Talk:South West England

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal 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.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bristol High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cornwall High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

Devon High‑importance

	Devon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Devon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DevonWikipedia:WikiProject DevonTemplate:WikiProject DevonDevon articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dorset High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dorset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Dorset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Dorset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.DorsetWikipedia:WikiProject DorsetTemplate:WikiProject DorsetDorset articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gloucestershire High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gloucestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gloucestershire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GloucestershireWikipedia:WikiProject GloucestershireTemplate:WikiProject GloucestershireWikiProject Gloucestershire articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Somerset High‑importance

	Somerset portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Avon

It was originally divided into just Avon, Cornwall, Devon, Dorset, Gloucestershire, Somerset, and Wiltshire.

I have changed this to It was previously divided... Avon was never an historic county, and only came into being in 1974.--MichaelMaggs 08:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All versions are correct. The current region was formed in 1994 so it came after Avon was created and before it was abolished. MRSC 18:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gibraltar

The article on Gibraltar lists that area as part of the EU voting constituency of South West England. Could someone who is more knowledgeable on the subjesct please clear this up for me? - USArsnl 03:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The link was wrong on the Gibraltar article. It should have linked to the constituency and not the region. I've corrected this. MRSC 13:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Name

While I think the article name should remain South West England (because that's what most people will think of it as), the emboldened part of the opening paragraph should read ‘South West (or Government Office for the South West) is one of the regions of England . . . ’ since the word England does not form part of its title. The only region of England which includes the word is East of England. If no-one objects, I'd like to change this (and also the other region of England articles). - Heavens To Betsy 13:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traditionally

This section is fatuous and way too early in the article. Some of it belongs in a trivia section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree (with me). The southwest surely has deeper and more serious associations with navigation from Bristol, mining in Cornwall, agriculture and tourism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 08:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

County sections

The sections on each county seem very brief in some cases: just listing large employers does not really tell you much about the economy.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Erm, can people not follow links to the individual county pages? Govynn (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also if, for instance in the Somerset section, we include Yeo Valley Organic (for example), why don't we include every company listed in Category:Companies_based_in_Somerset? CS⁴⁶ 16:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The Early Learning Centre (a business whose name sounds like a school) is hardly a typically southwestern trade. I'm sure they have Tesco's down there too, but saying so isn't encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 23:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am furious with the childish and nasty anti-Cornish edits in this article. Removing Cornwall's status as one of the most deprived sub-regions in the UK and the suppression of the associated primary sources is playing blatant and malicious politics with socio-economic data. You know who you are. Stop it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artowalos (talk • contribs) 21:29, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transport

As part of the transport planning system the Regional Assembly is under statutory requirement to produce a Regional Transport Strategy to provide long term planning for transport in the region. This involves region wide transport schemes such as those carried out by the Highways Agency and Network Rail. [12] - now out of date, regional assemblies in England no longer exist (as of now (2011)) Govynn (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. I've removed it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:37, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

History

What evidence is there that Exeter acted as a "regional capital" of a region coextensive with the modern south west region? Govynn (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed "the" regional capital to "a" regional capital, which was true in Roman times - it doesn't necessarily imply that the region of which it was capital was the same as the modern South West. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:56, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the Middle Ages section since it was implied by the previous version that there were natives of Devon or beyond who were British Celtic speakers in the Tudor period, the placename and documentary evidence would indicate that Cornish was restricted to west of the Tamar at least several centuries earlier. If anyone is aware of any evidence for a British Celtic speaking tradition persisting east of the Tamar this late you are welcome to add it back in if you can back it up. Govynn (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, does anyone with an interest in the English Civil War want to add some information about places beyond Somerset? Govynn (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Map?

The question has come up at Talk:West Country of the need for a better map of the region - showing some administrative boundaries, some towns, etc. As the term "West Country" cannot be satisfactorily defined, it seems to me that a map of the SW region would be preferable. Any views on this? Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Directory of businesses

WIkipedia is not a directory, yet with this edit that is exactly what this article has become a - a Yellow Pages for South West England. I'll give it a couple of days and if nobody beats me to it then I'll revert and trim a few more out. --Bob Re-born (talk) 18:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably all true, noteworthy (somewhere), and quite interesting - but almost entirely unsourced. Several possibilities occur to me. If sources are found, there's no reason in my view not to have a new page on Economy of South West England; or, maybe better, to transfer sourced information (or tagged unsourced information) to the individual county pages. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We already have Economy of Somerset, Economy of Devon, Economy of Cornwall etc some of which are better than others - perhaps they could be expanded/sourced etc?— Rod ^talk 20:02, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea - and someone can start Economy of Wiltshire, Economy of Dorset, Economy of Gloucestershire, etc... We already have Economy of Bristol as well. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:24, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zedland

Just noticed Zedland redirects here, but there's nothing relating to the name on the page. Googling I see a few sites claim Zedland is an old term for the West Counties (Cornwall, Devon, Dorset and Somerset) in South West England. It was called this because of the inhabitants pronunciation of S as Z. and another site that claims Zedland was old slang for the West Country (the counties of Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset). But don't appear themselves to be WP:RS. If this is true, and can be reliably sourced then perhaps it would be a suitable addition to the article, or at least some explanation of the term. Especially given the redirect exists.Number36 (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there seems to be some truth in it, as an antiquated slang term - for example, here and here. A brief mention might be justified. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:40, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of the 'South West Region'

This Wiki is particularly poor when it comes to defining its terms. If it relates to the Civil Defence Region called the 'South West' then it should say so. I have heard it asserted that there is an 'official' South West region, yet I can find absolutely no evidence for this. There is certainly no constitutional basis for the seven-county region. What there definitely is however is the ex-Civil Defence region, that subsequently became the basis for both the Government Office (GO) area and also for the South West regional development agency (both of which are now defunct). It is also true that national statistics have been complied using the seven-county region.

However, there are also competing terms: West Country (which can mean anything from Cornwall and Devon, Cornwall, Devon, Somerset and Dorset, or even Bristol, Glos, Somerset and Wiltshore depending on who you ask!), 'The West', 'Mid West', Far South-West, Devon-and-Cornwall, Wessex (usually taken to be Devon, Somerset, Dorset and Wiltshire but excluding Cornwall and Glos), plenty has also been written about Cornwall being a separate region or quasi-region, and Devon has been taken as big enough to be considered on its own. The issue of Bournemouth and Poole has also been in and out of the press about its potential transfer to the Southeastern GO region in the past.

Then we have the difficulty of government institutions including the previous TECs, LSCs and NEDCs. There are also the EU-based programme areas from Objective 1 downwards, NUTS-regions and so on. Even in the 1960s and afterwards the shadowy 'South' region that included Dorset, Wilts, Oxfordshire and Hants made an occasional showing and Gloucestershire has periodically been included with the Midlands on various bodies. The 1973 local government reorganisation was also important: it created the (disliked) county of Avon which was part of the vogue for building nucleated 'city-states'.

Apologies for being long-winded about this but my point is that an article on 'Southwest England' should at least discuss the usefulness and limitations of the term 'Southwest' and list some of the evidence that both legitimises its usage and otherwise. Taking the 'Southwest' as read without discussing its coherence and cohesiveness as an entity seems very strange and entirely superficial. I welcome discussion on this issue and hope it might significantly improve this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artowalos (talk • contribs) 21:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I note that no one has responded to my appeal for a positive discussion, yet a full, and egregious reversion has been upheld without justification. Very disappointing and indicative of a lack of interest in improving this (now pretty flaky) page. I'm still unclear as to whether proponents of keeping this page 'as is' insist on it being frozen as was in 2011 is because (a) they believe it retains some administrative legitimacy (in which case, by al means make the case), (b) they are attempting to promote it as either a cultural or administrative entity out of preference (again, please make the case), or (c) they just cannot bear any of their edits to be revised? Reverting proposed changes without supplying a rationale just further makes the case that this page needs a complete re-write. Artowalos (talk) 21:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We are much more likely to have a "positive discussion" if you could link to the sources that you assert provide "the evidence that both legitimises its usage and otherwise". If reliable sources exist, the article can be altered. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:28, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ghmyrtle, good to hear you and I hope your day is going well. I understand work you've put into this page in the past, and that's grand, and very much appreciated. I'm not really understanding your point: what sources are you asking me to find? I have looked for evidence and links as to the Southwest being an 'official region', particularly in gov.uk sources that could then be cited, and although I have spent some time looking, I can't find any. The ONS gathers Southwest stats, and that's about it. There is, however, a great deal about the LEPs and Enterprise Zones, and as I said, it would make sense to have these represented on the page. I don't remember what I proposed, but somewhere or other I have something written up with full citations and the relevant background.

I thought the whole point of Wikipedia was to provide cited and properly defined sources, and this is what principally let's the page down. I don't for one minute say there is no merit in having a Southwest page: There certainly is merit. The second issue the page has is that is conflates several terms and doesn't say what the relationship is between them. Earlier, I proposed disambiguating these for clarity, since it helps the reader: Southwest Region, Southwest Peninsula, West of England, Far West, Wessex, etc. It would seem to me reasonable to make these tweaks, so I'm still surprised at the strident resistance, which, as I last commented, seems to be more grounded in a desire to keep things 'locked down' rather than keep chipping away at improving the page. Happy to talk, as always, happy to propose changes as long as they are not gratuitously dumped overboard. Best wishes, Artowalos (talk) 12:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infographic?

Hi, I’m Andrew Clark and I work at the Office for National Statistics in the UK.

We publish lots of infographics and I wonder if this one on South West of England (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Regional_profile_of_the_South_West.png) would be of interest for South_West_England

FYI, the full gallery, updated weekly, is here <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Content_created_by_the_Office_for_National_Statistics>

All the best

Andrew Clark (smanders1982) 10 Dec 2013

Smanders1982 (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting graphic - however I do wonder about the selection of comparators ie West Midlands & London for Median Age while North West is used for Life Expectancy & North East for unemployment. I also wonder if it complies with policies (vaguely remembered) about not including logos of the organisations which have produced the graphic - but can't find this at present.— Rod ^talk 18:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Forest

Per this edit - later reverted - the region in fact does contain a small part of the New Forest national park, around Hamptworth in Wiltshire. It would probably give it undue weight to mention this in the lead (the region only fully contains two National Parks, Dartmoor and Exmoor), but it should probably be mentioned somewhere in the text. I'm not sure where - does anyone have any thoughts? Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The West Country Challenge

Would you like to win up to £250 in Amazon vouchers for participating in The West Country Challenge?

The The West Country Challenge will take place from 8 to 28 August 2016. The idea is to create and improve articles about Bristol, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, like this one.

The format will be based on Wales's successful Awaken the Dragon which saw over 1000 article improvements and creations and 65 GAs/FAs. As with the Dragon contest, the focus is more on improving core articles and breathing new life into those older stale articles and stubs which might otherwise not get edited in years. All contributions, including new articles, are welcome though.

Work on any of the items at:

or other articles relating to the area.

There will be sub contests focusing on particular areas:

Bristol (Day 1-3)
Cornwall and Scilly (Day 4-6)
Devon (Day 7-9)
Dorset (Day 10-12)
Gloucestershire (Day 13-15)
Somerset (Day 16-18)
Wiltshire (Day 19-21)

To sign up or get more information visit the contest pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge.— Rod ^talk 15:57, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on South West England. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 20:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on South West England. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 12:37, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Future of the Page?

Hello all. It's been a while since I've looked properly at this page but I'm wondering if it's now needed?

Intro - Is this still correct?

I thought the last government had formally abolished the regions. SWRDA has gone, the Government Office for the SW is now just a ministerial liaison unit and has devolved role. All the Southwest Councils have gone and they are now replaced by LEPS etc. or functions pulled back into government departments at the centre. Any views on this?

Overlapping Geograpical Pages: We also have West Country, Wessex, Wiltshire, Cornwall, Devon, etc. Q: Should/could this page be a stub with links to other pages?

Content: There is a great deal of (fairly broad) content on the page. Perhaps I'm being a little too critical, but the para on cream teas, the Eden Project and Enid Blyton seems a little..... eclectic? If it's needed still, would it be better too pull together all the literary-related material into something tighter? I am prepared to have a go at this if we decide to keep the page and no one objects.

Geography/History: I think I said this before, but I can't help wondering if these would be better kept on the relevant pages on Dartmoor, Exmoor, Blackmore Vale, Somerset Levels etc. and simply linked to. There seems to be quite a bit of duplication here. The same is true of the History section, lots of duplication.

Economics: As I understand it, government policy does not look at regional indicators. Please would someone who knows more on this comment? :-)

I think the options are:

1. Bring up to date, reflect that the relevant institutions have gone and add the LEPs etc. 2. Thin down and remove duplicated material, replace with links. 3. Replace with a stub page. 4. Other?

Best, Artowalos (talk) 13:50, 11 June 2021 (UTC) Artowalos[reply]

Following amendments have been made -

Have attempted to explain about Eric Pickles abolition of the regions

Have replaced 'region' with 'former region' in some places, and 'area' in others

Have removed two (?) paras relating to regional culture as they don't seem appropriate when talking about an administrative structure

Have left most of the rest of it, as I don't think I have strength to do more this evening!

Q1. The Southwest peninsular page does not have much on it, should the geological / geographical parts go there?

Q2. Should the parts relating to industry go under the relevant county, or somewhere else?

Q3. Any thoughts on other parts?

Best, Arto Artowalos (talk) 17:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)artowalos[reply]

To Chris Takey -> If you are going to undo edits, please signal your reasons BEFORE simply going ahead, and have the courtesy to use the talk page FIRST.

Okay, you have claimed that the region exists for official purposes (I provided direct evidence of the dissolution both SWRDA and the SWRA - did you not read this?) If you have contrary evidence then by all means provide it so we can make a joint decision. Otherwise you risk introducing POV edits. Thank you. Artowalos (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

As this page appears to be subject to dispute and changes will simply be reverted, I have added tags to show where the critical problems lie. A solution needs to be found though, and it would seem to me sensible to merge this page with that of the South West Penisula, rather than to continue a sterile argument about whether a South West Region has political legitimacy, which seems to be what is argued by Chris Takey (see above). I would welcome further discussion from anyone that is interested. Artowalos (talk) 10:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

Personally I support the changes that were made and think that they shouldn't have been reverted. However, I think we should be looking to get consensus on how all the English region pages should be modified to ensure consistency. Pick a wikiproject, e.g. UK politics, or England, from the list above. My suggestion is the England one. --10mmsocket (talk) 11:10, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, I couldn't agree more. Would you be up for raising this on the England project? I have tagged the page for the following, in the vain hope we can at least move forward in the meantime:

Missing Information - This article omits important information about the abolition of the SW Region for administrative purposes (the SWRA and SWRDA), and in doing so introduces a POV issue relating to the use of the term 'region' for political purposes. This may be avoided by adding an appropriate para.

Weasel words - The use of the word 'official' is problematic and will vary depend on who you talk to. If referring to the Office of National Statistics, then this should be made explicit and a citation provided. I'd be okay with saying 'for official statistical purposes by the ONS' and then citing.

Circular argument - Going on to talk about the 'region' in terms beyond the statistical is disingenuous and uses a circular argument to justify its further use in other circumstances. Personally, I'd remove non-statistical elements from this page and signpost to the page on the South West Peninsula to avoid this. Note also the comment by 10mmsocket above on a consistent approach across the ex-regions.Artowalos (talk) 11:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

The article does need to be updated, but not deleted. It's good to see that Artowalos, who has not edited on this site for eight years, shows no signs of repeating the WP:POV behaviour that they showed until then in relation to fringe views on the status of Cornwall. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to make personal comments (again). I do not agree with your politics, which I find inappropriate, but I choose not discuss them on the talk pages of a topic, since they are not relevant to that page. I don't know whether you are deliberately trying to be provocative, or intend to resume name calling, but my views on Cornwall are mainstream here in Cornwall, whatever you may think or assert. I'm truly sorry you don'tlike the terms Duchy or nation, or that Cornwall had kings, or that the flag is a national, not county, flag used on the field of battle in Tudor times, and that Cornwall has its own system of Arms, or that the Cornish are a recognised national minority, or that the language is protected under treaty, or any of the other things that upset you about Cornwall. May I respectfully suggest that deleting them from Wikipedia and reverting text simply because you personally don't like them, is not the way forward. I have offered talk page dialogue on contentious issues with you before, but so far you have not taken me up on it - I would be delighted if you did. 213.205.194.146 (talk) 14:46, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

I think any article on the area of "South West England" needs to take into account both official (governement regional offices etc) and common usage - my belief is that whatever the official status "South West England" means something to many people and is likely to be a term they might look for in an encyclopedia (along with West Country), and is a more likely search term than South West Peninsula. I feel that in addition to the county pages (without getting into the debate about Historic counties of England v Ceremonial counties of England etc) an article on the area/region of the southwest is needed. Having said that it is needed, I would agree that accuracy and clarity are needed, and would support the addition of "statistical purposes" or similar where appropriate. However I would suggest that history and "regional culture" (including accent, products, climate, "identity", media etc) is needed and that something about industry/GDP etc should be included. On the wider national basis I would suggest the creation of a guideline for "regions" be developed in a similar way to those for settlements, counties, districts etc at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography#Guidelines to enable the widest possible consensus and help the reader by having a consistent structure etc.— Rod ^talk 14:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, it sounds a sensible way to proceed, and I still think it is worth continuing on this basis. Might you be willing to make some provisional changes and see how this goes down? My last attempt resulted in a reversion without explanation.213.205.194.146 (talk) 14:46, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

Further to my last - since the old regions have now been abolished (that's the government's term, not mine - see Conservative Central for Eric Pickles abolition programme) - and have been replaced by the new LEP regions, we should embed the LEP map somewhere - fyi it may be found at https://www.lepnetwork.net/about-leps/location-map/. There also needs to be a digest of the legislation since 2010 on this, including the published devolution deals for the West of England Region and Cornwall Regions. These are both substantial documents and they reference recent innovations on devolved bus franchising, further education, local enterprise zones, low carbon zones, etc. Artowalos (talk) 17:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC) Artowalos[reply]

Firstly, the fact that the government states that the region has been "abolished" is no reason for not having an article on it - we have plenty of articles on regions of historic importance, and the fact that the SW was at one time a UK government administrative region, and for a much longer period a statistical region, justifies the existence of the article. Secondly, the "South West Peninsula" and "South West England" are not synonymous - areas like Gloucester, Swindon, and Bournemouth are not part of the peninsula, but are (or were) part of the region. Thirdly, there certainly should be a map in the article on Local enterprise partnerships - but I'm not convinced it should be included in this article, which covers a far larger area. Fourthly, nothing "upsets" me about Cornwall - on the contrary, I was lucky enough to be there again yesterday. Fifthly, I agree with Rodw. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:15, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'd endorse all Rodw's comments; the English regions each have their own history, character, cuisine, dialects, and so on, and an article on each region can rightly examine all such aspects. Adminstrative status can change rapidly, and we are not bound to describe only recent events. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:02, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting discussion which I'm following closely. I have yet to form my own strong opinion about the way forward but I like all the contributions so far. I have a favour to ask. Can one/some of you take a look at North East England and in particular the lead section. There's a disruptive IP editor pushing his own POV on what should be in there. I'm probably already guilty of 3RR there and t.b.h. some fresh pairs of eyes and fingers on keyboards would really help expand the lead into something more befitting the article. Thanks. --10mmsocket (talk) 15:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, having had time to mull things over, and seeing a similar issue crop up at North East England, I have a suggestion.

Keep this article South West England largely as-is; and
Move anything about the former English government or NUTS statistical region in to South West England (government and statistical region) (or similar)

That way the article contains what readers expect it to contain when they read the article (WP:COMMONNAME), and we make it really easy for the rest of the stuff to be accessed with good cross-links. I think this would work for all English region articles in fact. Thoughts? Comments? --10mmsocket (talk) 08:22, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason to start a new article on South West England (government and statistical region). All the relevant information about the administrative or statistical region should be contained in this article, though some of the information now in this article (for instance on geography, history, and the economy) could perhaps be moved into the South West Peninsula article, and summarised here with appropriate section hatnotes. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you 10mmsocket. May I go further and suggest that a new all-England article on Regional Government is created -- English Regional structures are certainly important enough in their own right to warrant such a page. This could include material from all the relevant regions. So far as retaining material on changes in governance is concerned -- where does one stop? If every time there's another change in government institutions and this is retained, the article will simply become too cumbersome to navigate or read. I'd argue we have already passed that tipping point. Artowalos (talk) 08:49, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Artowalos[reply]

Great idea. 10mmsocket (talk) 10:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The idea that there is no cultural continuity in SW England that also includes Cornwall (to a more limited degree than Devon+) is silly. You take someone from a foreign country, have them live in Devon for a time and then have them live in Cornwall for a time. Are they going to notice a substantial difference? - errr, no. No they are not.--2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:283C:5AD6:4DCB:2DD8 (talk) 18:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uncouth Devon savages put cream first on their scones. That's difference enough for anyone. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's because they know that the cream is in place of butter, not some fancy grockle decoration on top. Proper job. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They? Interesting way of putting it. You call the Cornish 'they', meaning 'not us'. I think you've made a point far more strongly than any point I was making (which was merely that it's worth commenting evenly and as objective as possible). My point was not that there are not similarities and commonalities between Cornwall and SW England: of course there are, and it would be absurd to assert otherwise. It's the counter-point that's more interesting in a Wikipedia article: there are also strong non-commonalities, a point you yourself so stridently make. A non-Anglo Saxon tradition, Celtic language and a very peripheral world-view being the most obvious. It doesn't detract from either Cornish or English cultural perspectivies to admit, equably, both differences and commonalities. Ignoring differences is as absurb as ingnoring commonalities, surely? It's certainly more interesting and illuminating as far as a Wikipedia page is concerned. Canadians have significant similarities with Americans, and English and Irish do too, but surely it's the differences that we want to compare and contrast? Artowalos (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whose comment you're responding to, but in my (flippant, small font) comment the word "they" clearly refers to people in Devon, not Cornwall. More pertinently, if you can find reliable, independent sources that discuss the antagonism some people in Cornwall are claimed to have, in regard to being included in "South West England", it may well be possible to include a mention in this article. So far, I don't think we have found any such sources. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:23, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ghmyrtle: You said "More pertinently, if you can find reliable, independent sources that discuss the antagonism some people in Cornwall are claimed to have, in regard to being included in "South West England", it may well be possible to include a mention in this article." Hm. I didn't claim that at all and I don't recognise any widespread antagonism or antipathy. I think you maybe leaping ahead somewhat. I don't believe Cornish people dislike SW England, simply: they're too busy getting on with their lives. But if the question does come up, many would say 'I'm Cornish', or maybe 'Cornish and British', rather than 'English' (several academic surveys on this exist). Of course there are also English people in Cornwall, and Cornish people who consider themselves English, but that's another question, and not what I believe you're referring to.

The point is that Cornish people (who identify as Cornish), are interested in Cornish things, in addition to the normal humdrum of life. It's not that they are antagonistic to SW England, English people, English culture, or whatever, they just don't identiify with it in the same way. You asked for evidence, and you probobaly know this stuff as well as I do: There are plenty of pro-devolution, pro-Cornish cultural organisations that simply don't even mention SW England or where they do it's on the basis of Cornwall not being a meaningful part of it. Some groupings are oriented towards pan-Celticism, inter-Celtic relations, the Atlantic Arc, or are focused on Cornwall's de factor perihperal status or perceived lack of power. Some of the main forums are Cornwalllive, Cornwall24, or any of the 30 or so Facebook pages related to these topics. There are also the various cultural non-English bodies such as Gorseth Kernow, the various Cornish language groups, Celtic Congress, National Music Archive of Cornwall, etc. Closer to home, there's the wiki page on Cornish Nationalism, of course, and Wikipedia's own Cornish language pages.

If you want reliable sources to talk about the cultural differences between 'Cornish-Cornwall', and 'English-Southwest England', there's simply a vast body of literature (and I really do mean vast, no hyperbolae), that indicate that a completely separate, non-English identity exists, and is alive and kicking, and has nought to do with English identity (as important and interesting as that is). First of all in literature to relating to Cornwall's history (Stoyle 'West Britons', Caraman 'Western Rising', Rowse 'Tudor Cornwall' amongst the most well known, and these are just the ones 'off the bat'), and contemporary identity in Cornwall For Ever/Kernow Bys Vyken, which was funded by the Duchy of Cornwall and given to all school children a few years back, the University of Exeter's previous and extensive series of 'Cornish Studies' journals, which has dozens of research papers and surveys on attitudes. If you really want a deep-dive, may I suggest you have a look through academic.edu for pre-print academic papers and also researchgate.net, for the latest works. I could go on (and on). If you *seriously* want me to write up a summary of this, I will, but given the recent history of bulk reversions, I would need a binding committment that any time spent would not be wasted. Best wishes, Artowalos (talk) 13:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I've commented before, I'm not necessarily opposed to moving - in a controlled way - some of the geographical content of this article into South West Peninsula. But, unfortunately, many of your other comments indicate that you are not approaching this from a neutral perspective, and for that reason your comments are likely to be mostly ignored here. We do need to be consistent. For example, are you equally concerned about the article on North East England? Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"West England" and "Western England" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirects West England and Western England and has thus listed them for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#West England until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jay (talk) 20:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Official region name is wrong - should be "South West"

There is currently a discussion at Talk:Regions of England regarding the official name of the region, as I believe that it is actually "South West", not "South West England". The thread is Talk:Regions of England § Some of the region article titles are wrong.. Thank you. Theknightwho (talk) 04:57, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]