Talk:Kemptown, Brighton

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

Brighton (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brighton, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BrightonWikipedia:WikiProject BrightonTemplate:WikiProject BrightonBrighton articles

LGBT studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles

Untitled[edit]

This article was once considered for a merger with another. That discussion became dormant with no strong consensus for change. No action was taken.
Below is the content of the original discussion.

I propose that Kemptown and Kemp Town be merged. The two pages show virtually the same information and this could all be shown on one page. A single page would also help to clear disambiguate the two and make it clear to readers when a space should be used and when it shouldn't. Also see Wikipedia:Merging_and_moving_pages#Merging - Smiker 10:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Providing that the distinction between correct terms was made very clearly, I'd be in favour of this. To avoid any chance of the very name of the page indicating a "correct" usage, I'd suggest that the new page be titled with both names — something like "Kemptown and the Kemp Town estate", with redirects from the old page names. – Kierant 11:44, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think on balance the articles should remain separate (though I may change my mind - I haven't completely thought it through).

Although the articles do have much common information, I believe that is mainly due to a combination of a lack of contributors' attention to which article is which, and also simply a lack of contributions. The Kemptown area, like most areas in B&H, merits an article of its own, and the Kemp Town estate merits its own article.

However if they are to be merged, I think Kierant's suggestion of "Kemptown and the Kemp Town estate" is a good one. --A bit iffy 12:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kemptown, Brighton. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051212155306/http://www.kemptown.org/history/ to http://www.kemptown.org/history/

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) 06:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

link or merge Kemp Town, make St. James Street an exception[edit]

This page and the Kemp Town page should be linked or merged. This page also indicates that St. James Street is in Kemptown. As someone who grew up in central Brighton and lived here since 1967 I would not count St. James Street as Kemptown. For me Kemptown starts at Rock Gardens and extends east. St. James Street was always known as the St. James Street area although often conflated with Kemptown mainly because of electoral boundary. A bit like calling Portslade "West Hove" actually.

Quentin (talk) 11:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hove resident here! Other than a merge, which I wouldn't support, I agree with this — and the sources also back us up. The New Encyclopaedia of Brighton notes that the name "is now applied generally to the area east of Rock Gardens", and further states that the bit west of there, between Old Steine and Rock Gardens (and including the houses on Marine Parade and the squares and crescents immediately off it, such as Royal Crescent and Marine Square), is known as the East Cliff. This also matches the definition of the conservation area of that name. Unfortunately, as well as the parliamentary constituency confusing matters, there is a tendency for the boundaries of Kemptown to be nudged outwards by the media, businesses, estate agents etc., presumably because it is a fashionable area and they want to be associated with it. Even "Visit Brighton" perpetuates this: East of the city centre and stretching as far as Brighton Marina...

I wouldn't support a merge because the Kemp Town estate was originally an entirely separate entity and existed many years before the area now known as Kemptown was developed around it. I have a suspicion, although I can't yet find a reliable source to confirm it, that the surrounding area became known as Kemptown only after the branch line and station were built in 1869. Both articles are in a parlous state, and I have enough book sources to improve them significantly, but I just don't have the time at the moment, sadly. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 18:09, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]