So, I moved this page from Birmingham, since that name is also used for Birmingham (Alabama). According to our article naming conventions, we use the next largest containing geographical area -- I think it's the Midlands for Birmingham -- to disambiguate two cities. I did that, and then added a page for the Midlands for good measure. If someone can think of a better way to do this, go to it. --Evan 07:55, 2 Dec 2003 (PST)
Moved from Wikitravel:Votes for deletion.
- Birmingham (Midlands). Clumsy title, not suitable for redirect. Content moved to Birmingham. -- Professorbiscuit 21:42, 2 Dec 2004 (EST)
- Unsure. Can you explain why it's a "clumsy title"? It's in line with the naming conventions isn't it, unless this is either the world's only Birmingham or by far the world's most famous Birmingham? Is either of those the case? -- Hypatia 02:36, 3 Dec 2004 (EST)
- Well, it's certainly the most famous Birmingham in England. If people think it's not significantly more famous than Birmingham, Alabama, to have the Birmingham page by itself, then it should be moved to "Birmingham (England)". "Birmingham (Midlands)" doesn't really sound right. Professorbiscuit 22:56, 3 Dec 2004 (EST)
- Yes, the policy of choosing the name of the item immediately up in the hierachy is more honoured in the breach than the observance and, often, rightly so, since the lower level regions often have ambiguous names themselves. -- Hypatia 23:09, 3 Dec 2004 (EST)
- Birmingham (Alabama) is more famous in the United States (mostly for historical reasons having to do with the civil rights movement), so I don't think the "world's most famous" rule applies to the one in England. I think Birmingham should be a disambig page. So Birmingham (Midlands) or Birmingham (England) seem better to me. -- Colin 19:59, 4 Mar 2005 (EST)
- There seem to be 2 almost identical pages at the moment: Birmingham (Midlands) and Birmingham. One needs to be a disambig or redirect before we have two forked pages. DanielC 16:02, 12 May 2005 (EDT)
- Too late, we have a forked article and it needs to be merged. Considering Birmingham was originally a disambiguation page and discussion about deleting Birmingham (Midlands) has gon on here rather than at Talk:Birmingham (Midlands), where there is NO hint of this controversy (fiasco), and no-one has taken steps to stop the articles being forked, I assume the VFD is lost and the name change does not take place. Consequently I propose to plunge forward and move all content on Birmingham to Birmingham (Midlands) and the restore the disambiguation page to Birmingham. To discuss that move further please go to the Talk:Birmingham (Midlands) page, where this conversation should be continued. -- Huttite 04:37, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)
- Conversation now continues Talk:Birmingham (Midlands).
OK, as per discussion above - Birmingham (Midlands) just sounds incredibly clumsy to English ears - I'm gonna plunge forward and move the page to Birmingham (England) - sounds a little better. If we must disambiguate fully (surely Birmingham in England is the most famous Birmingham? - it is the 2nd largest city in England, after all!), then this seems to be the better option.... I'm actually in the middle of splitting the Midlands into East and West Midlands in any case.... (reflect actual regions). So _Midlands_ by itslef would have been inconsistent.... Pjamescowie 13:39, 19 Jun 2005 (EDT)
- It's not a question of being the most famous; it's a question of being by far the most famous. Examples being, say, Los Angeles in California vs. Los Angeles (Chile) or Moscow in Russia vs. Moscow (Idaho).
- Well Birmingham (England) was there for a thousand years beforehand, the others are just a tribute to the first. If you don't want Birmingham (Alabama) then get an original name. :)
- Anyways, Birmingham (England) seems fine; although it's not strictly within the ANC, I think it's fine. --Evan 12:13, 30 Jul 2005 (EDT)
FYI, see the discussion at Talk:St. Petersburg. --188.8.131.52 04:57, 13 April 2006 (EDT)
"Also take care at either end of Broad Street where the traffic-flow speeds up and radical Muslim youths in cars throw missiles at drunken revellers. Immodestly dressed women can also expect to receive sexist verbal abuse."
Is this true? I can't possibly imagine such a thing happening on a frequent basis. Of course, I'm American so I've no idea, but I've never seen anything like this in my travels to the UK. 184.108.40.206 22:18, 12 July 2006 (EDT)
- Unfortunately it's true and happens all too frequently. The favoured missiles seem to be eggs, occaisionally higher powered water pistols containing dubious liquids are used. At least they're not bombing buses. Chris 1965 07:10, 23 August 2006 (EDT)
- I've never heard of this, Is there a citation to support it? Andy Mabbett 16:05, 26 November 2006 (EST)
- Citing sources isn't really done on Wikitravel... well not in the way that it is on Wikipedia. Anyway, just because it hasn't been reported somewhere officially is a bad reason for removing what may be a valid and useful piece of info. The problem is if it is just intended to stir up racial tension. I am going to go ahead and remove the words "radical muslim youths" because that isn't a helpful bit of info, but the fact that it could happen is useful, and for that reason it should definitely stay there. Remember, one of the main points of Wikitravel is that the traveller comes first... -- Tim 16:22, 26 November 2006 (EST)
- Thank you, but I wasn't querying whether it was done by muslims; I was querying whether it is done at all. "could happen" != "does happen". Andy Mabbett 16:33, 26 November 2006 (EST)
- I've been on broad street many times, and I've been no witness to this. This is silly.
There seems to be confusion between taxis ("black cabs", which can be hailed in the street, or used at taxi ranks) and private hire cars (which must be pre-booked). This distinction is national. Is there a standard way to differentiate? Andy Mabbett 16:04, 26 November 2006 (EST)
West Midlands Taxi use
Name of this page (again)
This page really ought to be located at Birmingham. It is far more famous in the UK and outside of the USA than any other Birmingham. It's also the original Birmingham and most others are named after it. It is the second largest city in the United Kingdom and one of Europe's biggest cities. Birmingham Alabama should be located at Birmingham Alabama. This is very like the situation on Wikipedia when American Wikipedians insisted on titling the country 'Georgia' as 'George (Country)' because they felt that an American state was more deserving. Please remember that the Internet is an international network and not just used by Americans. Xania 13:23, 11 December 2006 (EST)
- So, first, People on Wikitravel en: come from all over the world -- Australia, England, Canada. We're all working on these guides together to help all English-speaking travellers -- from Americans to New Zealanders to Nigerians to Indians to Singaporese. We need to keep an international perspective, and dividing the community against itself based on arbitrary criteria (men vs. women, American vs. Commonwealth, young vs. old) is no way to reach our goals.
- Second, please take a look at Wikitravel:article naming conventions. We have some pretty formalized naming rules, especially for places that have the same name. In particular, we almost always use disambiguators, except in the case where one place is "much more famous" than another. I think we've bopped around some ideas of how much more famous a place has to be in order to not be disambiguated; my rough number was 5-10 times "more famous". Now, measuring how famous something is is hard to do... but it's at least a number, even if it has no metric.
- My feeling is that Birmingham meets the criteria, and we should probably move it. I think the next most famous Birmingham, the one in Alabama, is probably the default one people think of in the USA, but not by much, and outside the US I don't think it's even close. I also think that since Americans often use the naming convention "City, State", finding the AL city at Birmingham (Alabama) is not going to be too surprising for people.
- So, unless there's major objections, let's move this article. --Evan 13:52, 11 December 2006 (EST)
- I agree with Evan. There is also precedent, at Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett 15:23, 11 December 2006 (EST)
- I would go with this. I think the tone of my previous message was a bit too anti-American but the point remains. Birmingham, UK is the main Birmingham and much more famous worldwide. The same applies for other cities like Manchester (I believe there are many Manchesters in the USA). I think the best thing would be to have a simple link to the 'Birmingham Alabama' article from the top of the 'Birmingham' (UK) page. Xania 06:32, 12 December 2006 (EST)
I'm removing the following listings as closed, if they open again we can stick the listings back in, but for now there's no point in cluttering the page with places you can't eat at! Maj 14:14, 10 January 2007 (EST)
- Aston Hall, Trinity Road, Aston (Train to Aston or Witton or #7 bus), ☎ +44 121 327 0062 (email@example.com), . '''closed throughout 2007'''. Restored Jacobean mansion built between 1618 and 1635, containing period rooms and artwork. Cannon damage from the English Civil War still visible. The Hall was visited by Arthur Conan Doyle and Washington Irving, inspiring the latter's 'Bracebridge Hall'. Aston Hall by Candlelight is a popular Christmas event that takes place every two years (even numbers) where the whole grounds are lit by candles for 17th-century festivities (fee charged). Free entrance. (52.5066,1.8836) edit
- I've restored it - the exterior can still be viewed. It's a stately home, not a cafe! Andy Mabbett 16:33, 10 January 2007 (EST)
Why does this article repeat the old canard that Birmingham was a concrete jungle in the 1970s, but isn't any more? It has been repeated in so many places that it "must" be true. In fact, I rather liked Birmingham in the 70s - it had a good atmosphere. It's also good now of course, arguably better, but in a different way. Ashbranch 05:07, 28 February 2007 (EST)
My edit to the "Get around / By train" section
As I'm an anon user, I thought it best to explain here why I changed "exclusively" to "mainly" near the start of this subsection. Previously the sentence said that:
"There is an extensive overland rail network serving most of Birmingham and the West Midlands area, operated exclusively by Central Trains."
This was, to put it charitably, completely wrong. Mainly by Central Trains, all right. But to name some of the exceptions: you can go from Birmingham to Coventry with Virgin Trains, from Birmingham to Solihull with Chiltern Railways, and from Birmingham to Wolverhampton with Arriva Trains Wales. Hence my edit. 220.127.116.11 20:27, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
I added some stuff there, but it was based on memories from the 80s. Someone who knows the city now, please check it. Pashley 04:53, 9 December 2008 (EST)
There are a number of districts within Birmingham (Bearwood, Selly Oak, Sparkbrook) that have got their own page on Wikitravel, with their own things to do, but there is no 'see also' page that gives the reader an explicit link to these districts, or allows one to be able to expand on some of the stuff there eg the 'Selly Oak' article is desperately out of date. Birmingham's a big city, but one with lots of small areas that make it up, so it's only fair that these small areas - rather than the town centre alone - are recognised. How do people feel about this?