Talk:West Midlands (region)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] WikiProject: West Midlands proposal
I have proposed the creation of WikiProject: West Midlands at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#West Midlands. If you are interested in participating in the project, if created, please add your name to the list. Thank you. - Erebus555 18:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Gloucestershire
I believe Gloucestershire is classed as part of the west midlands by the BBC as it receives Midlands news.
- Perhaps so, but it isn't part of the "official" region, and the regional programming overlaps. I would be very surprised if South Gloucestershire didn't get news from Bristol. Fingerpuppet 21:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] County Towns
I note the addition of the italicising of County Towns in the list, which includes Birmingham. Given that West Midlands County Council no longer exists, Birmingham cannot be said to be the seat of goverment of the county. Equally, as Stoke-on-Trent and Telford and Wrekin are techically Administrative Counties, should these be italicised?
I think that it should be removed altogether to prevent this sort of issue. Fingerpuppet 16:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Populations of major towns & cities
Wikipedia states that the population of Wolverhampton is 236,600 and that the population of Stoke-on-Trent is 240,636. According to the 2001 census both figures are falling. If 'settlement' figures are to be used rather than the census figures used elsewhere in Wikipedia then the reason for this inconsistency should be explained. To get the population of Stoke to over 250,000 the The Potteries Urban Area figure (362,403) is used but then this includes Newcastle-under-Lyme - a major town that also appears further down the list. I don't think this is satisfactory. Also... isn't the 'settlement' population for Walsall (including Aldridge, Brownhills, Streetley etc) 253,500? Perhaps Walsall should appear further up the list? Constantine (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- No, not at all. Local authority districts are not the same thing as settlements. The relevant settlement figures (and their source) can be found at List of towns and cities in England by population, which gives Stoke-on-Trent as 259,252; and Wolverhampton as 251,462. The populations are 2001 census figures from the Office for National Statistics, using the Key Statistics for Urban Areas figures, that divorce the populations of towns and cities from the Local Authority district(s) that they are contained within. Both cities have expanded into former Rural Districts outside their local authority boundaries (such as Blythe Bridge in the case of Stoke-on-Trent, or Perton in the case of Wolverhampton) therefore the settlement figures are larger than those for the local government districts of like names.
- The population of Walsall (the town) is somewhat different from Walsall MBC (which also includes the settlements listed above), and is given by the ONS as 170,994.
- Put it another way - is Sandwell MBC a town? Of course not, but West Bromwich clearly is. Did Sutton Coldfield, a town with a population of over 100,000 suddenly cease to exist in 1974? Other major towns that would need removing include Shrewsbury, Nuneaton, Cannock, Stourbridge and Halesowen - simply due to the fact that none of those towns have a like-named local authority. Fingerpuppet (talk) 07:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- The reference to figures in the Wikipedia List of towns and cities in England by population is reasonable. The problem I see with this article is that the links in the list of cities take the reader to information that is immediately contradictory. Unlike towns within metropolitan borough or district council areas, major cities are defined by their administrative boundaries. People in Blythe Bridge and Brown Edge really do not consider themselves to be citizens of Stoke-on-Trent for the very reason that they dwell outside the city limits and their local council is based in Leek. I would suggest maybe removing the bold type denoting cities from the list and allow the reader to research for themselves which settlements are towns and which are cities and/or annotating the list to indicate that 'settlement' figures have been used rather than population numbers as defined in the articles on each of the cities. Constantine (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think that's being a bid pedantic. If the settlement is designated as a city, then this should be reflected in the boldening of its name. As for people living outside urban boundaries not seeing themselves as belonging to the urban area (Blythe Bridge to Stoke-on-Trent in your example), that's an entirely different matter. I mean, we have to take a population figure from somewhere, so it might aswell be an official body of the government. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- The reference to figures in the Wikipedia List of towns and cities in England by population is reasonable. The problem I see with this article is that the links in the list of cities take the reader to information that is immediately contradictory. Unlike towns within metropolitan borough or district council areas, major cities are defined by their administrative boundaries. People in Blythe Bridge and Brown Edge really do not consider themselves to be citizens of Stoke-on-Trent for the very reason that they dwell outside the city limits and their local council is based in Leek. I would suggest maybe removing the bold type denoting cities from the list and allow the reader to research for themselves which settlements are towns and which are cities and/or annotating the list to indicate that 'settlement' figures have been used rather than population numbers as defined in the articles on each of the cities. Constantine (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Local government table
A nice addition to the article - thanks for that! However, I'd take issue with the town/city and urban area columns.
Firstly, the town/city column sometimes talks about local government districts (Birmingham, Stoke-on-Trent, Worcester) and other times about settlements (Telford, Hereford, Nuneaton). This column needs consistency - and I'd suggest that it should be local government districts, as settlements are covered elsewhere in the article. There is the obvious problem of Herefordshire in that, but I'm sure we can overcome that.
Secondly, the urban area column is incorrect. To take the example of the West Midlands conurbation, it spills outside the West Midlands county and contains parts of Staffordshire, Worcestershire and Warwickshire within. Nuneaton & Bedworth and Telford & Wrekin are not urban areas, but local government districts and contain rural areas. Bedworth, for example, is part of the Coventry/Bedworth Urban Area. And there are urban areas in Worcestershire and Herefordshire! I'd suggest that this column should be removed entirely. Fingerpuppet (talk) 08:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fair points. I've added a 'largest settlement' column however, as I feel that the district pages tend to be a bit 'bare', and the actual largest urban area is usually composed of the 'largest settlement'. It makes sense in my mind anyway, and I don't see any reason not to include it. :) Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- No problem - it makes sense to me too. Thanks for that! Fingerpuppet (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

