Talk:Landmarks and notable buildings of Brighton and Hove

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brighton, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource about Brighton and Hove. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or the Portal.
Brighton To do: Shortcut: WP:BAH Project Finish Project Page Urgent Recruit new members Urgent Articles Add talk page template to articles Identify further articles relating to the project Images Add more images to articles

[edit] Why create this article?

I've created this article largely to help stop the Brighton article get too bogged down in unecessary detail. The main Brighton article has a Landmarks section where I think the obvious and important buildings can go. In this article we can freely add more and more. Although I've added the content as two simple lists, I hope in time this article will expand to provide greater depth. --Seaweed 23:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removals

I've removed two entries from the main "Buildings and Structures" list. I took out the Hanbury Arms as I felt it was of minor significance, earning its place on the list purely because of its ballroom - hardly noteworthy. I also removed the Western Pavillion as out of the four links on the line of information about, only one linked to an existing article and that was, according the what was there, a "sometime working partner" of one of the others on list - I don't find this to be particularly significant to the city. Finally, I was tempted to take out the British Engineerium too because it doesn't have its own article on wikipedia, is one of the minor museums of the city (of which there are many) and even most Brighton & Hove citizens wouldn't know it even existed, let alone tell you where it was. However I have decided to leave it in for the time being because I do agree that in theory it is of some significance.
But what this boils down to is coming up with some sort of selection criteria for this page. We can't really add every public spot in the city but certainly there are plenty of places in this exalted conurbation that should be included that currently aren't. In the few I've added so far I've stuck to major locations that have warrented their own article on wikipedia. I realise as a selection criteria this is a bit hit and miss but for now I hope it works as a rough sort of guide as to what should be on this page. Please let me know why you disagree. --Stenun 22:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I actually disagree about all of them, sorry! (I feel I ought to insert a smiley here! :)

Brighton's style and heritage is partly characterised by it's quirkiness and the dubious justifications behind some of its legends. I think this must come into play when asserting "notability" about these places. Also, in the case of the Hanbury, the Sassoon family are discussed in several articles, and the mausoleum is really quite relevant to that important family's relationship with Brighton.

But I've not reverted the removals because I disagree with them. I've reverted them because I think they're debatable enough to warrant discussion here before deletion, rather than the announcement here which was all we got.

So please, other editors, chip in, and if the consensus is that they should go, of course I won't revert again. 62.30.176.215 01:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Not only did you put back in what I took out but you removed what I put in. I would contend that even if you disagreed with the removals, taking out all the additions does not fit well with the page name. This page is called "Landmarks and notable buildings of Brighton and Hove", not "quirky buildings with a bit of history in Brighton and Hove". I completely fail to see why you removed the addition of such noted landmarks as the County Ground and Withdean Stadium yet put back in the ballroom of a pub. I really don't see how this page can claim to live up to its title if it fails to list such famous landmarks as Volk's Railway or the Duke of Yorks cinema - both highly notable examples of their type having historical national significance and not just "quirky local significance". For the time being I am going to revert the list to he version I left it at but then add in the two entries I removed. Meaning the list will be a summation of both versions. Hopefully this will be an acceptable compromise for the time being. --Stenun 05:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I like having all these entries in. (Including the new ones, it was a shame they were lost in the reversion.) It's not an unmanageably long list, and the point about quirkiness is, for me, an important part of "notability" for things in Brighton. – Kieran T ^(talk) 12:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Then unless another editor comes along and re-opens the debate I will happily leave those two entries alone. --Stenun 19:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I've just added the "incompletelist" template since it seemed odd to only warn (in the text) that the parks section was incomplete. I've also removed the schools. Tentatively, given the above reaction to removals, but the schools weren't really landmarks, and besides are better suited to education lists/categories for the area. Hope that's not controversial? – Kieran T ^(talk) 22:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)