Talk:Bromley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Frampton[edit]

I'm pretty sure it was Peter Frampton's dad who was a teacher at Ravenswood school (Bromley Technology Collage). Not 100% though. Jason.
He was an art teacher there

Bromley, Bromley[edit]

Bromley, so great they named it twice? why is it Bromley, Bromley? sounds weird...

Makes sense to me. They probably named the borough after the town. - Hephaestos 03:08, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Sort of like Baden-Baden, I guess. Maximus Rex 03:10, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
As a person who was born and grew up in Bromley, I've never heard it called that, i guess thats why it sounds weird to me :-/ ... Steeev 03:39, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Isn't this just a case of something like New York, New York? Dysprosia 03:45, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Im pretty darned sure, theres no reason for it to be called "Bromley, Bromley" (speaking as a former resident of the area). -- Steeev 03:57, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Bromley's already a disambig though, where should we put this? - Hephaestos 03:58, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
As I believe this Bromley is the original Bromley, and all the other Bromleys have an extra identifier, cant this one just be plain Bromley? Steeev 04:07, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
It's workable; I'd like to give it a day or so before the move though in case anyone else chimes in. - Hephaestos 04:09, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Sounds cool to me:) Steeev 04:10, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Leofric[edit]

Moved from conversation from article:

Leofric, Earl of Mercia and husband of the Lady Godiva, is said to have died here in 1057.

Note: However, this is not true as Leofric died in Bromley, Staffordshire and not Bromley, Kent. DP

Argh![edit]

What's happening to Bromley? Since I went to Uni 3 years ago many of the so-called historic things mentioned on this page are disappearing. It's criminal that the Bell, with all it's history went the way it did, and whose idea was it to paint out H.G. Wells?? --Hobmcd 02:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The painting out or altering of the H.G. Wells memorial is a crime in my opinion. Charles Darwin was born in Shrewsbury, not Bromley, that's not to say he doesn't deserve a memorial himself in Bromley - just not one which replaces Wells.

Kent[edit]

Could someone familiar with how this sort of article works please add a mention of Bromley's history as part of Kent? I've written several bios recently of people born in "Bromley, Kent" in the 19th century, and as things stand another editor may turn up here, see no reference to Kent, and decide I was in the wrong. Loganberry (Talk) 22:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The same problem recurs across London - particularly (say) prior to 1880, when nearly everyone was born in Middlesex (now eliminated completely), Kent, Essex, Surrey, etc. It is permissible to note in the historical section that it formed the Municipal Borough of Bromley in the county of Kent - but someone would have to write a suitable history section. Kbthompson (talk) 10:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Kent Comment[edit]

totally agree with the above added kent to the Bromley page, again I suggest the page shows that Bromley is in Kent, yes its a London Borough, but it is still in kent, we need to show this, again there are other Bromleys!!! by showing kent we can link it onto the kent page. If a wiki reader was doing some research into kent, there would be no links to kent/Bromley. Other such things like Kent cricket ground in the bromley borough would also cause confusion, for the sake of a link to a kent page, I for one think its worth it.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 10:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Bromley joined the London Borough of Bromley in 1965. It's certainly in the historic county of Kent, but Bromley is in Greater London to indicate anything else is misleading and is an extreme violation of NPOV. It should perhaps also be noted that the postal address remained Kent until the introduction of the full postcode system - when counties were abolished in postal terms - prior to that the post office didn't modify the system on purely cost grounds. thanks Kbthompson (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It should be noted that amending the infobox by putting in the wrong county can lead to incorrect maps, police, fire, and political representation being displayed - please don't. Kbthompson (talk) 10:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

So are we all saying Bromley is not in kent ? so if Bromley is not in kent that must meen Beckenham is not in kent, then the cricketers are going to be lost lol. Maybe there could be come mention about the change from kent to greater london in the history.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha! Unfortunately, a number of county cricket grounds are no longer within their original counties - Oval (Surrey), Old Trafford (Lancashire) are two that spring to mind. AFAIAA Kent's primary ground is at Canterbury St Lawrence; Beckenham is their secondary ground.
--ikrip | talk page 09:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

to say bromley isnt in Kent is just plain stupid, as a resident, my adress is bromley Kent, br1 etc. it may be a London borough but in my eyes when i write my adress i put Kent. not London. TonyP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.63.244 (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I find residents have a very bias and extremely narrow-minded view about their local area, they often fail to see what outsiders would see. 'in my eyes' is a very arrogant reason to describe Bromley in the way you do. Also, If you read the Postcode Lottery and PAF articles on Wikipedia you will find that Postcodes are about the most inaccurate way of dividing the country, there are mistakes up and down the UK, It also says that county references were removed in the mid nineties, so your address would just be xxx road, Bromley, BR1 xxx, writing Kent is a waste of ink as it is completely ignored by the sorting machine! Justgravy (talk) 18:01, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Every time I put anything about Bromley being in Kent, which it is, it is re-eddited back. What is this person's problem? This cannot be written out of Bromley's History. also any local folklore or knowledge that may well be of interest to a tourist is taken out as well.

My problem is that Bromley is HISTORICALLY part of Kent and since 1965 has been a part of London, these articles are supposed to be up to date not almost 50 years out of date! Wikipedia didn't even exist the last time Bromley was in Kent! Also, "which it is" is not an explanation, you need to find modern reliable sources that confirm your reasoning because otherwise it just sounds like a personal opinion which has no place on Wikipedia and therefore you cannot add it onto Wikipedia because not everyone will agree with it i.e. not everyone does "regard Bromley as part of Kent" myself included! Also, if you are going to mention "folklore, knowledge" etc. you need to add references to this knowledge as well, otherwise how else do we know that it isn't just made up by you? For example, mentioning it as "The patio of England", when researching this term most people seem to refer to Surrey as this not Bromley.
Actually the fact that Bromley was a part of Kent is in the opening paragraph: "It was historically a market town, and prior to 1965 was in the county of Kent and formed the administrative centre of the Municipal Borough of Bromley". There is no need to say this a second time. Justgravy (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

This tedious debate goes on throughout all the outer boroughs of London. I don't know why people just can't accept they are now part of the extended London. It happened before and it might happen again. It's the same in other major cities which overspill into the surrounding areas. Surrey used to include much of south London, including Lambeth. To TonyP, if you pay your council tax to the London Borough of Bromley, then you cannot be in Kent, even though you would like to be. Bromley is mentioned in the Kent entry and vice versa. That should be sufficient for historians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NonID (talkcontribs) 06:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Apparently not only individuals, but also a medical institution situated there still uses the old address style: [1] (a PDF version I found but cannot link to, has a line break between 'Kent' and the postal code). Bever (talk) 00:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

It would appear that someone who edits this page has a real problem with any Kent or local cultural reference. As a former resident of Bromley, whom lived there for a long time, I have been luck enough to learn much local folklore and cultural knowledge however any references to these are quickly edited out to leave the article as a bare bones boring bullet point account. From reading the above commentary it would appear that many local residents have had the same problem in writing the truth about their own town. Regarding the Kent debate, Bromley is certainly in Historic Kent, also people must remember that if an adminastrive border is moved that doesnt mean that the identity of the redidents or town is automatically changed as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.34.1.14 (talk) 12:42, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

notable people[edit]

Some work needs doing on the notable persons section, I have now sourced the Darren M Jackson page about living Bromley and also another editor has added another source. Any more problems on the above notable person please feel free to get in touch.--Diamonddannyboy (talk) 10:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

p.s Orpington is not next to Bromley, so its not a nearest place--Rockybiggs (talk) 16:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you please add the 'Darren M Jackson' citation here, please. It is normal to include the citation to support the 'fact' as used in each article. Tricky, I know, but if the DMJ article were to be deleted (not saying it's going to be), then the supporting evidence would no longer be available - and it will prevent any future problems. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Coles Child[edit]

Wow. Occasionally Wikipedia comes up with a fact that blows you away. I used to own a house that was on former Bromley manorial land, built in 1929. As of 2002 the deeds still had restrictive covenants from a conveyancing a couple years before the house was built where a certain Coles Child (as mentioned in the article by another contributor) was the vendor of the land. So although it's definitely original research, I can vouch that Coles Child did own the little parcel of land that became my former house! BaseTurnComplete (talk) 22:23, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


"Destroyed by enemy action"?[edit]

From the article: "The parish church of St Peter and St Paul stands on Church Road. It was largely destroyed by enemy action".

When and what was the "enemy action"? I am assuming World War 2 bombing by planes but this should be clarified. --mgaved (talk) 16:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

being bold[edit]

I removed the sections on what shops Bromley has had and does have, as that doesn't seem very encyclopedic. I also removed the table of "bits of tv filmed in Bromley" for much the same reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.9.40 (talk) 15:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Primary schools[edit]

I have added {{merge-school}} templates to the following non-notable primaries:

This is where any discussion relating to such a merge should take place. In general, by WP:OUTCOMES, primaries will be deleted or redirected unless the is significant coverage in decent non-local sources. None of these seem to have such coverage. Atlas-maker (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bromley. 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}}).

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 06:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bromley. 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.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 09:55, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bromley. 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.

As of 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 {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 11:41, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Bromley is in London not in Kent[edit]

Some people (mostly IP users) keep on changing the location from London to Kent which is wrong. Bromley has been part of London since 1965 - 55 years ago.

Some have said that Bromley is administratively in London but geographically in Kent and / or referred to the London Government Act 1963. That articles says that creating Greater London "absorbed parts of Kent, Essex, Surrey and Hertfordshire plus the whole of the City of London", plus all of Middlesex and the old county of London.

Also in 1965 the Ceremonial counties of England were updated so that Bromley is no longer in the area of the Lord-Lieutenant of Kent but of the Lord-Lieutenant of Greater London.

Bromley used to be part of Kent but there is no sense in which it is part of Kent now.

FerdinandFrog (talk) 13:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Being from the other side of the sea, I have no prejudice or preference about in which region or county Bromley should considered to belong. I would like a few things:
  • The reluctance by suburbs swallowed by the neighbouring city to recognize that they are now part of that city, is well-known elsewhere.
  • Often, formal and informal names can coexist, although the government can try to impose the official ones. In my opinion, a non-governmental reference work (like Wikipedia) should give both, provided that the informal ('folk') names or divisions are not invented by a few individuals of course (or, in other words, there are sources for their use).
  • Kbthompson and others above are right that it would be confusing to say that Bromley is in the present county of Kent. Evidently a county is an official division the country, so it is the government's prerogative to decide about that. But I wonder if Kent could also considered an informal region, with perhaps slightly different borders. After all, there are many informal regions elsewhere with a name also in use for one or more administrative divisions, without claims that one of the meanings is better than the others.
  • In the Kent Comment section above, I noted that "a medical institution situated there still uses the old address style" and apparently it still does, six years later. (In fact the mention of that address in another publication was the reason that I came to this article in the first place.) So it may be justified (and helpful for readers from elsewhere) to mention in the article that regardless of the introduction of postal codes and border changes, the old name is still in use. Bever (talk) 01:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The traditional counties were never abolished. The government recognised this fact in 2013. WisDom-UK (talk) 22:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)