Talk:Adam & Eve, Birmingham

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Notability

edit

Anyone care to explain what makes this pub notable? Especially with the total lack of references. Comparing this establishment to The Old Crown, there seems no reason for this article.

The only apparent attempt at notability asserted in the article is the second line:

"The Adam & Eve is unique in that it is the only public house remaining on Bradford Street. At one time there where over twenty."

As far as I can tell, the points of interest in this article are:

  • 200 years old
    • I can't see why a pub is notable just based on age (I don't feel that 200 years is particularly old for a pub)
  • Survival compared to other local pubs
  • Unusual name
  • Architecture
    • And I quote: "...making it similar to other pubs of the time..." - not unique
  • Overnight accommodation
    • Pubs with bedrooms are not notable
  • Live music
    • Could be notable, if linked to a famous (regular) musician/group. However, pubs like the Eagle and Tun (linked with UB40) do not have a Wikipedia article.

If there's no response, I'll be nominating this article for deletion.

Booglamay (talk) 21:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The Adam & Eve is notable because there has been a pub of this name in its location for at least 200 years. These are marked on a map drawn-up in 1748 when Bradford Street was first created. The fact that the pub is the only remaining one on this street (out of more than 20) reflects the changing social history of the area.
The actual buildings are notable because they date back to 18th century. This isn't particularly old for Britain as a whole but it is for Birmingham. There were very few buildings from this period in the city and many of those that made it into the 20th century were destroyed in the blitz.
All the above information is supported by a link which cites primary sources, as is the evolution of the pub's buildings and the origin of its name.[1]
The lack of a Wikipedia article on the Eagle & Tun is irrelevant to this issue but there is no reason why you shouldn't create one.
I agree that Clientele section contains trivial information and unsupported material. I see no reason not to delete this section and keep the rest of the article.
Unknown Unknowns (talk) 12:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough, I've done it. The Grot (talk) 08:59, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Adam & Eve, Birmingham. 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}}).

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) 20:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)Reply