Talk:London Borough of Newham
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. (Add assessment comments) | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance within the UK geography WikiProject. | |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
 To-do list for London Borough of Newham: |
edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Linux
Newham become notable to a certain degree when they commissioned a study on Linux adoption throughout, and then decided to stick with Microsoft software after they were (purportedly) offered a large discount by MS. Although I'm not able myself to research this fully right now, it may be useful to add it since some people might look up Newham to find out about this (the incident led to the phrase 'doing a newham' for companies/organizations exploring linux use, ultimately to get more favourable treatment from microsoft). Via strass 20:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- The council tax payers of Newham might find that factoid very interesting right now. The IT department obviously did not count on the problems that are caused by Microsoft keeping there protocols secret (which is what the resent EU court hearings have been about). So now that the Council has committed itself, it finds it still does not have any applications to run yet and everything has had to be put back. See news article in Computer Weekly. [1]. So much for those 'total cost of ownership' calculations that Microsoft sold them. --Aspro 16:34, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ethnic/cultural diversity
Someone asked for a factoid, which is reasonable, since I don't really believe it. The 2001 census certainly did identify Little Ilford ward' as the most ethnically diverse in the UK (and I referenced it). Also, N15 - in the Evening Standard Sep 12 2006. If we want to go further afield, Queens claims the US champion title and world title (no where else exists); but San Francisco and LA also want the title!
Elsewhere on the Internet, Papua New Guinea is cited as the most culturally diverse place on earth. Kbthompson 00:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, this is why I asked for a factoid. It is indeed the most diverse in the UK, but maybe we should edit (or even remove) the part where it mentions its diversity in relation to the world. JJB 11:16, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
In encyclopaedia land, to err on the side of safety, is not to err at all. It may be that someone read a somewhat overblown claim from a council press officer. The GLA booklet (referenced) actually makes interesting reading, particularly in respect of areas which have a high concentration of an ethnic minority. It claims that (by their measure) diversity remains high across London, and there really are no mono-cultural ghettos. Kbthompson 14:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
- We're back to that statement again. (Page 11, table 3 of) the reference indicates that 9 of the 15 most ethnically diverse wards in the UK are located in Newham. As far as I understand that relates to stated origin and makes no reference to any racial characteristic. The current statement is nonsensical, as there are places outside London where, for instance Handsworth, where there is an absolute Asian majority with little diversity. It appears to me that the editor is talking about race, not diversity. Again, someone has put up a well I know it must be in there somewhere, but I can't be bothered to find it for you sort of reference. Kbthompson 15:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I think it all boils down to what you define "ethnic diversity" as, and there appears to be some confusion about it being equated with the levels of non-White populations on the page with ethnic diversity for local authorities. The GLA report that has been quoted uses the Simpson's Diversity Index to produce a statistical measure of diversity in terms of equitability and "richness" of ethnic groups in an area, or how mixed it is, as opposed to how non-White it is.
The changes I have put into the text about Newham with regard to diversity are based on analysis that was done using Simpson's Diversity Index. The report done by the GLA that is referenced used 10 ethnic categories for its Simpson's analysis, so that some comparison could be done with the 1991 Census, which used different ethnic group categories to the 2001 Census. An area with a high concentration of any single ethnic group (be it White or one of the Asian groups) will result in a low diversity score, while an area with a range of ethnic groups with relative equality in community size will result in a high diversity score.
If all the white ethnic groups are lumped (White British, White Irish and White Other) together, then Newham comes out as the most "diverse" as it has the highest proportion of non-White ethnic population, with greater equitable proportions of all of the ethnic groups, rather than concentrations. But such a grouping negates the White Irish and White Other populations, which should also be seen as ethnic minorities.
If all 16 ethnic groups are used for a Simpson's Diversity Index analysis, then Brent comes out as the most diverse borough, as it includes a larger White Irish population than Newham. Similarly, Dollis Hill in Brent comes out as the most ethnically diverse ward in the country, with a greater range and relative richness of all the ethnic groups - a better "mix". If White categories are aggregated, then Little Ilford moves into the position of "most diverse". Mivona 16:50, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for that clarification - perhaps move the qualifying statements to a footnote? Otherwise, the intro reads like a legal document. Any ultimate statement should be both precise and concise, but it is a point worth expanding on in a note to preclude further discussion. Kbthompson 15:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
I would prefer to re-write the "List of English districts by ethnic diversity", and put an explanation of the definition of diversity used there. Once that was clear, I don't think that the explanation would need to be repeated here. Would that be acceptable? I believe I have the analysis done at work, and could amend it shortly. Mivona 21:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I would have no problem with that, perhaps best put a note on the page to explain what you are doing; but as you say the original text is misleading and open to misinterpretation. I appreciate your help in clearing it up. Kbthompson 22:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Crime
I went ahead and asked for a factoid on this. The editor has put a link to the Home Office, but this is a general "search" point, and not to specific information on Newham.
I looked up a couple off the top of my head, E6, SW1, E3 and E9. All were much the same, although Hackney was up, and as might be expected Kensington and Chelsea was down a little. Bow was the same. To my mind, crime in Newham is comparable to other areas of London. What I would like to see in the section are independent links to statistics that actually justify what is claimed in the text.
In general, if a statement goes into wiki, it should essentially be backed by independent sources, otherwise it looks as though we are drawing our own conclusions. Has anyone got any references for this? Links to league tables of crime?
All the best Kbthompson 18:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree... the "statistics" are not referenced in any robust way. The area that has the highest "crime deprivation" score from the 2004 Index of Multiple Deprivation is not in Newham - it is in Haringey. I will try to come up with a re-write when I can. Mivona 15:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- I removed the crime section. It was too journalistic in style and full of innacuracies. MRSC • Talk 07:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Music
In the music section it is stated that the artist kano comes from forest gate, he actually comes from east ham, first hand knowledge as a friend and also stated in the independence online. (http://enjoyment.independent.co.uk/music/features/article306739.ece)
Can the appropriate person please fix this please.
[edit] Places of Interest
Is it just me, or is there a lot of POV stuff in the "places of interest" section? Eg. "Stratford Shopping Centre, rather a characterless shopping centre, home to various chainstores that make up the all too familiar face of 'Clone-town Britain'." And "The Hub, a revolutionary community resource centre". Does anyone even have any information about these places (especially the two community centres) or is someone just self-publicizing? Story Weaver 11:50, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Several attempts have been made to give the contents a less POV format, but they keep being reverted, presumably by the original contributor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.86.1 (talk) 08:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Keystone Kops
Should the tales of the legends that are the Newham Parks Constabulary be included here, or are the too libelous coming from Private Eye, as after all, their almost regular apperances in a national magazine, are the only thing I, been from Bradofrd, know about Newham. Willow177 (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Generally, something like that is only included if their exploits reach the national press. While I would tend to believe that PE contains the kernel of truth, it usually verges on libel; so, best not. Kbthompson (talk) 21:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
