Talk:Brentwood, Essex

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Churches[edit]

Is it just me or are local churches now swamping the external links section? Maybe a subsection is required about churches in the town in the same way as there is a section on sport, parks & open spaces? DaveK@BTC 12:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have had no reaction on this comment/question I posed above. Of the external links there are now more than 50% relating to churches in Brentwood. 

   * Brentwood Borough Council - Welcome to Brentwood (PDF)
   * Brentwood - White's Directory of Essex, 1848
   * Churches in Brentwood - The Website of Churches Together in Brentwood
   * Brentwood Baptist Church - Brentwood Baptist Church
   * BBC's H2G2 Entry on Brentwood - The Guide to Life, The Universe and Everything
   * Brentwood Directory - A free directory/portal specifically for Brentwood
   * Phoenix FM - Community radio license holder for Brentwood
   * Boredtown - A Resident's Views on Brentwood Life
   * Sawyers Church Brentwood - A Brentwood town centre Church
   * Brentwood Freecycle Network - Online recycling service
   * The Roman Catholic Diocese of Brentwood
   * Dodd Road Community Church - Dodd Road Community Church
   * St. Peter's Church South Weald - St. Peter's Church South Weald

I do not believe that Brentwood is 50% preoccupied with Christian religion and consider this to be unencyclopaedic material adding little in the way of any true perspective about the town. Those churches that have historic interest ought have that historic material reflected here; maybe with a suitable link to the church website for further detail, those undertaking activities that are not 'day-to-day' religion and could be considered outstanding would also merit mention perhaps; otherwise are the links not little more than ad spam? DaveK@BTC 22:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sugar Hut[edit]

I certainly agree that the derogatory remarks recently made about the Sugar Hut were inappropriate but it must be said that the current owners of what used to be the White Hart have hidden all but the facade of what used to be a historically interesting building easily accessible to the public as a walk though to what is now William Hunter Way. I believe it to be the case theet the owners have also been accused, if not yet found guilty, of having breached planning consents in somewhat over-zealous re-construction. DaveK@BTC 16:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Elephants[edit]

Ahem, I just read this and I have to say I've seen some implausible nonsense on the internet, but why would they import elephants from India to Essex, train them, and send them back to India? I lived there and I never heard about it. Maybe this was the work of a comedian, but then Brentwood School alumni include Douglas Adams, Griff Rhys-Jones, and Keith Allen. And Noel Edmunds. And Hardy Amies. And Frank Lampard Jr. - Anon comment put in main article

You people have absolutely no sense of humour whatsoever, do you? Whoever removed that text from the Brentwood, Essex page seriously needs to examine why they did that. What's the matter with you? Can you not let something vaguely light-hearted remain where it was? Secondly, I can only hope that your question regarding the importing of Elephants to Brentwood was meant to be seriously tongue-in-cheek, otherwise I'll have to conclude that you really are intellectually deficient. Whoever you are, Anon, do try and grow up - and yes, one can be grown up and have a giggle, before you start. Dear me.
User:Harry Potter added the factoid; I've left a query for him/her on his/her talk page, and we now wait ... --Tagishsimon (talk)
Well this is apparently where it came from. Do you suppose we can trust the word of Eric Pickles MP? -Wiccan Quagga
It's a fact that is often used in many histories of Brentwood. Unlikley as it may seem, it does appear to be true. Of course without finding someone that is an expert on the East India company we won't know for sure, but they did have a headquarters on that site. - DarkCryst

It also makes more sense if you consider that the East India Company wanted to train their men to be used to working with Elephants before they went abroad rather than training the elephants. This way they would be productive from day one rather than spend their first 3 months learning the local ropes. DaveK@BTC 12:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Town info:[edit]

I've just noticed that the town info quotes Brentwood as being postcode CM14. It certainly also covers CM15 and possibly other CM codes as well. --DaveK@BTC 12:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The CM15 postcodes tend to be Pilgrims Hatch and Doddinghurst. Central Brentwood is CM14... thats probably why DarkCryst 19:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually CM15 extends right up Doddinghurst Road to junction with Ongar Road - just 5 minutes walk from High St so pretty much Brentwood. DaveK@BTC 09:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank Christ you noticed Dave, let's get that fixed. Good to know our council taxes are being well spent. Superseve (talk) 11:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've added CM13 because this is Brentwood too (Boleyn Gardens, Aspen Court, Thornden Park, etc)

Boring town[edit]

Why pose the question 'Is Brentwood a boring town?' It is transparently obvious to all those who live there that this is true, and it must be even more stark to visitors. Fortuitously for residents, it has the saving grace of being situated right next to London, and since the town's proximity to London is the reason that most of us live here, the town itself being dull as s*** is not that much of a problem. Who cares when we live on the edge of the greatest city in the world? And flighty lives in Brentwood as well.

  • My grandparents lived in Brentwood for many years (and my parents, until they escaped... to Norfolk, the only place more boring), and you're right; it is a terminably irretrievable hole. That said, it's still not encyclopaedic material unless it's verfiable from reliable sources. Kinitawowi 16:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's very varifiable - it was featured across national newspapers and TV shows. Not to mention the local newspapers OTT coverage. - DarkCryst
      • It's only verifiable that there is an anagram and that it was reported in the papers. It is NOT verifiable that Brentwood is any more or less boring than any other time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.64.194 (talk) 10:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only because an anagram of Brentwood is #Bored Town'. It's no more boring or exciting than any other town. In fact it's a very pleasant place to live. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.110.178 (talk) 19:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mate you're an irretrievable cretin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.205.17.135 (talk) 13:59, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly stupid really. Brentwood is just a town, some shops, houses, few pubs....just like hundreds of other towns. There's nothing particularly interesting about any of them, but theres no specific reason why Brentwood should be singled out as being any more boring than the others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.75.166 (talk) 09:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Graves & Roman battle at Brentwood[edit]

The History section says:

"Robert Graves claims that Brentwood was the site of the battle where Claudius defeated the Ancient Britons in 44AD."

I know that in one of the Claudius books ('I, Claudius' or 'Claudius the God') Graves writes about the battle taking place in Brentwood, but my understanding was that this was fictional and has no basis in fact.

Would it be reasonable to say that either a source should be added to this text or it should make clear that it is not a "claim" but a "fictional account"?

Edits 20th August 2006[edit]

A significant edit was undertaken on this date by Mrsteviec - I have emailed the following questions to him:

Hi - just noticed your (extensive) update to the Brentwood entry. Can you explain why you felt it necessary to:

1. remove the material on schoools in the area? Many town entries on Wikipedia have this information which is normally considered to be quite useful to know about; 2. change the emphasis from Essex to London (maybe as a Londoner you feel the need to lay claim to Brentwood) because much of Brentwood is rural and certainly considers itself to be an integral part of Essex and most definitly not much at all to do with London; 3. remove the notable institutions piece - Brentwood School (although not quite my cup of tes) is a significant aspect of the town; 4. cull the nearest places for no apparent good reason.

Always open to the entry moving forward but only if it adds to relevant knowledge base of the town. DaveK@BTC 10:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Here is my reply:
  1. I moved the schools to the Brentwood (borough) article as the list was for the borough, not the town, listing schools in Ingatestone etc.
  2. I added the map of the Greater London area as it shows more detail than the previous map and also shows Brentwood's built up area rather nicely (its that little island around the dot). No terretorial claims were made, however, I highly dispute that any part of the town is rural (or indeed considers itself to be any one thing or another).
  3. The notable institutions were already linked and mentioned in the article. This section was needless repetition.
  4. Nearest places is just that, nearest, every place in 5 miles need not be included. MRSC 17:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - wasn't aware there was also a 'Borough' entry so thanks for that - will need to look at it now and see what it has to say. However, living in the area as I do I would suggest that locally Brentwood is considered as a larger area than just the built-up part adjacent to the town centre and is thought of as being a whole with the 'villages' surrounding including South Weald, Pilgrims Hatch, Kelvedon Hatch, Ingrave, Herongate etc... and, indeed, Shenfield, Hutton etc... That includes one whole large part of countryside by which Brentwoodians would identify themselves. On the same basis I would think (personally) that most would consider themselves to be Essex first and London second and so the introductory piece should be reversed back to 'Essex and part of the London commuter belt' rather than the reverse. Would be interested to hear the views of anybody else actually living in Brentwood. DaveK@BTC 23:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where you are getting the idea the article says Brentwood is part of London. It doesn't make any such suggestion. The London commuter belt reference has been in the intro for ages. MRSC 05:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a matter of precedence only. As phrased Brentwood is considered first as part of the commuter belt (suggesting a precedence and, possibly, a dependence) and then indirectly referenced as part of Essex. DaveK@BTC 08:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to take issue with the map being used, it is certainly detailed but I would suggest overly so and not really all that helpful. The marker, for instance, is the same colour as urban areas which, being london, means it gets a bit lost in the crowd. --Shadebug 12:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

InME[edit]

Slightly pedantic update, but removed "punk" from the description of InME. They are a nu-metal band, nothing like punk rock :) --TheDigger

Requested move 2007[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Please note that the naming conventions do not give precedence to the oldest usage of a term or the largest city with a name. Tangentially, this also may not be the largest Brentwood; the location in Los Angeles is of similar size. Dekimasuよ! 03:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support - Brentwood, Essex has quite a strong case for being the primary usage. It is the largest city of its name and twice the size of the second largest. (The other being Brentwood, Tennessee with 23,445 inhabitants) It also has a long and important history, especially with its relevance to Essex. Reginmund (talk) 22:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Exactly where in WP:DAB does it say that being the largest is a reason to move the dab page? Vegaswikian (talk) 07:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think WP:DAB would attempt to suggest that the largest, or smallest or any other *est ought define where the DAB page should be but it does talk about where a user might reasonably expect to end up and since all the pages we are talking about are Geographic (ie generically similar and not diverse such as the examples given in WP:DAB), it is probable that all residents of Brentwoods worldwide have some passing awareness of the history of their placename as originating from the UK original and might, therefore, reasonably expect to be directed there. DaveK@BTC (talk) 15:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • That requires a few assumptions. First that the other place is named after the first. Second that people know the history or even care. If you ask, I'd bet that most don't know that these other places might be named after someplace in a different country. People simply don't know and probably don't care why a place got the name it has. One place I lived in was named after an Indian tribe and another after someones mother, I believe. I know that most people who lived in these places are not aware of the source of the names. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • On another point. A redirect or article should avoid sending large numbers of readers to the wrong page. I would make the point that what Brentwood is, is clearly defined by a persons location. This makes it very difficult to say that one is the primary. Its all a matter of perspective. Since there are so many, clearly the dab page is the best choice at the primary name space since it does not create any problems. Any other choice will create problems. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • On that basis then would Manchester and Birmingham also fall foul? I think not. Consistency ought be applied here. DaveK@BTC (talk) 10:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Further to Reginmund's point, the history of Brentwood is such that it predates all other options by many 100's of years and is, almost certainly, the common ancestor of all other Brentwoods which were probably named on the basis of local memories of the original town in Essex. DaveK@BTC (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There are simply too many places with this name to say that one is clearly the primary use. Oldest or largest do not make it the primary use. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:43, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are 8 cities in the US alone listed at Brentwood, plus many other places with similar names. I dodn't see any proof presented that this would be the main use for the name. TJ Spyke 00:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are 24 Manchesters in the United States alone compared to only one in the UK. I doubt the number of other Manchesters or Brentwoods is a factor. Reginmund (talk) 07:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rather than oldest or largest ought we consider 'the original' after which others were named as being a factor.DaveK@BTC (talk) 07:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Exactly where in WP:DAB does it say that being the largest or first is a reason to move the dab page? Vegaswikian (talk) 07:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Be reasonable. London is the primary usage there for being the first, best-known, and largest. Reginmund (talk) 16:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the article basically speaks for itself. The original Brentwood is by far the best known. Parable1991 (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Far too many places that share the name with none having clear distinction to merit primary topic. Prior to looking at the disambiguation page, the only place that name evoked for me was the locale for the OJ Simpson murders. older ≠ wiser 18:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Youth culture[edit]

Needs referencing if possible, or removing. MRSC • Talk 11:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arts in Brentwood[edit]

I felt it pertinent to add a few details on the Arts in BRENTWOOD. Anyone who lives in the borough will recognise that there is a lively Arts scene. Little mention may lead to the conclusion that Brentwood is indeed "boring". I would be grateful for others comments Polymathkid (talk) 14:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vaughan Williams and Brentwood[edit]

I find it surprising that there is no entry on the connection of Brentwood with Vaughan Williams. I have added a brief one, though I feel a more thorough entry is needed. Polymathkid (talk) 11:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Entire article lacks cohesion[edit]

There is a distinct lack of cohesion about this article - the principle reason being that is does not follow the recommended Wiki layout - see here. Hence the remark immediately above (why nothing about Vaugham Williams?) when there is nothing about any notable people, for example. There is nothing at all about the geography of the place; a far too brief history section (see here) which for some unknown reason begins with a fictional reference. Apart from that the article builds around the fatuous media-speak of Bored town! Peter Shearan (talk) 06:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. People seem so obsessed with the 'bored town' story that they cannot see the irony: the story itelf has become boring and cliched. There is more to Brentwood than that. If I knew how to use (write) wiki better, then I'd do it myself, but as it is, the encyclopedic knowledge of the world has been left to technical people! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.244.28 (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree too. I have asked people who live and work in Chelmsford if they heard about the Bored Town reference - none of them had. So the 'notoriety' is not true. One tiny news item many years ago is just not important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.230.222 (talk) 13:52, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion should be removed[edit]

"During World War II, over 1,000 bombs were dropped on Brentwood, with 19 flying bombs (doodlebugs), 32 long-range rockets (V2s) and many incendiary bombs and parachute mines. 5,038 houses were destroyed, 389 people were injured and 43 died. It is a wonder that the 15th- and 16th-century pubs survived."

Is it a wonder? A small proportion of the total buildings in Brentwood were destroyed, therefore the majority of buildings remained intact, so it is not surprising if any building survived. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.230.222 (talk) 13:47, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2010[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 10:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brentwood, Essex → Brentwood — Search for it, it clearly the prime topic. Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 15:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Google searches vary by location, do you have any other evidence to support your assertion? Nev1 (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As above, there is no obvious primary topic here. --DAJF (talk) 16:21, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. With this number of similar size cities I can see no way there is a primary topic. Dpmuk (talk) 16:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Far to many possible choices there is clearly no primary topic. Keith D (talk) 21:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Suburbs and nearby towns[edit]

Chipping Ongar Doddinghurst Ingatestone Ingrave Herongate Hutton Pilgrims Hatch Romford Shenfield Warley

This appears to be an incomplete list and also a mixture of different things. I believe the following to be correct:

Chipping Ongar, Doddinghurst, Ingatestone, Ingrave, Herongate are parishes of Brentwood. Herongate should read Herongate and Ingrave, Ingatestone should read Ingatestone and Fryerning The other parishes are: Wyatts Green Parish, , Kelvedon Hatch, Mountnessing, Navestock, Stondon Massey and West Horndon

Shenfield and Pilgrims Hatch are boroughs of Brentwood.

Hutton is a village within Brentwood

Romford is a nearby town

Warley is a suburb.

I am happy to change the list to be more structured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.71.174 (talk) 19:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Brentwood, Essex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Brentwood, Essex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

School merge[edit]

I have suggested that St Thomas of Canterbury Church of England Aided Junior School should be merged to here as per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Any comments appreciated. CalzGuy (talk) 05:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Brentwood, Essex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:56, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brentwood, Essex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:22, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Crossrail[edit]

I added a short sentence to the Transport section, mentioning Crossrail, but this has been reverted with no explanation. Looking at the edit history, I see another revert by the same user, TBM10, of a similar edit, again with no explanation. Neither my edit nor the previous one seem to be factually incorrect nor irrelevant. Can we come to some consensus on whether Crossrail deserves a mention on this page please. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest you include a reference from a reliable source to support the edit, e.g. a news report. Being factually correct is not always sufficient justification. I agree that the editor who reverted should have stated the problem. Weburbia (talk) 08:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I've done exactly that Rosbif73 (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ผก็่รำำหถยผยพ[edit]

กไปฟวยำวำมืโดดใแ่ฝงกดกรา 110.78.133.139 (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brentwood,_Essex&oldid=1217384200"