Talk:Selly Oak (ward)

Selly Oak ward
Hi, you're going to have your work cut out if you intend to populate all the blank Brum wards articles. You may wish  to check the user's contributions - there are about 20 of them and most of them have  PROD tag that  will expire in 6 days.--Kudpung (talk) 22:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello Kudpung
 * Yes I saw that Steve11oct had created a number of ward entries for Birmingham, but sadly I won’t be contributing to all of them (which would be a large task indeed). In fact I only have information on the Selly Oak ward from Christopher Phillips’ Birmingham Votes 1911-2000, and was just trying to save this particular article from deletion.  I suspect that this Steve chap was simply trying to separate information of a purely political/administrative nature from the various articles for the different districts of Birmingham, which are very often not coextensive with the electoral wards or Parliamentary constituencies of the same names; as is the case with Selly Oak.  Would it be acceptable to now remove the proposed deletion notice from this particular article?  Regards (Lepidus Magnus (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC))
 * Hi yes, by all means go ahead and remove the template if you are expanding the article. Do bear in  mind however thatan  article about just one Brum ward without all the others might not make much sense, particularly as wards are not really all that  notable.--Kudpung (talk) 12:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Kudpung
 * Thank you for getting back to me about things – I will remove the deletion template then if you’re happy for me to do so, and I will try and work on the article as much as I’m able. As I am, sadly, only an infrequent contributor to Wikipedia, I’m afraid I’ll have to leave judgements on what’s acceptable and what isn’t to others.  For what it’s worth election wards may not be not be particularly notable, but to my mind the information about them does sit better in separate articles rather than trying to fit it all under an article about a place that doesn’t actually constitute the same area as the ward but just happens to have the same name.  This is my own personal feeling of course, but in the case of Selly Oak at least, to my mind, the ward and the district are distinct entities which should be treated separately.  Incidentally I see that someone has been working on the Weoley (ward) article, but that there is also an article called Weoley which is essentially about the ward, so I wondered if these two shouldn’t be merged into one?  Weoley is an historic area, but the current Weoley article isn’t about this, rather it is about the ward of that name.  Anyway, I’ll remove the template from the Selly Oak (ward) article, and crack on with trying to improve it a little.  Many thanks.  Regards (Lepidus Magnus (talk) 15:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC))