Talk:Luton/Archives/2007/September

Appropriate Picture

The picture of Luton sums up the place well. Looking at it I am reminded of the tears we would shed as children, playing in the streets, when on the wind would drift the heady aroma of the nearby glue factory. --Dumbo1 00:03, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd say it was made with a pinhole camera in a shoebox, or some other piece of free equipment. You would never take a real camera to Luton, because of the constant street robberies. [1] Goatherd 10:25, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Or maybe it was grabbed from this BBC webcam: http://www.bbc.co.uk/threecounties/content/webcams/stuart_street_webcam.shtml—Preceding unsigned comment added by Goatherd (talk • contribs) 13:31, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Why the hell did Nv8200p pull the picture? It was better than nothing... Bjrobinson 11:56, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

The picture was deleted because it violated copyright - it was taken from the BBC webcam. That's against Wikipedia policy and so it wasn't better than nothing. Pdean 12:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I have added some pictures which have the correct licenses for Wikipedia GazMan7 12:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Those pictures are great Gazman7! Bjrobinson 15:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the picture of the town hall further up the article. I think we need a pic nearer the top or its just a block of text. What do others think?GazMan7 15:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The picture still screws up the root contents menu for me, thats on three different computers. It might be because i use firefox? I would propose its moved to the 20th century section, as that bit is pretty devoid of pics? Bjrobinson 10:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Running at 800x600 with Seamonkey, which is similar to Firefox, the article currently looks like this. This kind of problem crops up quite a lot with Wikipedia articles. IE has no problem. At 1024x768 there is no problem with Seamonkey. Nonetheless there is a large blank white area underneath the picture of Luton town hall, which looks poorI'm glad I don't have to fix this problem; I understand that the Wikipedia engine is not ideal for layout purposes. -Ashley Pomeroy 00:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I am generally unwilling to chop out pictures. But this shot of "Luton Town Centre" doesn't illustrate the subject, it can't be used to illustrate anything else, and it's not very pretty. It should really have been taken at noon, pointing down the main street, perhaps from the same location as this picture here. -Ashley Pomeroy 23:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

It may not show the town in its best light, but is maybe a fair reflection on that side of the town. The other pics are very nice, i guess this evens it up a bit. Bjrobinson 15:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Image added 81.107.111.211 12:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Great Job!

This article is pretty good now, you guys have done a great job :) 81.168.114.190 13:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply: What's been done is a total gloss job, loads of stuff about culture and nightlife. Luton is not Barcelona. Its violent and has a very nasty crime and drugs problem. The advice to go to Bury Park looking for restaurants is surreal. I would not walk around there at night if I was paid to. Anyone seduced by the talk of varied, exciting nightlife will be sorely disappointed as they trawl from one chav filled chain pub to another. That's if they get to the end of the evening without being robbed or assaulted.

Its not all bad, but this article is misleading and bears no relation to real life in Luton. Must go now, the drug dealers next door are fighting with some of their customers, so I have to make sure the doors are locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PrivateWiddle (talk • contribs) 19:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

If your scared of walking through bury park i can only assume you are scared of your own shadow. Its busy certainly, and the resteraunts there are lively and offer a decent range, no its not Barcelona clearly, but neither is it the Bronx. Luton really isnt the drugs and crime ridden place you suggest.GazMan7 11:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Are you trying to fool the people who don't live in Luton, or are you in denial? try a BBC news search:

http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?sourceid=Mozilla-search&q=luton&tab=news&scope=newsukfs

Nuff said? The violent crime stats speak for themselves, why do people like you pretend that this is not happening? The violence in Luton is shocking and well documented. There are two drug houses on my road, one next door. I was unable to get home after my road was shut off after the third stabbing since January. The asian family two doors up had their 8 yr old assaulted in their own back yard by a half-naked druggie in broad daylight. My house has been turned over twice in four years. Drunks regularly smash windows, kick over bins and urinate on people's doors. The police won't attend, and if you take them on you will get stabbed.

People like you make it worse by refusing to face up to it. Its real life and you are censoring Wikipedia by stopping the bad things getting space because it does not suit your agenda. Pathetic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PrivateWiddle (talk • contribs) 10:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Please sign your tirades. Anyone can edit wiki, so if you want to add a balanced section then do so.... The violence you speak of is not widespread, it simply isnt, i have never been broken into attacked or anything like that, and the vast majority of people have the same experiance. As to my making it worse.... erm how? get real luton is like many other towns, and is by no means the ghetto you suggest, sure there are a couple of rougher estates, but name a town without them. Your seach of the BBC doesnt really demonstrate your point, do a search of Watford, Stevenage, Milton Keynes and its the same sort of stories. If you dont like it then move, it really is as easy as that.GazMan7 07:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Well i thought it was an improvement anyway... maybe I should not have said anything. I'm completley with Gazman here:

1. 'correct' it with well written and sourced stuff if you feel strongly about a particluar section,
2. other towns suffer from the same problems, Luton is not an exception. No-one is going to write a wiki entry on their own town saying 'xxton is a blood soaked hell hole'. Read the Watford page. Watford has the same problems, no mention of them. 81.168.114.190 12:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and can i just point out that it isn't just a total gloss job that is going on in this article, it is a work in progress. I set up these sections with the intent to develop them into truthful, balanced sections. At the moment, they are a bit superficial, but that's because i'm busy revising for my exams. If you don't like them, then edit them into something that truly reflects luton, not your biased, ill-informed view of luton. Random articles 14:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The Home Office violent crime stats for last year:

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/tool/default.asp?region=2&force=30&cdrp=146&l1=6&l2=0&l3=0&sub=0&v=36

clearly show that Bedfordshire without Luton would be one of the lowest crime areas in the country. With Luton it is dragged over the national average. There is obviously a small clique of the "Luton In Bloom" brigade acting as a little mafia here so there is no point contributing as anything critical will be deleted. Comments like 'its just like anywhere else' show a lack of connection with the realities of life here. I suggest you have a word with some of our serving police officers, particularly those from elsewhere in the country, as it might show you that you can edit out comments on Wikipedia, but you can't do it in the real world. The word ill-informed means lack of knowledge and experience, that is the opposite of my problem, far too much experience. Having been the victim of violent mugging and burglary and a viscious unprovoked assault that hospitalised me for a month and having had much worse happen to people I know. I have seen the results of knife crime first hand. Where I live there are alchoholics and drug addicts everywhere, you can't go the local shop without being accosted. Nearly every night people come to the door demanding money, even at midnight, and if you refuse you are subjected to a torrent of abuse and threats.

It is you who are ill-informed, not I.

Luton crime stats versus England as a whole

http://www.upmystreet.com/local/police-crime/figures/l/Luton-4298.html

It seems that rather than calling me ignorant, ill-informed and biased, you should have looked at the bare facts before hurling insults around. Look at those stats and then come back and tell me that I'm wrong. As a victim of violent crime I think its grossly insulting to try and gloss over this issue because of political correctness. PrivateWiddle 13:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

PrivateWiddle, im not really sure what your point is? Urban areas generally all have higher crime than rural. To compare Luton against national averages without comparing it to similar urban areas is misleading. The quote is in about crime on the Luton page. Luton is a typical town with typical problems of many similar sized towns. You claim to have had a whole series of problems, however these are not typical of most peoples experiances, i have lived in the town for nearly 10 years and have nt been mugged, robbed, beaten etc etc. Maybe you should consider moving house? You clearly hate Luton yet you live there... one has to ask the question why? The majority of Luton is a normal and pleasant place to live. There are areas with problems, such as parts of Dallow, Marsh Farm etc, but most people do not see this side of the town. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, rather than a town-bashing exercise. You claim there is a gloss job on the town, but what is gloss about history, local attractions etc, all of this is factual, and verifyable.

You are obsessed with the crime stats which taken out of context as you continue to do really doesnt help. Are you really claiming that everyone in Luton has been repeatedly attacked? Luton is a large urban area, with all the social problems that go with that, however it also has all the benefits of being such an area. You keep talking about where you live, well where i and most of Lutons residents live we dont get attacked in the streets, or have people banging on our doors, try doing something about it, call the police, make a difference not just bemoan your situation. But more simply move from that area....GazMan7 14:03, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

So after claiming that crime is not an issue, then seeing that the figures prove that it is really high, you then claim that its out of context. Crimes against the person are among the highest per capita in England - Fact. You can spin it any way you want. I do call the police as do my neighbours, half the time they refuse to attend, because they are 'too busy' ie there are four coppers on duty. If they do come its two hours later.

Your solution is that I should be driven out of my home by the scumbags that the council foist on us. That's great, give the criminals the whip-hand by letting them control our communities and terrorise people out of their homes. Unfortunately decent people are moving out in droves, abandoned by the police and council, in order to protect their families people are forced out. By 'try doing something about it' I assume you mean going out to confront drunks and druggies. That proves that you are inhabiting a parallel universe. If you want to get dead really quickly thats the way to do it. I would have thought that yesterday's events would have given you pause for thought, but if you bury your head deep enough in the sand you can block out anything. PrivateWiddle 15:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

There is no point talking with you really is there? doing something about it doesnt mean going out to confront, but then you are too pig headed to think otherwise. Do you really beleive that the whole of Luton is like that? Well wake up and smell the coffee. Sit inside moaning about the yoof of today and all that crap. Some people make an effort, others simply moan. Either do something about it or accept it, its your choice, and quite frankly i couldnt really care. You know that towns have higher levels of crimes than rural areas. Compare Luton to Bedford, Stevenage, MK, Watford etc, similar towns in a similar area and you will see its a very similar picture. Luton is what it is, an ex-industrial town dealing with many different communities, who on the most part get along very well.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.182.176 (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Lets test that

The main thrust of the arguments against the idea that Luton has unusually high crime is that a) its not happening, or b) it is happening but its the same everywhere else.

The previous contributor wrote: "Compare Luton to Bedford, Stevenage, MK, Watford etc, similar towns in a similar area and you will see its a very similar picture."

I decided to do just that.

I went to the report published by the Reform Society in May 2006 called Urban Crime Rankings by Blair Gibbs & Andrew Haldenby. This is the most exaustive collection of data on crime in Britain ever carried out. It is compiled from raw police authority and Home Office stats and is accepted by the Home Office as the basis for their crime strategy for the next few years.

The two propositions I wanted to test were firstly the idea as stated in the main article here that Luton has some crime just like any other urban centre, and that in any case its mostly vehicular crime.

Murder is thankfully rare all over the UK, so the 'its the same anywhere' argument works here, although we were never discussing murder. Its no worse than London or Liverpool, not that that's anything to be proud of.

As cynical as I may be, I was appalled to find that we are No. 4 for rape in the UK. The inicidence of rape in Luton is so far ahead of urban norms in the UK that it begs the question of why there is no dedicated local government & police task force for this most vile of crimes. This awful statistic cannot be dressed up. Watford, Milton Keynes and Bedford do not even get on the list which is over 40 urban areas.

Robbery, that is where one is accosted and violence is threatened or used: Luton is number 5 in the entire UK, only Manchester, London, Nottingham and Stockport have higher rates. Luton's rate is the highest in the UK for a non-metropolitan area. Once again Watford, MK & Bedford do not rate a mention on the list of 25, giving the lie, once again, that our figures are normal. I hope this end the ' you are imagining it', strand of the argument

Vehicle crime is stated on this page to be the main area of concern in Luton. Yet the facts are that Luton is at number 26 in the table. So why is it mentioned? it is entirely average for an Urban UK area.

Luton comes in at number 12 for gun crime in the UK, that is worryingly high, even if its not as eye-popping as the rape and robbery figures.

My experience of life here is different than yours. But it is your perceptions which are at variance with reality not mine. According to all accepted authorities, including our own police force, violent crime, sexual assault and burglary are unusually high in Luton and they are rising. In some cases, such as rape and robbery where violence is not just threatened but is used, Luton's figures are so high that they have been the subject of special funding from central Government.

The much vaunted 'its all car crime' argument is proven rubbish. Car crime has actually fallen in Luton,from an average baseline. The 'Number 10 (Downing Street) web site quoted Luton Police figures:

1) Robbery increased by over 31% between 2003/04 and 2006/07

2) The combined theft of and from vehicles fell by over 10% between 2003/04 and 2006/07

Whether you like it or not, violent crime and sexual offences are out of control in Luton. That is the view of the police, our Mp's and the Safer Luton Partnership which has been set up with government funding, the existance of which should start to shake people out of their complacency.

The issue of crime in this town seems to be accepted by everyone apart from a few people who think they 'own' this wikipedia article. A proper if small crime section should be part of the Luton Wiki, which states the raw facts. The current article deliberately ignores the issue and is misleading. PrivateWiddle 14:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Put your findings in the crime section, if true, they are important for this article 81.107.111.211 18:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is continued as Talk:Luton#Crime section.

Crime section

Rather than keep having the same old discussion how about actually deciding upon:

• A, whether there should be a crime section

• B, if there is, then what should go into it.

Regarding A, having had (admittedly a rather quick) look at several other town and city pages there seems to be very little on crime. We need to remember here that Luton is a large town (185k people) so must only compare with large towns/cities. Manchester was mentioned above, and that has little or no mention to crime.

So is a crime section regarded as a necessary part to an encyclopedia entry. Certianly it would not be given much attention in say a printed work, partly as the stats would be out of date, but is it not considered encyclopedic?

This probably falls down as Wiki is constantly updateable. Crime if mentioned should in my view not carry the same weight as say history/geography etc, but be a part under demographics - as it is now.

B, what should go into it. Wiki must be balanced, so this is where we must be careful. I know a certain member feels that the article is a gloss job, which i personally feel is not accurate. Most of the article is dominated by History and events/organisations in the town. This is all factual. Crime stats are (in my view) less important than say demographics, so must be kept sensible. If we are proposing adding these, then it is important that this is a view accross Wiki.

We should not single out Luton for a section all about Crime. Whilst the stats quoted above appear unpleasant (and i say appear as i havent spent any time comparing these to other towns or verifying them), to simply add them because one Luton resident/ Wiki user does not like the town they live in would be an injustice.

I do not have any objection to a sensibly written, i.e. balanced section being added, provided that the user who is so obssessed with stats ensures that crime stats are added to other major towns.

The figs are either encyclopedic or not, if they are then i assume Mr Widdle would be keen for them to be added elsewhere? This would help to ensure a consistent approach accross Wiki.

Anyway, what do others think?GazMan7 08:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

The crime section is necessary, this is not an advertisement for Luton, and as we all know, Luton does have high levels of crime compared with other towns in the area. Many larger towns have a crime section, and Luton only has a subsection. In my opinion, all towns/cities/villages should at least have some kind of mention of crime because that is part of the town, the culture and the way people live and act. I agree that there should be some balancing such as mentioning policing etc. 81.107.111.211 17:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

As i mentioned above i found little about crime elsewhere. A crime section unless a town is famous only for crime, which im sure you are not saying is the only thing about Luton, would ever only be a breif section. It was mentioned above about places such as Manchester, Stockport etc as having high crime, yet there is not a section on crime. The rest of the Luton article has been based on the style and formatting of the other larger towns on Wiki, eg MK, Manchester etc, so the crime 'issue' should, in my view be constant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GazMan7 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we could add crime information about the individual wards of Luton (I know the stats exist because I saw them in the police station when I was reporting a crime). As we know, if you are gonna send your daughter Marsh Farm, you should send a group of friends (pref male) if you want her to come back safely.Also note that there are 190,000 people in Luton and 54,000 crimes, so every year there is a one in four chance of having some kind of crime committed against you. I think this info was in last week's Herald or Luton on Sunday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.111.211 (talk) 15:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Dont you think this is starting to get a little silly. Whether stats exist or not does not make them encylopdic. To put crime figs in every small article about an area of Luton makes no sense at all. GazMan7 16:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Other cities

Having checked articles for Liverpool, Manchester, London, Watford, Milton Keynes, Bristol, [Stevenage]], Norwich, Cambridge there were no figs on crime.

I noted a crime section in only one article - Nottingham - once described as the gun capital of England.

Crime stats are therefore not regarded as being encyclopic for Town articles on wikipedia. Lutons stats are not putting it at the top of any of the tables. The rape stats are revolting at 4th (having checked Portsmouth the number one does have a very small section) which may arguably be a relavent stat to have.

The 54,000 figue is not right, there is a 54 in 1000 chance of a crime accroding to the British Crime Survey (http://www.reform.co.uk/filestore/pdf/Urban%20crime%20rankings,%20Reform,%202006.pdf) which has your other stats mentioned above. So the chance of a crime against you is 5.8% NOT 25%. Bear in mind that this is BELOW average for urban areas. Incidentally Nottingham has the highest chance of Crime at 11.5%. Please when quoting stats try to get them right. I would suggest those who are obsessed with the crime stats write a balanced section. This should be fair on the town i.e. kept the figures in context and quote any good news you may find. An indivual years stats are meaningless realy so we need comparatives. If Luton was 4th on the rape table for the last 5 years that shows its a more significant problem than if it was say 20th for several years and then has jumped up ( as bad as the jump is a one off jump should be put in context).

As wiki is 'owned' by anyone who contributes you have always had the opportunity to add this. Make sure its balanced and fully referenced. I am not going to write it for you as i really cant be bothered.GazMan7 16:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

The report by Gibbs and Haldenby quoted above (in the Great Job! section) is available online. PrivateWiddle selects various figures, but does not mention the overall rate for those crimes that are covered in the report. Tables 13 and 16 show the rate in Luton is 58.85 crimes per 1000 population, which is very close to the average of 61.42 for cities and towns with a population over 100000 in England and Wales. For comparison, top-of-the-league was Nottingham with 115.54. Therefore, if there is a Crime section or subsection, I think it has to start with something like "The overall crime rate in Luton is about average for an urban area in England" and a reference to the report. The section could then discuss more detailed figures.

The report used data for the calendar year 2005. More up-to-date figures for the financial year 2006-7 are available on the Home Office website, including an Excel spreadsheet with figures for local authority areas. This shows that in Luton the rates for burglary of dwellings and for theft from a motor vehicle are rising; while those for violence against the person, sexual offences, robbery, theft of a motor vehicle, and interferring with a motor vehicle are falling. JonH 17:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Statistics can be interpreted how you want, you can silver line whatever you want. Wikipedia is not about making the best of everything - there is another wiki that takes a more sympathetic approach somewhere else on the internet - it is about the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. We are not supposed to be advertising the town or anything else for that matter. Crime information is notable because as I said before, it has a direct effect on the people affected by the crimes.

Remember that the government has a vested interest in representing the truth in such a way that it looks like they are doing a good job (not that they are not) 81.107.111.211 19:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

even if you are correct about the government having an interest, that is irrelevant to an encyclopedic article such as this. i am of the opinion that by all means, have a crime section if you insist on it, but i can't see the point of including every statistic known to man about crime in luton.

firstly, i doubt a reader would find this section as overwhelmingly useful as i think everyone is trying to make out. i don't disagree in the slightest that these point are relevant and have a place on this article, but what use may all of these facts and figures come to in the general scheme of things? i think a few of us have forgotten that this is an article that has a lot of other information as well as crime stats and that by, overall, scrapping with each other over this little section of information in this article, we have neglected the rest of this article whcih is in dire need of a good overhaul, not to mention the sister pages.

secondly, there is a lot of emotion going on in these discussions (i take privatewiddle and a few others as examples) and i do have some sympathy with these people. i can understand how they may find this relevant, as i myself have been recently been set upon by thugs and whathaveyou, but, yet again, people are concentration on minute details and forgetting this is an entire article that needs to be considered. i can tell you now that we as people are very sympathetic to your cause, but as wikipedians, we have to say, look, can you just take your emotions out of this picture and give us a balanced, non biased view about whether there should be a crime section or not in this article. this is an encycolpedia, not a record of your personal experiences with crime in luton.

of course, from what i have seen above, it just seems we are endlessly discussing this and not doing any work. so i am going to suggest, i say suggest, that everyone takes a vote on this as soon as possible and then from that vote, we move from there. as a past frequent contributor to this article, i take great interest in this article, and i think this has go on far enough. everyone take a vote and then move on from this. i am hoping to become more active again very soon, so if you don't start the vote, i will and then move on. there is other work to do in this article and endlessly arguing about all this will not have that work done, will it?

thanking you all most kindly, RA

Random articles 13:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Statistics can be interpreted how you want

Does anyone else see the irony in that? Yes they can be interpretted how you want, which is exactly what you are doing.GazMan7 16:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Archival

I think this page is getting too long so I am going to set this page up to archive every discussion with over 30 days inactivity.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.111.121 (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Infobox?

The table on the main article page could probably be better presented in an info box because the code for the table version is a bit of an eyesore —Preceding unsigned comment added by DudeWithNoName (talk • contribs) 12:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Which table, the one in the "Local attractions" section? There is a big pink infobox at the top of the article so I removed the category that you added. Can you explan a bit more. I'm a bit thick this morning must be the 4 cm of snow that fell overnight. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I was talking about the infobox at the top of the page. Although it says that it is an infobox, it is not a standard one like on the Manchester, St Albans, Falmouth (3 random English towns). I think I will try to fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.111.211 (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I believe the "pink" infobox is there because Luton is not just a town, but also a council district. See Oxford, Cambridge and City and District of St Albans for other examples. Note that St Albans is a separate article that just covers the town. It would be better if the districts used a template, and they could look prettier, but I think you should first discuss any changes at a higher level, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject England. JonH 09:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Culture in Luton

Previous comments have been archived.— Preceding unsigned comment added by JonH (talk • contribs) 12:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)