Talk:Birmingham/Archive 8

message: Further to this deletion, although the oft repeated observation that Birmingham has more canals than Venice is "spurious" in the sense that the former is very much the larger, I think that the assertion is still sufficiently widely made to merit inclusion in the article. To my mind, the question is: where should it come? —Theo  (Talk)
:In the abscence of any International Comparisons section, then I think it fits best in the Transport section, where it currently is. Thryduulf 17:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The comparison is spurious, because the canals are not the same type of waterway in any regard. Andy Mabbett 21:10, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point (although the "in any regard" seems overstated)! The validity of the comparison is not really the issue here, however. This assertion is so widely made that I think that it merits a mention if only to debunk it. How would you phrase this? — Theo  (Talk) 07:19, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about "Birmingham has a large number of waterways, and is often described as having 'more canals than Venice'.  This is technically correct - however, the city is far larger than Venice, which has the highest concentration of waterways in the world."  That seems kind of accurate. Proto t c 08:29, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The way it's currently worded, under Transport, if it must go in at all. Andy Mabbett 09:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks good to me; and, yes, I feel that it must go in. —Theo  (Talk) 10:07, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Andy: I do not understand why you italicised "concentration" in this diff. And, how does this "dab canals"? I feel confused. —Theo  (Talk) 14:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Italicisaton is a form of emphasis, but less so than emboldening. I understand "dab" to mean a small change. Andy Mabbett 17:30, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the explanation. I can see why I was confused. I read "dab" as a contraction of "disambiguation".  No wonder it made no sense to me! —Theo  (Talk) 22:42, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've always assumed dab was a contraction of disambiguation as well, so you're not alone! Thryduulf 23:32, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, in wikipedia, 'dab' is usually the shoirt form for disambiguation, usually with a link. (ie, changing a link that reads Sting to Sting (musician)) Proto t c 11:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  dab: n 1: a light touch or stroke. Andy Mabbett 12:10, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that's the dictionary definition.  Well done Andy. Proto t c 12:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison with Venice

message: Andy, I don't know exactly how the 3 revert rule works, so I won't report it, but you must be teetering on the edge of it now, I make it at least 4 times you've reverted that canals sentence, possibly 5, in the last 24 hours.  I hid it with a note asking to please explain what 'The type of waterway is very different' means if you have to have it in there.  A link to waterway doesn't help.  I still don't know what you mean when you say the canals are very different. A canal is a canal. Do you think you could manage to 'dab' it correctly, please, and better explain what you mean? Proto t c 11:25, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, that's much better.  Well done Andy. Proto t c 11:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  3RR 

message: Can I just say that I recently created an article on Punch Records which is an excellent example of an urban workshop for street art at ground roots level which caters for people who would not otherwise get an oportunity to follow their chosen path of urban dance, art and music. I personally know several of the entertainers and they are definately unique in Brum, from dance to dj mixing, MC'ing and record producing, even the Council have picked up on what they offer. I couldn't help noticing that as soon as I had created the article user Andy Mabbett disputed the articles validity on wikipedia without even looking into what Punch is about. I filled in more detail and pointed out that Puch has remained in the eductaion section of Brum main page for months, I then went back to the main article and made live the link to Puch records. Needless to say that after I had pointed this out to Andy I notice that someone has now removed Puch Records from the education section, any clues anyone? Thanks Nick Boulevard 17:23, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Punch Records

message: I agree with Andy's removal of Punch Records from this article.  I think it is not sufficiently important to the city as a whole.  In my opinion it would be appropriate for inclusion in Arts in Birmingham and Education in Birmingham. ‐Theo  (Talk) 11:26, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok that's fair enough. I shall include it in the arts section and education section, they also are heavily involved in urban theatre so I have included it there on the main page also, thanks. Nick Boulevard 13:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Punch Records again

message: Hi Andy.  I find it admirable that you require this amount of rigorous scrutiny of sources.  With that in mind - please could you provide evidence, in the form of an official, recognised website and/or (preferably and) a print source for the following statements you have contributed to the article.
#Although its music scene is not as renowned as those of Liverpool or Manchester.  Unsubstantiated.  Please provide citations.
#The city is at the centre of a large metropolitan area, defined by the government as the West Midlands county (with a population of nearly 2,600,000), but in practice including parts of the surrounding counties of Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire.  Is it?  Provide official citations, please.
#David Lodge.  IS he associated with Birmingham?  Please substantiate this claim.
#Birmingham's is also notable for its canal system.  Is it?  Please substantiate this claim.
#The type of waterway is also very different, with those in Venice being the short reinforced channels of the islands on which it is built..  Is this true? I'd like to see some verifiable sources before I believe it to be encyclopaedic. 
There are plenty more I'd like to see you substantiate with fully verifiable and official sources, as opposed to hearsay, from cut&paste biographies or fan sites, but these will do for a start. Please provide substantial evidence for them all.  Thanks Andy. Proto t c 16:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's unreasonable to ask a contributor to provide evidence for statements that are common knowledge or which can be verified with a basic Internet search. Items 1 and 4, at least, are common knowledge. A number of websites describe Birmingham as Britain's "canal city". Here is an encyclopedic one. For 3 simply Google "David Lodge" and "Birmingham". For 5 see Venice, though admittedly this description could be improved. Shantavira 18:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Er…Proto was making a rhetorical point about Andy's own intensive request for sources. (Hey, Proto, do you feel bad about causing some innocent bystander to waste their time? Very big grin, indeed!). —Theo  (Talk) 19:36, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Providing evidence