This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) at 22:50, 18 October 2005 (→Article Protection). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:50, 18 October 2005 by Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs) (→Article Protection)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)RfC: inside/outside conurbation?
Definitely outside. The tinyurl link, as cited by Pigsonthewing shows a chunky schematic Streetmap.co.uk map that vastly exaggerates the width of the motorways, giving the apparance of a join.
- If you look at a more accurate map from the Ordnance Survey Get-a-map site, you can see that it's separated from the conurbation by a strip of empty farmland, now bounded by the motorways, in the region of the River Cole and Coleshill Hall Farm. 213.130.141.8 12:41, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- An adjacent map square shows the 'gap' to be less than the size of a small park, and comprise solely the inside of the loop of a motorway junction. Andy Mabbett 20:59, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- This aerial photo makes things clearer, since OS maps at this scale still exaggerate the sizes of houses and roads. The narrow southern tip of Coleshill is about a kilometer from the conurbation. And zooming back a bit - like so - shows how it diverges even further as you go north. 213.130.142.7 22:57, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- And zooming in further shows additional buildings inside the motorway junction, making the separation a matter of yards. There are bigger gardens in Birmingham, than the gap between these built up areas. Andy Mabbett 09:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
- This aerial photo makes things clearer, since OS maps at this scale still exaggerate the sizes of houses and roads. The narrow southern tip of Coleshill is about a kilometer from the conurbation. And zooming back a bit - like so - shows how it diverges even further as you go north. 213.130.142.7 22:57, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
- An adjacent map square shows the 'gap' to be less than the size of a small park, and comprise solely the inside of the loop of a motorway junction. Andy Mabbett 20:59, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
The "West Midlands Urban Area" is officially defined by the Office for National Statistics, and Coleshill was part of it as of the 2001 census. A Spreadsheet showing all of the areas included is available here and a map showing the area thus defined is here . The connection is a tiny one through Water Orton, but it is enough to count as 'continuously urban' according to the official UK definition (which is explained in the introduction to this ).
So what, it is still quite clearly seperate. I have an ordnance survey 'Explorer' 1:25000 scale map and carefully measured the gap between Birmingham and Coleshill which at its narrowest point is just under one mile. Saying it is part of the West Midlands conurbation without qualification is utterly misleading.
Secondly that definition is outdated as any 'urban continuity' there might have been between Water Orton and Coleshill in 2001 has been utterly destroyed by the M6 Toll.
Thirdly some of the definitions used by the ONS are utterly bizarre. For example Hinckley is defined as being part of the 'Nuneaton Urban area' ???????. G-Man 22:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Article Protection
I've locked editing on this article until we can make some progress towards ending the frequent edit wars here on this page. I'm not taking sides, because until there is some meeting halfway on how to solve this dilemma and still maintain factual accuracy, I consider all users participating in the dispute on this article to be part of the problem. This notice will be posted to Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Pigsonthewing, and Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:G-Man. Karmafist 03:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- How can this be solved by "meeting halfway"? Do you suggest that "Coleshill is half in the WM conurbation"? Or perhaps "Coleshill is in the WM conurbation on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays?" Andy Mabbett 11:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- There ought to be scope for compromise here. That Coleshill is a part of the conurbation is a simple matter of fact (as of the 2001 Census at least) and should be stated as such, but its situation is clearly different to that of Castle Bromwich, Yardley or other former country villages that have been completely swallowed up by sprawl.
- How about "Although Coleshill is part of the West Midlands conurbation, it has not been completely enveloped by it and large areas of open countryside remain between Coleshill and Birmingham"?
- JimmyGuano 22:30, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- "Coleshill is next to the border with the West Midlands just outside Birmingham, but a part of the West Midlands conurbation. It has not been completely enveloped by the latter, and a narrow wedge of open countryside lies between Coleshill and Birmingham, north of the point where Coleshill meets Solihull" would be more accurate. I note, BTW, that no action has yet been taken, over yesterday's breach of 3RR. Andy Mabbett 22:50, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
I suggest that you follow official Misplaced Pages Policy, and I quote, directly from WP:RULES.
Misplaced Pages contributors come from many different countries and cultures, and have widely different views. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia.
I'll be back to check on your progress meeting this goal. You might get some ideas on how to accomodate both sides from looking at articles on WP:FA.Karmafist 15:25, 18 October 2005 (UTC)