West Midlands different to Regions->West Midlands?

It seems to me there is a 'bug' that
West Midlands
has content different to
Regions->WestMidlands.

I'm not talking about the proper and correct use of '@' in order to give the user different routes to the same result. I'm talking about users ending at a different final pages with logically the same content, yet with different actual content.

The case in point. Naive user looking for "Travel and Tourism" in "West Midlands":

http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/West_Midlands/Travel_and_Tourism/

containg 4 REAL records:

but see also:

http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/Regions/West_Midlands/Travel_and_Tourism/



Surely the 'Regions' one should end up with a whole bunch of @ redirections to the 'real' West Midlands entries.

There is only 1 West Midlands (ignoring the West Midlands in the West Midlands, but that is another story), so what is the REAL 'Travel and Tourism' in the West Midlands?

This stuff is surely a mistake in the category hierarchy?!?

regards,


Hugh Prior
webmaster
www.localpin.com
The World's Most Innovative DMOZ Dump User

Re: West Midlands different to Regions->West Midla

Ugh. Um, thanks.

You have a very interesting site Hugh! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Dziekuje bardzo!

Re: West Midlands different to Regions->West Midla

The two categories cover different areas. The England/West_Midlands category covers the area defined by http://www.oultwood.com/localgov/uk/westmidlands.htm , consisting of 7 Metropolitan councils. England/Regions/West_Midlands covers the area defined by http://www.go-wm.gov.uk/ , which also happens to include England/West_Midlands .

Um... blame the government.

Re: West Midlands different to Regions->West Midla

Thanks very much for the post; at least it indicates there is perhaps some logic behind things.

But, let's assume for a moment that people were capable of understanding this difference (from your post, I suppose you do, but please count me out), it leaves me with a few questions:

1) isn't it reasonable to assume that there may actually be different definitions (depending on whether you are local government, national government, a cartographer, a space alien etc.) of what actually constitutes something which is called 'West Midlands'?

2) Isn't it reasonable for DMOZ to take a single view on what is or is not 'West Midlands' and to lump everything together under whatever DMOZ defines as 'West Midlands'?

3) Will the person resposible for this region, or some meta editor prepared to make the change (or enforce the status quo), please step forward and say what actually is proposed to be done about this?

Thanks!

Re: West Midlands different to Regions->West Midla

I am with Hugh on this one. I live in the West Midlands and I have never heard of any dispute about the borders etc. I can't honestly think of anyonethat I know around here who would be aware of the difference between the geographical coverage of the categories, and they would indeed expect the same content. I would have thought that the categories should be merged/mirrored.

Re: West Midlands different to Regions->West Midla

The Regions category structure was created to mirror the English Regions set out by the UK government; incidently should the government opt for Regional Assemblies, then the West Midlands Regional Assembly will cover this area. 'West Midlands' is the official name of one of these regions, hence the category name.

The England/West_Midlands category is so called because that is what the area is traditionally known as.

As it is, I don't think any change will occur, since you have six of one and half a dozen of the other.