Misplaced Pages

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

1. Support as above. Evertype 15:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Support. Although the one in England is the original, I don't think it's major enough to be automatically recognised. Deb 16:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Support. I don't care which of the suggested names is used for the rename. Vegaswikian 21:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
4. Support - Misplaced Pages is a world-based website, not England based. Plymouth, Devon is not world famous like Boston. I consider myself to be knowledgeable in geography, and when I think of the word "Plymouth", Plymouth Rock and nearby Plymouth, Wisconsin come to my mind first. Plymouth in England doesn't even come to my mind. I barely remember hearing of the city. There's about a 1% chance that I would be searcing for the city in England. I guess that's my United States bias. The city may be historic, but I don't think its necessarily well-known to a world audience. Its beauty is irrelevant. My point is Plymouth needs to be a disambiguous link. --Royalbroil 14:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   As has been discussed in the case of Newport News, Plymouth Rock is not the same as Plymouth because it's a different name. Just type in Plymouth Rock if you want that article, it links directly there. Seems like a very strong US bias to me. Are you suggesting that Plymouth, Wisconsin, a town of 8,000 people, is well-known to a World audience? I know my geography but I've never heard of this place, after all it's a very small town in a country of 300 million people. I don't think any Plymouth is known that widely across the World, but the one in Devon is the nearest I can think of. Marky-Son 15:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   Let me be quite clear on this, you're supporting the proposal that this page be moved on the ground that Misplaced Pages is a world-based website, and should not reflect a UK bias... you're obviously blissfully unaware of the many many examples of US bias on Misplaced Pages (such as colour and flavour, which both redirect to the US spelling, despite the word only being officially spelled that way in one country) and moving this page, or any other pages about towns in the UK because there's an American town with the same name, panders to that, to my mind. Whether you've heard of Plymouth in England or not, it's still the most notable place bearing that name. No disambig is needed; people can click on 'for other uses see' link at the top if they need somewhere else. --Stevefarrell 17:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   Agreed about the Plymouth Rock reference. I agree there are US biases, and that they should be removed too. There is no way to make everyone happy with the color/colour debate, so I won't touch that one. I think a city needs to be MUCH more notable than all the others (such as Kiel, Germany vs. Kiel, Wisconsin), and a world-reknown city to earn the right to own the native page. I don't think that Plymouth is considered a world-reknown city like Kiel. I have written two articles about UK things (the DYK articles Henry Segrave and the Segrave Trophy), and I got to experience first-hand how biases EVERYONE is without realizing it, including myself. Very humbling. I think that Plymouth, Newport, and Chester are too UK-biased. I found about all three articles at the same source, and I feel the same about all three. I have no anti-UK sediments. Cheers! --Royalbroil 20:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   Well, I just find it very odd how few Americans seem to have heard of the place where the Mayflower set sail from in order to found their country. I'm saying, the city has an important historical role in your country, so there's no bias at all in assuming this is the most important place with this name. --Stevefarrell 23:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

5. Support due to Plymouth, Massachusetts and Plymouth (automobile). I am not trying to be biased, but those two articles (especially the car company) are also important. And to say "historical cities of 500,ooo are significant in a way towns of 100,000 usually are not" is a bit disingenuous in this case; Devon's is listed at around 250,000 and Massachusetts's is listed at 50,000, while both are very important to the history of their respective countries. Dekimasu 17:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

1. Oppose As at Newport, importance is not a linear function of population - historical cities of 500,ooo are significant in a way towns of 100,000 usually are not. Plymouth, Devon is one of the major cities of a major country - the other Plymouths aren't even the most important features of their own states. There could be another 12,000 or 120,000 hamlets and townships called Plymouth, but the article is still at the correct place. Aquilina 22:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
2. Oppose For the same reason as Aquilina. Population, history and importance are important factors. Dot dismabiguate for the sake of it. Apply common sense. Owain (talk) 08:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Oppose Plymouth, England would be pandering to regional nationalism and therefore is not reflecting a NPOV. Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 10:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

   I don't understand quite what you mean about "pandering". Plymouth is in England, and not in Wales or Scotland or Northern Ireland. In any case, the proposal is that Plymouth per se should be the portal to all the many Plymouths, and I've already indicated below that the move for this article should be to Plymouth, Devon. Evertype 13:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

   My opposition is to the move detailed above: which is to move Plymouth (which has been in Great Britain since 1707) to Plymouth, England. Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 14:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

   The reason for this proposal is to free Plymouth to be the disambiguation page, so people looking for any of the 30+ Plymouths can get there more directly. Evertype 14:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

4. Oppose for the reasons outlined by Aquilina and Owain. -- Arwel (talk) 21:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Oppose - Plymouth is a highly significant place historically as well as being a beautiful large city. When most people type in Plymouth, they will be looking for the place in Devon so it should stay as it is. For more details, see my comments on Newport and Chester. Marky-Son 21:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose as outlined by Aquilina and Owain. If you select Boston you go to Boston (Mass) not a disambiguation page. NoelWalley 22:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
7. Oppose per reasons already outlined above. -- Roleplayer 13:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
8. Oppose same nominator, same US-biased reasons. --Stevefarrell 13:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   What's this about? I proposed this because I believed this and some other pages should be like the Westport page. I didn't do it for "US-biased" reasons. I don't live in the U.S. either. Evertype 18:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   If you say so. But your assertion in the original nomination on this and the Chester and Newport pages was that 'hardly anyone looking for (this place) would be looking for the one in the UK', which is a nonsense. Perth leads to a disambiguation page because there are two Perths that are very notable, the one in Scotland and the one in Australia. But, especially with Chester, none of the other places bearing that name come close to being as notable, and the same applies to Plymouth. It seems to me that you want it disambiguated because you believe that, if they're not more important, the places bearing these names in the United States are at least as important, for the simple reason they're in the United States. But they're not. If they were, I'd be supporting the proposal in a flash. --Stevefarrell 23:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

   No, honestly. The assertion has ALWAYS been "there are 30 Newports/Chesters/Plymouths and it makes good sense to have these treated like Westport has been. In my view, the "notability" resides not in any particular place, but in the fact that there are so many bearing the same name. Look at Westport. I live near the one in Ireland, and yet the list is NPOV ordered simply alphabetically. No chauvinism. No U.S. bias. Just fair access for anyone interested in a "Westport" regardless of how "important" or "populous" it is. Evertype 00:59, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

   But as I said elsewhere, to the best of my knowledge there is no one Westport that is more notable than the others. That isn't the case here or with Chester and Newport. Chester in England is the place people think of when they think of Chester. I'm happy to see there's no bias in your nomination, although there certainly is in peoples' reasons for supporting it, but I remain unconvinced that these three towns need a move to a disambiguation page. Newport, for example, already links straight to the next two most notable places bearing the name, and if we followed this convention throughout Misplaced Pages, thousands of pages - not just on place names - would be a disambiguation page instead of going straight to an article and then giving you the option of seeing more things with that same name. Personally I feel that would be unnecessary in the majority of cases. --Stevefarrell 08:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

9. STRONG OPPOSE There is no comparison here. Plymouth has a 1000+ year documented history, and without recourse to arguments about Americanocentrism, none of the US Plymouths have one iota of the significance in overall historical, geopolitical, and encyclopaedic terms. Similar arguments apply to e.g. York, London, Copenhagen, Paris, etc. Sjc 06:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
10. Vehemently oppose Without going into the issues of Plymouth being the original Plymouth, are there actually any none-Americans who want to see this?? Plymouth is a city of immense historical significance (for Americans as well, see Mayflower) and is today a major centre of learning. Having studied at University of Plymouth and been a part of its International Students Society I can state that Plymouth is famous world-wide with its university considered a centre of excellence (again, worldwide) for maritime-related studies and even its business school. There is no other Plymouth in the world with the same significance. You can discover that right here on Misplaced Pages. Suriel1981 07:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
11. Oppose Plymouth is larger, has more history and is more important in the UK than Plymouth is in Massachusetts or Plymouth the car company is in the US. Mageslayer99 17:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• If the article is moved, it should be to Plymouth, Devon, with a redirect from Plymouth, England - see Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (city names). Warofdreams talk 16:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I would not object to this. The idea is to free up Plymouth to be the portal to all thirty+ Plymouths, too many to be well-served by the current disambiguation page. Evertype 16:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Plymouth should not redirect to this page

Plymouth, Massachusetts is just as famous, if not moreso, than this town. Plymouth should redirect to a disambiguation page. 71.234.216.249 22:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Plymouth (UK) is a city, not a town, unlike Plymouth (Massachusetts). And while I can't speak for the perspective of any other country, Plymouth (UK) is much more famous in the UK than is Plymouth (Massachusetts). Whitepaw 13:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

A comparison between a city and a town is completely irrelevant in this case; Plymouth (Massachusetts) is an extremely important town in the United States just as Plymouth (UK) is a very important city in Britain. Most people in the US haven't even heard of Plymouth (UK), while most are familiar with Plymouth (Massachusetts), making it 'more famous' here. To declare that Plymouth (UK) is more important due to its long history, harbor, source of the name, etc. is just not true. Plymouth (Massachusetts) is just as important to the United States as Plymouth (UK) is to the United Kingdom. Neither Plymouth is more important, and therefore a disambiguation page is necessary. Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

This Plymouth is the source of the name of all the other Plymouths around the world. Mind you, as there are two dozen different Plymouths in the States (and about 100 Plymouth pages in Wiki), perhaps there is some merit in the argument.Geof Sheppard 07:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

A name source doen't necessarily make it a more important city. Both cities have served extremely roles in the developments of their countries. Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that much more notable than some of the other Plymouths. Plymouth should be a disambiguation page. Recury 14:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's a fun quiz question for you, 71.234.216.249. Name the English city that the Mayflower, the ship which the pilgrim fathers sailed on to settle in what is now the USA, set sail from? Was it called Plymouth, perhaps? Don't even tell me that Plymouth in Devon is 'less famous' than some random town named after it in America. The only reason you think that is because it's in America. --Stevefarrell 08:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC) *applause* Scibah 09:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Random Town? You have got to be kidding me. The first/second permanent English settlement in the United States is not random at all. No one is saying the Plymouth in the UK 'less famous' world-wide. Still, throughout United States, the Plymouth (US) is extremely famous, without a doubt more famous than the city in Britain. As both cities are extremely important in different parts of the world, they can be seen as about 'on par', meaning a disambiguation page is needed. The only reason you think that is becuase it's in Britain. While Plymouth (UK) may be an very important city, even world-wide, it is not necessarily better than the important town in Massachusetts. Both should be listed prominently on a disambiguation page (Key words: Disambiguation Page). Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Where did the Mayflower land? Might that place also be important in history? It's Plymouth, Massachusetts. Personally I think the Plymouth in England is more important, but that doesn't mean this shouldn't go to a disambiguation page. Dekimasu 17:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

That is true, of course. I favour a soft disambiguation, where Plymouth continues to redirect to the English one, but at the top it says something like "This article is about Plymouth in Devon. For the town in Massachusetts, see Plymouth, Massachusetts", and then the disambiguation page linked after it. It works on loads of other pages I've seen. --Stevefarrell 00:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Plymouth, Mass. should be mentioned on a title page when one searches simply for "Plymouth." In the popular mind of the US, "Plymouth" is where the Mayflower landed, where the Puritan's Plantation was, where the first Thanksgiving took place, and where tourists visit Plymouth Rock. As Americans, we learn about Plymouth, Mass. from the very start of school at age 4 or 5. In other words, it's VERY famous--certainly not "some random place." This is not to say that the British Plymouth is not important, or even equally important; however, Plymouth, Mass. should certainly be mentioned, at the very least. LuMas 23:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Plymouth, Mass. might be important to citizens of the United States but I fail to see the relevance to the rest of the world. Simply compare the articles, that tells the story. Misplaced Pages caters to an international audience, not just an American one. Is anyone willing to explain why they think Plymouth Mass. or the American Plymouth car company would be more famous world-wide than Plymouth? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Suriel1981 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Yes, of course Misplaced Pages caters to an international audience. However, America is a huge part of that audience. As such, America's 'hometown' should be listed prominently on a disambiguation page. Both Plymouth (UK) and Plymouth (US) should be listed at the top of the page, allowing easy redirect access for each. Since Misplaced Pages does cater to an international audeience, a disambiguation page that links to Plymouth (UK) would satisfy British users, a link to Plymouth (US) would satisfy American users, and other users can choose whatever Plymouth they are seraching for. Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I strongly agree that Plymouth should be a redirect. There are so many places (as well as companies, etc.) named Plymouth that there is absolutely no reason that this page should redirect here. It goes against all Misplaced Pages naming conventions. And I don't feel this way because I'm American... I'm Canadian. Sven Erixon 18:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I find it very irritating that Plymouth, a very common name, comes to an article instead of a disambiguation. It doesn't matter whether Plymouth in Devon is "more important" than the other Plymouths. What matters is that there is more of them. I'm willing to bet that more than 3/4 of the people who come to this page immediately click the link at the top to the disambiguation.

Why isn't the above comment signed? Really! Three-fourths(!) of the people would want a redirect - I don't think so. If you want to look at cars or small towns scattered around the world then maybe you should expect to type more than 'Plymouth' if you want to find them. Anyway, don't want to troll. Stevebritgimp 14:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right, maybe it is more like Four-Fifths. Samll towns scattered around the world? Come on. The primary focus in this discussion has been the prominent American Plymouth versus the prominent British Plymouth. Any American who types in Plymouth would likely expect to find the Massachusetts Plymouth, the home of the Plymouth Rock, the home of America's first Thanksgiving, the home of the country's first museum, and the site of one of teh nation's first European settlements. It is no random town, and is not less important than the British Plymouth. Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

To expand on that comment - I personally feel that you should get an important article for your word, and if that's not what you want then it's no big deal looking for the exact thing you wanted. When London, Birmingham, Boston and Charlotte become disambiguations then Plymouth can be. I have no problem getting Charlotte North Carolina when I type Charlotte, as it's a place I've heard of, and am glad to learn something new about it.172.209.84.63 21:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but London, Birmingham, and Boston are far more significant cities than Plymouth, UK, and they do not have cities of nearly equal historical significance in other countries that share a name. No small town called 'London' in the United States could ever come close to matching the cultural importantce of London, UK, and the same goes for Boston and Birmingham. Plymouth, UK is a much smaller city than London, Boston, and Birmingham, and Plymouth, Mass. has historical significance that rivals, if not surpasses, that of Plymouth, UK. As there is not a clear city of more significance between the two, a disambiguation page is needed in this case. Raime 16:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Vehemently oppose any change. Without going into the issues of Plymouth being the original Plymouth, are there actually any none-Americans who want to see this?? Plymouth is a city of immense historical significance (for Americans as well, see Mayflower) and is today a major centre of learning. Having studied at University of Plymouth and been a part of its International Students Society I can state that Plymouth is famous world-wide with its university considered a centre of excellence (again, worldwide) for maritime-related studies and even its business school. There is no other Plymouth in the world with the same significance. You can discover that right here on Misplaced Pages. Suriel1981 07:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Just because Plymouth, UK is the original Plymouth, this does not make it automatically the most important one. As for the non-American comment, see a post above written by a person from Canada. While Plymouth, UK is a great city and a centre of learning, Plymouth, Mass. is America's first permanent British settlement, the location of the First Thanksgiving, the site of several landmarks, including Plymouth Rock and the National Monument to the Forefathers, and the site of several historical events. The town is extremely important in United States history, far more important for the Uniteed States than Plymouth, UK. Plymouth does have the same, if not more, significance than Plymouth, (UK), and therefore a disambiguation page is needed. As for the other pLymouths, since there are over 30, a disambiguation page seems to make even more sense simply due to the large number. Raime 16:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Vehemently Support a change to a disambiguation page where both Plymouth, US and Plymouth, UK are listed prominently. For the non-American jeer, see an above post listed by a user from Canada. Plymouth, Massacusetts is an extremely important city for North Americans, far more important than the Plymouth in the UK. I am not trying to say that the British Plymouth is not a famous city; it is a great city, but not so much more important than the American Plymouth that 'Plymouth; should redirect there.However, Plymouth, Mass. is of utmost importance to Americans (who make up a lrage portion of Misplaced Pages users), and a disambiguation page is needed. Both Plymouths deserved to be listed prominently. Raime 04:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment Plymouth, Mass is so named after Plymouth, and its undoubted importance to Americans don't change that. Most Americans surely know whence the Mayflower sailed? DuncanHill 10:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Just because Plymouth, Mass. was named after the Plymouth in the UK, that doesn't make it better. Boston, Mass. was named after Boston, Lincolnshire, but you'll find a hard time convincing anyone that the Boston in the UK is more important than Boston, Mass. Most Americans would undoubtedly feel that the place where the Mayflower actually landed and established America's first/second English town is far more important to the United States than the city from which the ship failed. PLymouth, UK is important to the United States in some ways, but it could never be as important or historically significant to Americans as Plymouth, Mass. Raime 11:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that one Plymouth is better or worse than another. Misplaced Pages is an international encyclopedia, and this is the English language wikipedia. I would suspect that in Commonwealth countries (where English is either the mother tongue or the most widespread second language) the Plymouth in England is the one that would most readily spring to mind - especially considering the naval history of the city and the navy's contribution to the development of the Empire. DuncanHill 11:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

But as Misplaced Pages does cater to an international audience, it must also cater to the United States. The US is the largest primarily-English speaking country in the world by population (India's primary language is not English), and since most Americans would want Plymouth, Mass. when they type in Plymouth, a disambiguation page is necessary. Anyone who is searching for Plymouth, UK would have no problem easily redirecting at a disambiguation page, just as Americans would do. I am not suggesting that Plymouth, Mass. become the rerdirect article, but rather that a disambiguation page would allow easier access to both extremely important Plymouths that are liklely about equally searched for. Raime 11:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Plymouth, UK is undoubtedly a great city, but so is Plymouth, Mass. I think that Plymouth, Mass. has had just as much, if not more, a comtribution to the development of the American civilization as Plymouth, UK has had on the development of the British Empire. I suspect that throughout North America (including Canada, a Commonwealth nation), Plymouth, Mass. would most readily come to mind, given the town's huge infliuence on the development of the United States. If Plymouth, UK is really is no better than Plymouth Mass., and both cities are extremely important to their respective countries/regions, then why should a disambiguation page that would allow easy access to both great cities, without putting one above the other, not be used? It an easy win for both sides, and contrary to popular opinion, will not degrade Plymouth, UK. Raime 13:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Contribution to American civilisation, vs British Empire, is POV. These things should decided on their merits (but of course me weighing in on this side is also POV). Also like I said Charlotte is not redirect and that's a person's name. Also agree with the point that no one is bothered about Boston or London not being redirects, regardless of nationality, they're safe bets. Consensus is not majority or 'plurality', but a workable way of keeping as many people as happy as is practical. This is en. wikipedia, not us. wikipedia. Stevebritgimp 12:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

(also ironically because it isn't a disambiguation I often end up surfing into New England and doing minor edits in their articles(!)) :)Stevebritgimp 12:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine, if you put it that way, contribution to British Empire vs. American Civilization is POV. You honestly think that contribution to the American Civilization, neigh, the founding city of the American civilization, which eventually replaced the British Empire as the dominant force in the world, is unimportant!? Charlotte does not need to be a redirect, normally people's names are not as important as cities. Furthermore, typing in "Charlotte" (and expecting to find an article about a specific person) is almost as vague as typing in "Charles" or "William". And for Boston and London, you have got to be kidding me! Plymouth, UK has not come close to the level of prominenece or importance these two glocal cities have. Plymouth, UK is more along the lines of Worcester, UK, a smaller city that aren't more prominent than an American town/city with the same name. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of a talk page to express your POV? While this is en. wikipedia, this is not the British Misplaced Pages, so it needs to go in line with both the United States and Britain equally. Anyways, Plymouth, UK is NOT a global city and has not played any more inportant a role in the development of its country than Plymouth, MA has done for the USA.Raime 21:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

My mention of Empire in POV is one of the assumption that British history consists of Empire, which is an anachronistic view, and rather irritating. Britain is a country, not an Empire. Anyway, I've read the Plymouth Colony article, and it's contribution was significantly less than Massachussetts Bay Colony. My point was that global cities, as well as the 23rd largest ciy in the US, get their own non-disambiguation pages, but Plymouth seems to have to argue its case. Worcester is in fact NOT a disambiguation. You can express your POV as much as you like. Also Britain and America should not be treated equally - they are just two of many, and not shorthand for single views anyway. I would actually disagree with your last point, but I think the two Plymouths are opposite sides of a coin, in that one has an important place in US national mythology, while the other is almost entirely ignored in its national life. But now I'm rambling. I will speak no more of this. Stevebritgimp 23:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying that Britain is an Empire; I definitely concur that it is a country. But, at one time, it was an empire; that is all I was saying. And I'm also not saing that Plymouth Colony contributed more than the colony that eventually grew into Boston, one of the United States' most important cities. Whether you like it or not, Boston IS a global city, and Plymouth (UK) IS NOT. Plymouth, UK cannot come close to the historical and cultural significance that Boston has had in its much shorter history. And I know that Worcester is not a disambiguation page, and never said likewise; I was only stating that Plymouth and Worcester are in similar categories and should both be disambiguation pages. And I am NOT saying that the English Misplaced Pages should only focus on British and American views. Rather, it needs to take into account important cities/towns of all countries, and not single out one city as being more important than another of similar historical value simply because of namesake reasons. Whether you like it or not, Plymouth, Massachusetts has been extremely important to the American civilization, so much so that there is now have a National Holiday that celebrates the importance of Plymouth, MA and its inhabitants in the country's development. Last time I checked, Massachusetts Bay Colony does not have a similar National holiday. Raime 00:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Vehemently oppose changing. Plymouth, Uk is by far the most important in every category. A link to the lesser Plymouth, Mass at the top wouldn't go amiss though. 77.99.8.53 19:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Plymouth, UK is certainly not the most important in every category. Due to Plymouth, Massachusetts' historical value to the United States, and it being well-known throughout North America, it is equally important. Plymouth, Devon is important to the British civilization. Plymouth, Mass. is equally imortant to the American civilization. Neither city is extremely important outside of its respective country. That is why a dab page is needed. Due to the extreme opposition to moving this page, however, perhaps a dab link to Plymouth, Mass. (rather than a dab page) is the best way to go. Raime 20:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It is ridiculous that queries for PLYMOUTH redirect here and not to a DISAMBIGUATION page... The automaker, "rock," and Massachusetts town are at least as famous as this Plymouth... Your HUBRIS is confusing people who search for PLYMOUTH. Please change this and make queries for plymouth redirect to a disambig page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.217.27 (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

As an American, I find this discussion bizarre. Every American I know, and probably 80% of the country, learns about Plymouth, Mass., when they are 3 or 4 years old. It is a deeply important part of the American national mythos. It seems like the UKers in this discussion are arguing that Plymouth, Mass is less notable because it is a small town, whereas Plymouth, Devon is a city. But this isn't the point of the argument. Plymouth, Mass, is as notable as Plymouth, Devon because it is a incredibly important part of American history that everyone in the country knows about. It has nothing to do with the size of the town. mkehrt (talk) 22:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

General discussion about the article

The Plymouth citadel does not have more cannons facing towards the city than out to the sea, it's just the ones facing the city are the only ones that remain, as the ones facing out to sea were down closer to the shoreline, less visible, and later removed.

Is there any evidence to suggest that Takoradi-Sekondi in Ghana is a twin city of Plymouth? The list of cities of the official city council webstie doesn't list it: http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/twin_towns-2

Links for a to do list of things to add:

• NASA photo of Plymouth, Dartmoor and Bodmin Moor

This page is rapidly becoming absurdly hagiographic! Can't someone find some crime statistics or unemployment statistics or something? Monk Bretton 01:59, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was rather surprised to see some pages in my watchlist merged into this one in their entirity... Given how long the page has become, I'm not sure this is really a good thing - I prefer to see ten focused, interlinked pages than one single page about ten different things. What do other people think? Whitepaw 23:40, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)

I agree that ten small, focused pages are better than one long one. Not that this is a 'bad page' as such. --Monk Bretton 23:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I changed some references (in the captions of photos) that said 'the Plymouth Hoe'. It is called either 'the Hoe' or 'Plymouth Hoe' but never (in my experience) 'The Plymouth Hoe' (which is rather curious, when you think about it). At any rate the text of the article talks about Plymouth Hoe (no 'the') so it is best to have the text and captions matching. Cheers --Monk Bretton 23:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have recreated the pages for Devonport Dockyard, The Barbican, the Citadel and the University of Plymouth and moved all relevant material from the Plymouth page into each respective one. I have also removed the Eddystone lighthouse information from the History section as there is already a separate page for it. Plymouthguy 20:37, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• I agree the article was all over the place and embarassingly parochial in its tone. I've tried to take on board the (interminable) discussion above of which Plymouth is the more important and added a section on the Pilgrim Fathers in the spirit of transatlantic brotherliness. i've also tidied up the history, and added headings, references and even changed the title pic to do the place justice - the old one was overcast and miserable!. hope you agree its better Trysca (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The French attacked Plymouth

It might be worth mentioning this bit of history:

Plymouth played a role in the many wars between England and France in the Middle Ages. Because of this Plymouth attacked by French soldiers several times. The worst attack came one day in August 1403. The French sailed across the Channel and landed north of the town. The French marched into Plymouth and occupied the area around Exeter Street. The English fought back but were unable to dislodge the French, who stayed overnight.

The next day the French sailed away but only after burning much of the town. (This was easily done as most of the buildings were of wood with thatched roofs). Afterwards part of the town was called Breton Side. After this disaster Plymouth was soon rebuilt and began to flourish once more.

BUT

don't use those words - I copied them from this website: - http://www.localhistories.org/plymouth.htmlOgg

A very interesting piece of history, unfortunately, it is not very significant to Plymouth and only ever gets a tiny mention in local history books. The vast majority of people in Plymouth have no idea it ever happened. I will however mention it but in no detail. Plymouthguy 16:57, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

plymouth cathedral

plymouth has a cathedral, you wouldnt know it from this article. by my reckoning its got the 16th tallest church spire in the country on it.

It has, but as a Roman Catholic cathedral it's more just a largish church than one of the great Church of England cathedrals, and it's not exactly central. Nice church though. -- Necrothesp 14:29, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Not when their ruddy bells wake you up on a Sunday morning /sigh Sjc 09:01, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

There is no reference to churches - congregations I mean, though buildings are scarely mentioned. Is there a template for this?

Janner Reference

"Plymouth contains a rather dangerous sub-breed of humanity known as the 'Janner'. Please see the relevant Misplaced Pages page for important information concerning the nature of this sub-moronic underclass, and also ways planned of dealing with the menace to culture that they pose purely by virtue of their existence"

Removed this as it is actually rather offensive to myself and other Plymothians.

I have just reverted this edit from the introduction: "SEE THE JANNER TEXTBOOK - A GUIDE TO JANNERS, WRITTEN BY MIKE WHIDDON 2002" If it is a real and useful book then someone might want to add it properly to the article references. Geof Sheppard 07:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Nineteenth Century

Vernon White 22:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• There ought to be a section on (architect & city planner) Sir John Foulston and Union Street which were highly important works of public architecture of their period - unfortunately very little survived WWII and Abercrombie's plan, so it's now hard to bring together. Trysca (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject

I think it's time there was a Wikiproject:Devon up and running. Anyone interested, come to my talkpage and we'll sort something out. I'm not much good at HTML but if we all put our heads together I'm sure we can get Devon articles shipshape! Totnesmartin 16:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The site for the proposing such projects is:. Cheers! Totnesmartin 22:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Devoport - GUZZ not true?

The belief that Devonport is known as "GUZZ" because it was a radio callsign is, I think, an urban myth.

Take a look at this page

I have asked for a citation and I'll wait a week or two before correcting this.Paulbrian 01:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, looking at that site it may be that the GZX (Mount Wise and therefore controlling access to the Hamoaze and all routes in and out of the naval base) callsign might be the originator - but the idea that it was GUZZ has stuck in people's minds as the term has gained currency outside of the navy, and lay people like me would assume radio callsigns have 4 letters. Unless some other positive source can be had (I doubt it for a piece of slang like this) the call-sign origin has to be toned-down or removed. Problem is as an urban myth it's a pretty strong one, and it's likely to reappear in the future. Guzz or Guz is worth mentioning - but how? Can the site you gave be cited as a source? Stevebritgimp 22:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the callsign comment as Paul hasn't. I stand by my earlier comments above on the origin. Stevebritgimp 15:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Why is the word "guzz" so important as to appear in the introduction to the Plymouth article? Shouldn't it be moved to Devonport or, better still, HMNB Devonport? Geof Sheppard 07:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Devonport and Plymouth were officially united in 1914, and Devonport itself was previously Plymouth Dock, the main naval port having moved to the Tamar from Sutton Pool. In its use Guzz by extension describes Plymouth as a whole, as well as Devonport. If anything it would be applicable to all three articles. Maybe some explanation to this effect might remove the mystery. Stevebritgimp 12:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Architecture

An un-signed-in edit on the Arts Faculty has appeared - it sure is an odd building. I don't know if the University has proper permission to build so high. There is another building appearing in the old car park by the JSV, and that is contributing to the university blocking out all the views we all once had in the city. I suppose the Arts building at least looks like an Arts building - Barry Humphries famously commented on how much of an eyesore the Art College was - and he was spot on. Of course opposite this groundbreaking building we still have a forty yard circle of waste ground with a purple wooden wall around it. When will the city centre be finished? Is this an opportunity for some critique of the hagiography? Stevebritgimp 15:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

As long as it is neutral in tone and fully referenced of course! ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ 01:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

A picture of the Royal William Yard has appeared in the Transport section - this is kind of disembodied - I would have thought it would be relevant to something on regeneration of Plymouth, in particular reclaiming former military sites. I don't think there is anything at the moment.Stevebritgimp 21:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

South West Coast Path

The South West Coast Path passes through the city, and there has been a proposal made that its article should be rewritten. At present it is largely long lists of towns, villages, and places of interest. If you can help turn these lists into prose, could you join in at Talk:South West Coast Path. Thanks. Geof Sheppard 12:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested Dab Link

Would anyone be opposed to putting a dab link to Plymouth, Massachusetts at the top of this article, to go along with Plymouth (disambiguation)? Clearly there is a stronger opinion to leave the article the way it is, and therefore it should remain with "Plymouth" redirecting to this page. However, as was fairly established in the last debate, Plymouth, MA is by far more prominent than any other United States Plymouth, and therefore a set-up with a dab link to Plymouth, MA at the top of this page (as is currently used with Cambridge) would be appropriate. Raime 03:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

That seems quite a reasonable thing to do. I think you should also do something to the Plymouth (disambiguation) page to make it obvious which is the most prominent Plymouth in the USA, and also put a clear link to that page from Plymouth, Massachusetts. Geof Sheppard 07:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I went ahead with the dab link and did as you said, putting a link to Plymouth (UK) and Plymouth (disambiguation) at the top of Plymouth, MA, as well as bolding Plymouth, MA on the dab page. Raime 05:37, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Globe Theatre

Just me sounding off again: Whiteworks keeps describing this building as 'georgian' - yes, with a small 'g'. Both in terms of welcoming newcomers, and avoiding 3 reverts, I can't keep getting rid of this. I'm not sure what sort of 'georgian' is meant, one must assume it's the architecture, not the country or state. Here's a description from applause southwest:

The Globe Theatre Location: Stonehouse Barracks Plymouth PL1

Brief History / General info: The Globe Theatre, located inside the Royal Marine Barracks, opened in 1848 and was initially used by the men of the battalion.

The theatre had several alterations made to it over the years and in 1928 the seating capacity was increased to 250.

The theatre is a prime example of early Victorian architecture and, although unassuming from the outside, it has an attractive interior.

The Globe Theatre is not open to the public.

Here's another description, from parents guide to Plymouth:

Globe Theatre, Stonehouse, Plymouth. The Globe Theatre is set in the Royal Marine Barracks at Stonehouse. It is a beautiful Victorian theatre that is lovingly maintained and has that old theatre feel. As it is within the barracks you must obtain a ticket by booking prior to arrival, although tickets may be available at the gate.

Hppppff Stevebritgimp 01:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Degrading quality

Since the end of August this article has changed substantially. However, the quality of the alterations is very erratic and a number of POV comments are finding their way into the prose. Requests for sources are also being lost through these edits and other miscellaneous issues. For example, in the second paragraph of the lede "destruction of the dockyards and city centre in the Blitz" has changed to "minimal damage to the dockyards but extensive destruction in the city centre in the Blitz". Neither of these are accurate IMO, but the original more closely matches the truth.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The original was very close to the truth, and if anything understates the case. The photographs in the H P Twyford book, It Came to Our Door reveal the extent of the devastation wreaked by the Luftwaffe during the blitz over a largely unprotected Plymouth; very little was left of the centre at all, and significant parts of the dockyard as well as Morice Town, Stoke, Devonport, etc were extensively collaterally redeveloped by Herr Goering's boys. A cursory glimpse at the Bomb Map in the Devon Records Office paints a very sombre picture indeed. My parents' experience, children at the time time, will perhaps underpin this: mother was bombed out of three houses during the blitz and my father twice. Sjc 03:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Plymouth's Climate

I think a section is needed for some data on Plymouth's climate, like the one used for London. Seeing as Plymouth is right in the south west it would set a good of example of true atlantic climate. I do not know how to insert such a table, but it would be great to see one on here. Bsrboy (talk) 19:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The table is actually a template {{Infobox Weather}}. Follow this link and copy the coding from one of the empty source boxes. All you need then is to follow the instructions (basically to delete all the bits you don't need) and insert the relevant data for Plymouth. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Bsrboy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Could I use the same data for nearby town Ivybridge and put "climate of the nearest city Plymouth"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsrboy (talk • contribs) 01:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't have thought so. Ivybridge is considerably higher than Plymouth, right on the edge of the moor, and five or so miles from the sea. So with those topographical differences it's likely to be noticeably colder for a start. And you couldn't use Plymouth's figures and state what I have just done, because that would be original research (unless you could find a reliable source - which I'm certainly not!) WP:UKCITIES does say only include a note on the climate "where the figures are available". But it does depend on whether we're talking macro- or micro-climate, I suppose.  —SMALLJIM  20:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's kind of hard to tell. It says "If local data is available, consider using Template:Climate chart." I know that the temperature might differ slightly, but probably the same amount of rainfall and temperature. Plymouth itself is quite large and can vary from place to place. For example some areas of Plymouth are near to 150 metres above sea level - far higher than anywhere in Ivybridge and some areas of Plymouth are 5 miles away from the sea. I'm sure that this problem occurs in London too which is huge and yet it uses its climate data from Greenwich (5 miles from the city of London). In conclusion to this I've added the climate chart template to Ivybridge. It differs from the one used on Plymouth. Bsrboy (talk) 14:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Arts and culture

I've united the various arts/culture/sport sections into one largish section, which would make a dfecent-sized article in its own right. Why bother? because the current article, at 52K, is bigger than WP:SIZE recommends. any comments? Totnesmartin (talk) 13:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Sheffield is a featured article—so it's some sort of goal to aim for—and it has several sub-articles (though its main article is still 59Kb). WP:SIZE and WP:SUMMARY have some useful guidance. I say go for it and create a "Culture of Plymouth" article. There's easily enough for a separate "History of Plymouth" article too.  —SMALLJIM  18:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

OK I will. Hmm, "Culture of Plymouth"... that's not a phrase you hear every day... Totnesmartin (talk) 18:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Culture of Plymouth is go! But it needs work... Totnesmartin (talk) 13:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Kool and the gang. Looks like there could be several spin offs that could improve the consistency of what remains.Stevebritgimp (talk) 22:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm offline at home currently (currently using the internet cafe's laptop), could somebody else take this on? I find it hard to get the time... :( Totnesmartin (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I've given Culture of Plymouth a quick copyedit, but it needs a lot more to get it up to FA status ;-)  —SMALLJIM  16:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Ergh, not sure where to add this, but this page has definite signs of vandalism. It says Micheal Jackson and faggot on the front page. I have no idea how to fix it, so I'll just leave this here

• Yes - appears this is a persistent vandal identified by various IP addresses - maybe needs a vandalism template slapping on their page. Still eats up 10 mins of someone's time sorting it - I'll do it myself this evening if I've a mind to. Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Tidying up the city

I've started moving some headings around to closer match those recommended in the WP:UKCITIES project guideline. Ideally we still need "Geography" and "Landmarks" sections. The small "Green space", "Twinning" and "Military and Naval" sections need merging into others. I'm not sure now whether "Sport" should have gone into the "Culture of Plymouth" sub-article, even though I sort of suggested it above. Thoughts, anyone?  —SMALLJIM  17:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

This entry is becoming a complete mess, all puffs surmise and unverifiable controversial asertions. Someone should start again from scratch. there have been many better much earlier sections. If the sports section and 'culture' have to go why not this retail and the geography bits as well. it makes the city sound so pathetically ham. Exaggerating unjustifiable claim just brings on endless edits and deletions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.214.43 (talk) 18:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you've read the comments on your talk page. I'd suggest taking things slower – instead of running quickly through the whole article each evening, why not concentrate on one section that you are still unhappy with and explain here what you think is wrong with it? You'll find that most editors are willing to listen and respond to cogent arguments. But please read the guidance at WP:UKCITIES first and remember that this is a work in progress: in contrast to the article "becoming a complete mess" as you allege, I'd rather say that the article had become rather messy and we're now in the process of cleaning it up.  —SMALLJIM  12:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Following comment copied from User talk:86.160.136.198
Could Smalljim please explain his vision and plan for the Plymouth page which he seems to have emasculated and is now combining a strange, almost perverse mixture of clinical and questionable detail with a strangely folksy approach to controversial and oddly labelled sections? Is the intention to provide one idiosyncratic view of the city or so reduce the detail as to make it worthless to any casual reader or researcher? Gingernut 18.2.2006

I've suggested a couple of times that it would be useful for you to read up on Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines – you obviously have not yet done so. I've also given you several chances to be civil, which you have ignored. Therefore I feel justified in not replying to your comment in any depth. I'll just say that you should not assume that I have written all the content that you are unhappy with.  —SMALLJIM  20:02, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that the Culture of Plymouth article should be merged into this and a much larger sub-article for Sport and the picture of the Britannia should be moved to the sub-article of culture. Any thoughts welcome. Bsrboy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Please let us know your current thoughts under the Sport heading below, Bsrboy.  —SMALLJIM  20:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I think a section on public services is required after the sports section in compliance with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements. Bsrboy (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Apparent loss of the Spirit of Discovery

Has someone put a selective filter on my web connection, or has Plymouth dropped its "Spirit of Discovery" slogan? There's no mention of the phrase on the Council's Tourism and visitors page, which is the reference at Plymouth#Tourism. There's only one mention on the whole Council site (to a playground) and I can't find anything else that looks official via Google.  —SMALLJIM  16:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the reference and changed the text to read "… used to market the city …", though even that's not an easy fact to verify (online at least).  —SMALLJIM  20:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It says it on a signpost as your enter Plymstock. Maybe you could take a picture of it as proof...? Bsrboy (talk) 00:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like that's one sign that the council hasn't got round to replacing yet.  —SMALLJIM  20:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sport

Hi. All the sports info has reappeared on this page, and now there is in fact slightly less information about sport on the Culture of Plymouth page than there is here. The idea of having a subsidiary page is to keep the main city page from being cluttered with lots of information about lots of sports teams. I would concede that a mention of major sports teams in national competition, such as Argyle, Albion and Raiders would be fair, but an exploration of the origins of Pilgrim Pete would be better elsewhere. Stevebritgimp (talk) 17:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

We need a consensus as to where Sport in Plymouth belongs: it's just wrong to have the info duplicated as it is now. As I indicated earlier at Talk:Culture of Plymouth, I'd be inclined to separate sport from other culture and probably have a separate Sport in Plymouth sub-article. What do the rest of you think?  —SMALLJIM  20:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Steve. "A note on notable sports teams or sports centres." That's from the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements. I suggest three paragraphs: Sports (using prose - NOT just a list), Arts (Robert Lenkivich - I can't spell), and Culture (nightlife etc). Bsrboy (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks - are you saying that these three paragraphs you suggest should be in the main Plymouth article or in one or more subarticles? Have a look at Misplaced Pages:Summary style, if you haven't already read it.  —SMALLJIM  22:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The three paragraphs should be in this article (three paragraphs isn't too long). Bsrboy (talk) 22:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

A dedicated Plymouth Sports page on Misplaced Pages would be far better to have for all the info plus in a bit more detail rather then have it just in Culture and a few mentions on the main Plymouth page IMO. We could Still have a few mentions on those pages but the majority of the info should have it's own page given the amount of Sports team i.e Argyle, Albion,Raiders and Devils plus more also Indivdual sportsman/woman too. What ever happens i am more then willing to help out.Phenom V1.0 (talk) 23:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Good to hear it. I'd like to see a very large section (with prose) for the main article on sports in Plymouth and the section about sports, arts and culture to be a summary of sports, arts and culture. Bsrboy (talk) 00:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

So that's three of us in favour of a new Sport in Plymouth page. I was hoping that one or two of the other regulars here would give an opinion, though I see that Stevebritgimp hasn't posted since 29 March, and Totnesmartin (the original proposer of the Culture page) seems to be on a wikibreak. Anyone else? If no-one expresses a strong opinion against in the next day or so, I suggest we go ahead.  —SMALLJIM  20:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I'm neutral on the matter - sport-as-culture or separate sport is fine.Stevebritgimp (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you say Plymouth is a B-class article? Bsrboy (talk) 20:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

When is work going to start if you don't mind me asking? Phenom V1.0 (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

At the moment Plymouth has a section on sports, which is two paragraphs and a section on culture, which is four paragraphs. I have gone ahead and created the article, Sport in Plymouth, but the article on Culture of Plymouth contains some information on Sports. I shall go ahead and move the information about sports onto the seperate article about Sports on Plymouth, unless anyone objects? bsrboy (talk) 16:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Re-assessment April 2008

I have requested a re-assessment for Plymouth (currently start-class) on WikiProject Cities, WikiProject England, WikiProject UK geography and WikiProject Devon. Bsrboy (talk) 21:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

International Links

Should we have the flags for them or not? (I say yes, but I want to hear other views) Bsrboy (talk) 21:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (flags) and its talk page, where the whole issue of flags and flagicons has been exhaustively discussed. My personal opinion is that they don't add any useful information, so shouldn't be included, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to do anything about it.  —SMALLJIM  20:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Image problems

I don't know if it's just me, but Image:Karte Plymouth UK MKL1888.png and Image:Charles church today.jpg only partially load. Especially Charles church where I can only see about 2 cm of the top. Bsrboy (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's just you. What happens if you do a Shift-Reload on your browser? I'm a Mac user now, but I have found problems in the past on a PC with Misplaced Pages falling foul of ad-blocking software and Symantec/Norton security due to the image dimensions. One possible workaround is to change the default thumbnail size in "My preferences --> Files" --TimTay (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It works on firefox. Oh well, not the end of the world. Bsrboy (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

YES! It works. I think it's because I deleted all my temporary internet files. Bsrboy (talk) 12:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

This is not the only "Plymouth"

It is time for the discussion about whether this should be a disambig. page to resurface... Many people are being mislead by this erroneous non-disambig. Massachusetts, the automaker, the Rock -- all are equally important Plymouths.

Let the discussion begin again, ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.217.27 (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

What has changed since the previous discussions? DuncanHill (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Plymouth Marine Laboratory

Should some mention be made of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory? DuncanHill (talk) 22:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've added a paragraph about it it the Geography section. I don't know much about it, so any corrections or further information added to it would be great. Be bold my friend! :) bsrboy (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

New infobox

 Done

Hi, I've made a proposed new infobox for Plymouth in my sandbox. Feel free to edit it and tell me what you think. Consensus should be met on an edit as big as this. bsrboy (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Which one are we talking about - the one with the nickname? ;) Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... Something tells me I'm gona need a reference for that. Do you think it should use the current City of Plymouth logo as used on the city's council's website or the coat of arms with the motto on it? bsrboy (talk) 13:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Both the logo and the coat of arms are familiar to me - and I would suppose they're both associated with the council. I would personally prefer the coat of arms, with the green lion logo in the government section. Again speaking personally the nickname comes from 'City by the sea' which was a long poem about the city written fairly recently (80s?). Whether the title refers to something else previous I don't know. Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. Do you know where I could get a decent sized logo? bsrboy (talk) 13:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done couldn't find larger image, though and the nickname of shit hole by the sea has been removed. bsrboy (talk) 14:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Shipbuilding

I know nothing on the subject, but I would imagine in the pre-Industrial age there might have been shipbuilding in the area. However I find it far-fetched that Plymouth was involved in building battleships for the Royal Navy in WWII, which the top section suggests. Can anyone shed any light on this? I think the mention of shipbuilding should be toned down, and ship maintenance emphasised. Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

There's a map in the history section from 1909 of the dockyards, which looks like it is capable of building war ships. If there's anything you know then please help! bsrboy (talk) 13:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If ships were built or laid down there ought to be information as to which ships.Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

about two thirds of the way down... there's a lot! bsrboy (talk) 13:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

yes, reading your source was quite surprised. King Edward VII got me - and lo and behold on the wiki is in dock - I'm even wondering if that photo is at Devonport, but I can't quite tell from the view, or from the page, and would need to rummage around in the source website. Interesting! Stevebritgimp (talk) 13:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Degrading quality II - well not really, it's confined to the header

Tone warning: the following will sound stern and unhappy, but is just observation - I'm smiling on the inside. Can't bring myself to read the whole article (so don't know if I would like it or not). Suffice to say that the usual things that happen have crept in again, and edits that don't cover us in glory have survived. So in the first paragraph the city has a red light district (easier to find on this page than reality - worse luck), was besieged by Parliamentarians in the 1640s, and on a more prosaic note, has two links to England and two to the United States in the top section, but none to the United Kingdom, in case anyone was wondering what state we were in or what the flag on top of the citadel signified. Stuff about the Pilgrim Fathers establishing the constitution of the US is a little daft too. Now, yes, I know, I can edit all this myself, but just wanted to make a note, as it seems we've lost the focus of the article after its major, and very welcome, sort out earlier this year. Stevebritgimp (talk) 16:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get straight to it. By the way the lead had a link to the United Kingdom. At the moment it has two links to England, one to USA and one to UK. If I'm wrong, please let me know. bsrboy (talk) 17:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

No - you're right, it said 11th largest university in the United Kingdom. I didn't see that. I still think that somewhere there should be something saying Plymouth is in the UK, rather than people having to work it out. Stevebritgimp (talk) 17:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It says United Kingdom in the infobox, but if you'd rather I change "Plymouth is a city and unitary authority in Devon, England" to "Plymouth is a city and unitary authority in Devon, United Kingdom", I'll be more than happy to do so. :) bsrboy (talk) 17:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Jut for your information, I put the sentence about the red light district and 20,000 capacity football stadium in to cover the sections on sport and culture in the lead. I'm more than happy for you to remove it, though! bsrboy (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

That's cool - I'm being a bit of a curmudgeon, and am having to revise my opinion - having actually read the article now it is massively stronger that it ever was before, bigger, longer, and well sourced. That will mean that it will stand up better to the weathering it periodically gets (and will in fact confine the 'usual' edits to the header. I was judging by looking at the edit history, rather than the article itself - so my bad (scars from previous situations here). Thank you for your diligent editing!! On the red light thing, it would be good to make some kind of 'cultural' comment in the header other than 'we have some prostitutes and football', but I'd have to think about what to put (!). When I read 'complete with red light district and 20,000 football stadium' it sounds like someone is making their time-honoured 'Plymouth has no culture' statements. Mention of the Theatre Royal as a producing theatre of national standing would be better. Stevebritgimp (talk) 17:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time to read, review and edit the article. I hope you stay with Misplaced Pages. When refering to the "usual" edits, does this have anything to do with the Janner dome being an alternative name to the airport? I remember similar IPs putting the information into the article after being reverted. bsrboy (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that would be the sort of thing. Also what I would call the inferiority complex, i.e. the idea that Plymouth is not of any consequence, and anyone who says it is must be misguided. Stevebritgimp (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay. If this sort of editing occurs again I will contact the IP as soon as possible. Has the IP ever replied? bsrboy (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The History section and summary style

To Bsrboy. See WP:SS. The main reason for spinning off sub-articles is to reduce the size of the main article, so the removed section must be summarised, not merely duplicated in the main article, as it substantially was here. Now maybe my summary was (as I suggested) rather feeble, but it's the sort of size that we should be aiming for - note that WP:SS says that the summary of the sub-article should be quite similar to the 'summary' in the parent article. Happy to hear your comments.  —SMALLJIM  22:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll trim it down bit by bit, making sure I don't remove anything vital. You might have already noticed this, but I've been working my way down the history section assigning a reference to each sentence and making sure it all sounds good, but I'll jump straight to the 20th century sub-section right away. In part, the revert I did was so I could work on the main bulk of text and trim it down, but I'll copy and paste it into my sandbox, trim it down there and then when I've got a smaller size I'll copy and paste if back into the Plymouth article. bsrboy (talk) 23:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done It's a rough outline; probably needs a bit of tidying here and there. bsrboy (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

OK - I think we're getting there. I've removed the date of Abercrombie's rebuilding that was wrong, and cut out some of the figures which I think provide excessive detail for a summary – obviously this is a subjective decision. Regarding referencing, can I suggest that in accordance with WP:SS, instead of referencing sentences in the History section here, you should be expanding and providing references for the information in the History of Plymouth article, and then just summarizing that content here.  —SMALLJIM  12:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. I have a question: I see you've been breaking up book references onto seperate lines, why? bsrboy (talk) 12:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm one of the many editors who find it helps to separate the citations in this way from the rest of the text. Now what is about summary style that you don't understand? Why are you still adding new refs to sentences in Plymouth#History instead of History of Plymouth?  —SMALLJIM  14:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I want Plymouth to become a good article. Every sentence needs to be referenced for that to happen. I'll get round to the main history of Plymouth article later. bsrboy (talk) 14:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you know?

I've nominated the fact about Smeaton's Tower for the Did you know? section on the Main Page here. bsrboy (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)