Communications Circuits (ANSI Approved: July 25, 2022)

 * UL 497A, Standard for Secondary Protectors for Communications Circuit (ANSI Approved: October 01, 2019)

 * UL 497B, Protectors for Data Communications and Fire-Alarm Circuits (ANSI Approved: February 07, 2022)

 * UL 603, Standard for Power Supplies for Use with Burglar-Alarm Systems (ANSI Approved: July 06, 2018)

 * UL 609, Standard for Local Burglar Alarm Units and Systems (ANSI Approved: March 09, 2018)

 * UL 636, Standard for Holdup Alarm Units and Systems (DOD Approved: July 30, 1987, ANSI Approved: January 30, 2018)

 * UL 639, Standard for Intrusion-Detection Units (ANSI Approved: October 24, 2019)

 * UL 681, Installation and Classification of Burglar and Holdup Alarm Systems (DOD Approved: January 02, 1992, ANSI Approved: December 17, 2020)

 * UL 827, Central-Station Alarm Services (ANSI Approved: October 19, 2023)

 * UL 827A, UL LLC Outline of Investigation for Hosted Central Station Services

 * UL 864, Control Units and Accessories for Fire Alarm Systems (ANSI Approved: October 09, 2023)

 * UL 985, Household Fire Warning System Units (ANSI Approved: October 07, 2022)

 * UL 1023, Household Burglar-Alarm System Units (ANSI Approved: May 20, 2021)

 * UL 1034, Standard for Burglary-Resistant Electric Locking Mechanisms (ANSI Approved: June 03, 2020)

 * UL 1037, Antitheft Alarms and Devices (ANSI Approved: August 24, 2023)

 * UL 1076, Proprietary Burglar Alarm Units and Systems (DOD Approved: April 09, 1992, ANSI Approved: February 16, 2021)

 * UL 1481, Standard for Power Supplies for Fire-Protective Signaling Systems

 * UL 1610, Central-Station Burglar-Alarm Units

 * UL 1635, Standard for Digital Alarm Communicator System Units (ANSI Approved: April 13, 2018)

 * UL 1981, Central-Station Automation Systems (ANSI Approved: March 29, 2023)

 * UL 2050, National Industrial Security Systems (Revised: November 07, 2010)

 * UL 2610, Commercial Premises Security Alarm Units and Systems (ANSI Approved: April 07, 2021)

 * UL 2900-1, Software Cybersecurity for Network-Connectable Products, Part 1: General Requirements (ANSI Approved: April 14, 2023)

 * UL 2900-2-3, Software Cybersecurity for Network-Connectable Products, Part 2-3: Particular Requirements for Security and Life Safety Signaling Systems (ANSI Approved: September 21, 2023)

UL Solutions of Canada

 * CAN/ULC-S101-07, Standard Methods for Fire Endurance Tests of Building Construction and Materials
 * CAN/ULC-S102-10, Standard Methods of Test for Surface-Burning Characteristics of Building Materials and Assemblies
 * CAN/ULC-S102.2-10, Standard Methods of Test for Surface-Burning Characteristics of Flooring, Floor Coverings, and Miscellaneous Materials and Assemblies
 * CAN/ULC-S104-10, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Door Assemblies
 * CAN/ULC-S107-10, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings
 * CAN/ULC-S303-M91 (R1999), Standard Methods for Local Burglar Alarm Units and Systems

Photovoltaic

 * UL 1703, Photovoltaic Flat-Plate Modules
 * UL 1741, Inverters, Converters, Controllers and Interconnection System Equipment for Use With Distributed Energy Resources
 * UL 2703, Rack Mounting Systems and Clamping Devices for Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Modules and Panels

Recognized Component Mark
The Recognized Component Mark is a type of safety certification mark issued by UL Solutions. It is placed on components which are intended to be part of a UL certified end product, but which cannot bear the full UL Mark themselves. The general public does not ordinarily come across it, as it is borne on components which make up finished products.

Computer benchmarking
UL offers the following computer benchmarking products:
 * 3DMark
 * Easy Benchmark Automation
 * PCMark 10
 * PCMark for Android
 * Servermark
 * Testdriver
 * UL Procyon AI Inference Benchmark
 * UL Procyon Photo Editing Benchmark
 * UL Procyon Video Editing Benchmark
 * VRMark

Similar organizations

 * Applied Research Laboratories (ARL)
 * A competing testing laboratory, based in Florida, U.S.

 * Bureau Veritas
 * A competing test, inspection, and certification company.

 * Baseefa
 * A similar organization in the United Kingdom.

 * Canadian Standards Association (CSA)
 * A similar organization in Canada. Also serves as a competitive alternative for U.S. products.

 * CCOE
 * Chief Controller of Explosives

 * CEBEC
 * Testing laboratory, inspection, and certification company, based in Brussels, Belgium.

 * DNV GL
 * A global testing laboratory, inspection, certification, marine class, and engineering organisation, headquartered in Høvik, Norway.

 * Efectis
 * A similar organization in Europe, fire science expert, testing laboratory, and certification body.

 * ETL SEMKO
 * A competing testing laboratory, part of Intertek; based in London, U.K.

 * FM Approvals
 * A competing certification body, based in Rhode Island, U.S.

 * ICC-ES
 * International Code Council Evaluation Services.

 * IAPMO R&T
 * A competing certification body, based in Ontario, California, U.S.

 * INERIS
 * Testing laboratory, inspection, and certification company, based in France.

 * KFI
 * The Korea Fire Institute, a similar organization in Korea.

 * MET Laboratories, Inc.
 * A competing testing laboratory, based in Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.

California, U.S.
 * NTA Inc
 * A certification agency based in Nappanee, Indiana, U.S.

CA and Tulsa, OK); Seoul, South Korea; and Shanghai, China.
 * Sira
 * A similar organization for the UK/Europe.

 * GS
 * Geprüfte Sicherheit

 * TÜV
 * German and Austrian approvals organizations.

title: UL (safety organization)


text:
National Institute of Justice

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) is the research, development, and evaluation agency of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ).

NIJ, along with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), Office for Victims of Crime (OVC), and other program offices, comprise the DOJ's Office of Justice Programs (OJP).

History
The National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice was established on October 21, 1968, under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as a component of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA). In 1978, it was renamed as the National Institute of Justice. Some functions of the LEAA were absorbed by NIJ on December 27, 1979, with passage of the Justice System Improvement Act of 1979. The act, which amended the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, also led to creation of the Bureau of Justice Statistics. In 1982, the LEAA was succeeded by the Office of Justice Assistance, Research, and Statistics (1982–1984) and then the Office of Justice Programs in 1984.

NIJ was notable among U.S. governmental research organizations because it is headed by a political appointee of the president rather than by a scientist or a member of the civil service. The Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 removed the need for Senate confirmation of the NIJ director.

In 2010, the United States National Research Council released a report on reforming the NIJ, and identified issues with its independence, budget, and scientific mission. While it considered making the NIJ separate from its current department, Office of Justice Programs, it recommended retaining the NIJ within the OJP but giving it increased independence and authority through clear qualifications for its director, control over its budget, and a statutory advisory board. It also recommended that the NIJ: (1) a focus on research rather than forensic capacity building activities,(2) increase funding for programs for graduate researchers, (3) increase transparency, and (4) do periodic self-assessments.

Research areas

NIJ is focused on advancing technology for criminal justice application including law enforcement and corrections, forensics, and judicial processes, as well as criminology, criminal justice, and related social science research. Much of this research is facilitated by providing grants to academic institutions, non-profit research organizations, and other entities, as well as collaborating with state and local governments. Areas of social science research include violence against women, corrections, and crime prevention, as well as program evaluation. Grants for technology development help facilitate research and development of technology and tools for criminal justice application, which is a need that the private sector is otherwise reluctant to meet. NIJ also supports development of voluntary equipment performance standards, as well as conducting compliance testing. Areas of technology research and development include biometrics, communications interoperability, information technology, less-lethal technologies (e.g. tasers), and officer safety including bullet-proof vests. Crime mapping and analysis is a topic that includes both technology and social science (geography) aspects. The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers, which are located throughout the United States, play a role in law enforcement technology development, testing, and dissemination.

In the 2000s, NIJ developed the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System.

DNA initiative
A major area of research and support is for forensics and the president's DNA initiative. The Federal Bureau of Investigation developed the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) system as a central database of DNA profiles taken from offenders. In the late 1980s and 1990s, all of the states and the federal government required DNA samples to be collected from offenders in certain types of cases. The demand (casework) for DNA analysis in public crime laboratories increased 73% from 1997 to 2000, and by 2003, there was a backlog of 350,000 rape and homicide cases. In 2003, President George W. Bush proposed the Advancing Justice Through DNA Technology initiative, which would include $1 billion over five years to reduce backlogs, develop and improve capacity of state and local law enforcement to use DNA analysis, support research and development to improve the technology, and additional training for those working in the criminal justice system.

Technical working groups
Technical working groups (or TWGs) were created by the National Institute of Justice to create crime scene guides for state and local law enforcement. The guides were individually developed by a separate Technical Working Group tasked with a single topic. The groups were a multidisciplinary group of content-area experts from across the United States. The groups included urban and rural jurisdictions as well as Federal agencies representatives. Each participating member was experienced in the area of crime scene investigation and evidence collection in the criminal justice system from the standpoints of law enforcement, prosecution, defense, or forensic science. The Technical Working Groups were designed to be short term in duration to respond to a topic. Longer term groups exist under other organizations such as the FBI's Scientific Working Group (SWG's) on Digital Evidence.

Technology Working Group topics have included:

• # Aviation

• # Biometrics

• # Body Armor

• # Communications

• # Community Corrections

• # DNA Forensics

• # Electronic Crime

• # Explosive Device Defeat

• # General Forensics

• # Geospatial Technologies

• # Information-Led Policing

• # Institutional Corrections

• # Less-Lethal Technologies

• # Modeling and Simulation

• # Officer Safety and Protective Technologies

• # Personal Protection Equipment

• # Pursuit Management

• # School Safety

• # Sensors and Surveillance

• # Weapons Detection

During the several years of their existence they developed numerous guides including the following:
 * Crime Scene Investigation: A Reference for Law Enforcement (pdf, 60 pages) Published June 2004
 * Death Investigation: A Guide for the Scene Investigator (pdf, 72 pages) Published November 1999
 * Fire and Arson Scene Evidence: A Guide for Public Safety Personnel (pdf, 73 pages) Published June 2000
 * Guide for Explosion and Bombing Scene Investigation (pdf, 64 pages) Published July 2000
 * Electronic Crime Scene Investigation: A Guide for First Responders (pdf, 93 pages) First Edition published July 2001; second edition published 2008

title: National Institute of Justice


text:
Antoine Bibesco

Prince Antoine Bibesco (Prințul Anton Bibescu; July 19, 1878 – September 2, 1951) was a Romanian aristocrat, lawyer, diplomat, and writer.

Biography
He was born as the son of Prince Alexandre Bibesco, the last surviving son of the Duke of Wallachia and his wife, Elena Epureanu, daughter of Manolache Costache Epureanu, former Prime Minister of Romania. Though raised at 69, Rue de Courcelles, in Paris, Antoine continued to oversee the Bibesco estates in Craiova until after World War II.

As a young man, his mother, Princess Hélène Bibesco's celebrated Paris salon gave him the opportunity to meet Charles Gounod, Claude Debussy, Camille Saint-Saëns, Pierre Bonnard, Édouard Vuillard, Aristide Maillol, Anatole France, and Marcel Proust among many other notables. Both his father and mother commissioned artworks and music (most notably Edgar Degas and George Enescu) and Antoine continued this family tradition, particularly through his friendship with Vuillard.

Marcel Proust became a lifelong friend and shared a secret language in which Marcel was Lecram and the Bibescos were Ocsebib. Antoine made a concerted effort to have Proust's Du Côté de Chez Swann (in which, it is said, Bibesco was the model for Robert de St. Loup) published by André Gide and the Nouvelle Revue Française, but failed in that effort. Toward the end of Proust's life, Bibesco, who was a great raconteur, was an outside ear for the reclusive writer. Later he published Letters of Marcel Proust to Antoine Bibesco. Bibesco, though not a prolific writer, was the author of a number of plays in French and had at least one American success. In 1930 his play Ladies All was performed on Broadway at the Morosco Theatre, running for 140 performances. He also translated Weekend by Noël Coward and Le Domaine by John Galsworthy into French.

Diplomatic career
Having earlier served as counsellor of the Romanian legations in Paris and Petrograd, by 1914, Prince Antoine was First Secretary of the Romanian Legation in London and by 1918 had entered the circle of H. H. Asquith (former Liberal Prime Minister). At this time he was in a relationship with the writer Enid Bagnold, but his affections for her were replaced by those he began to feel for the twenty-one-year-old Elizabeth Asquith (he was 40 at the time).

Margot Asquith, her mother, thought he would be a steadying influence on her daughter. "What a gentleman he is. None of my family are gentlemen like that; no breeding you know," she wrote. The marriage took place at St Margaret's, Westminster on 29 April 1919. It was the society event of the year, attended by everyone from Queen Alexandra to George Bernard Shaw. Their only child, Priscilla, was born in London 1920; she died in Paris in 2004.

Apparently marriage did not change Antoine's womanizing ways. Rebecca West (with whom he had a short affair in 1927) called him "a boudoir athlete". While attending a party at the French embassy in London and looking around the room, West realized that every woman in attendance had been his mistress at one time or another.

Antoine continued his diplomatic career in Washington, D.C. (1920–1926) as Minister of the Romanian Legation (the present Embassy of Romania in Washington, D.C. was first used as such during his tenure) and in Madrid (1927–1931).

In 1936, after Romanian Prime Minister Gheorghe Tătărescu removed Nicolae Titulescu as Foreign Minister and recalled nearly all Romania's diplomats, Prince Bibesco had the unenviable responsibility of reassuring the United Kingdom and France that Romania was not slipping into the grip of fascism.

The World War II years were spent in Romania where his wife died (in 1945) and when, after the war, his estates were confiscated by the communists he left his country, never to return. Bagnold, in her autobiography, tells of unwittingly smuggling silver across the English Channel for him after the war. He died in 1951 and was buried in Paris.

"He had three tombs in his heart", Enid Bagnold wrote in her Times obituary, "which I think he could never finally close—of his mother, his brother Emmanuel and his wife."

title: Antoine Bibesco