Talk:Lickey Hills

I have a few issues with this. Firstly the Lickey Ridge is much larger than anything which can be called the Lickey Hills. The ridge runs right down almost to Bromsgrove, miles from anywhere that might be called the Lickey Hills. For this reason I would argue that 'Lickey Hills' actually *is* the country park, nothing more (that certainly is the only way I have ever heard it used), and the geological information should be in the arcticle about the ridge.

Your edits seem to imply there is a non-descript general area called the Lickey Hills, I am not sure what this refers to beyond the Lickey Hills Country Park.

In either case I have a lot of material about the history of the country park (and the golf club) as a place where the people of Birmingham went on days out, as well as details about the Lickey Beacon (which is with the hills) and the Earl of Plymouths obelisk (which is also within the Hills country park).

I intend to flesh out the article about the Lickey Hills Country park with some scans of picture postcards and a few details about the tea rooms, the Cadbury connection etc.

My second issue, which again is one of article naming disambiguation, is that the Lickey Incline is NOT within the Lickey Hills, it runs down the ridge from Blackwell to Bromsgrove- it is located at least 2 miles from the Lickey Hills. This is factual inaccuracy in the article you can check on the map or by having a drive down there.

The problem is that 'the lickey incline runs through the hills' does not reflect reality. Better to have an expanded article about the incline in my view, and link to it from the Hills article. Then have one overarching article about the ridge discussing the geology.

Thoughts? Leonig Mig 12:27, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think it's a multiple usage problem. A look at the birmimgham.gov.uk pages shows there's "Lickey Hills", singular, the well-defined park; "the Lickey Hills" (aka the Lickeys"), plural, an ill-defined geographical region (see [1]); and a deal of slippage between the two. Maps don't seem terribly consistent; on my AZ (uncertain date), the caption "Lickey Hills" specifically labels the Lickey Ridge. Difficult. RayGirvan 10:55, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ray's observation certainly reflects local usage, in my experience. Andy Mabbett 11:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I just had a look at Old Maps - very nice online reprint of the 1887-1893 OS maps - this link is to the first L of Lickey Hills. On these, "Lickey Hills" again labels specifically the Rednal, Blueberry and Cofton Hills, so I assume that's the original geographical use. The geology link explicitly defines "Lickey Ridge" as that same line of quartzite hills. The Lickey Incline has nothing to do with this, but goes up over the Bunter formation of which Beacon Hill is part. RayGirvan 18:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Interesting, I wonder if there is a general name which could be given to the overall bunch of hills; not only the Lickeys, but the Bunter formations and the hills around Wheeley Farm also- they are clearly part of an interrelated geological (glacial?) process. Leonig Mig 13:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this and it would be perhaps foolish to forget the "Lickey Woods" as a possible source of the name. The wooded area of region is pretty contiguous with the area people generally refer 'the Lickeys". Leonig Mig 01:00, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Could be. On the earlier matter, I skimmed some maps and my geological books today, and can find no generic name for the upland (for want of a better word) that extends as a ridge all the way from Clent, via Beacon Hill, to Blackwell. RayGirvan 01:17, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You will then both know that the Lickey Incline passes one and a half miles away from any part of the Lickey Hills (ill-defined-geographic area). Therefore whoever keeps reverting 'runs through' should cease as this is false. Leonig Mig 11:44, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Coston / Cofton ?

Talking of Old-Maps, have you noticed that Cofton used to be Coston? -- RHaworth 01:00, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Yes: the Cofton Hackett page mentions that it was "Coston Hvckett" in the Domesday, but I didn't realise the change was so recent. The dual usage is interesting. It's not a standard phonetic drift - could typography have had some influence?

(Very nice links - I hadn't worked out the code to access an Old-Maps page). RayGirvan 02:19, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Coston to Cofton

That will have come from a simple hand copying error at some stage in the past. The old English S looks like a modern day f and similar transmogrifications of village names have happened over the centuries all over the country. I am currently writing my autobiography and had just mentioned walks at the Lickeys in the early 1950s (must have been before 1953 because I remember travelling to Rednal on the tram), collecting bilberrys for pies each autumn and sledging down Beacon Hill in the endless snows of winter. 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 00:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

General Question

I've just added a photo to the page, can someone in the know get rid of the awful black boundary around it, it looks awful. Thanks! Cls 23:48, 1st August 2006

Castle Date

The article gives the impression that the mock "castle" that houses the toposcope was built in 1988 - That cannot be right, I remember playing on it as a child in the early 1960s. I've been back to look at it today and a plaque in front of the "castle" indicates it was built in 1907 to comemorate the land being donated by Cadbury. Maybe the Toposcope was resited within the "castle" in 1988 but the building itself is certainly much older. - John Dell — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.1.163.102 (talk) 19:50, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Quite agree! - this website gives photos of the castle and the plaque! - http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM6NVB_Beacon_Hill_Toposcope — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.70.80.249 (talk) 13:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It appears that the whole thing was rebuilt in 1988 to mark the Park's centenary [2]. The 1907 date is when the land at Beacon Hill was bought by Edward, George and Henry Cadbury and added to the land that they had given earlier to the City of Birmingham page 106. I used to go sledging here in the 60s, but oddly I don't remember the castle. I'll add the information about the gift of Beacon Hill in 1907 to the article and tweak the toposcope section to match the available sources. Mikenorton (talk) 18:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

You don't remember the castle from the 1960s Mike because it was not there in its current form. The toposcope plaque was mounted on a simple circular turret like structure with a single walkway around it. The elaborate fort design with extra wings was only added in 1988. Don't make any changes till better references and proof can be found. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 20:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

That sounds more like what I remember, but I can't find any sources that explain that. I've already tweaked the article to say that the structure was rebuilt in 1988 - so I hope that's OK. The plaque itself is less than clear, referring to "restored and refurbished". Mikenorton (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I queried it at the Birmingham History Forum and already received this reply from a senior forum member It has been many, many years since I played "up The Lickeys" as a child, but the structure that I see on photos now, is NOT how I remember it. I have also spoken to my Mom and Uncle who were born in Rubery (My Uncle still lives at "The bottom of The Lickeys").

Mom, who again hasnt been up there for many years, described it as a drum shaped structure with steps (which is how I remember it) My Uncle also said it is not now how it used to be. He said he will ask around to see if he can get hold of a photo.

If anyone comes up with a pre-1988 photo I will upload it. The original 1907 circular structure is still there in current photos and what was added in 1988 was the flying buttress wings with their archways and the castellated coping stones on the top rim. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 02:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lickey Hills. 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/20140419030018/http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=398890&Y=275425&A=Y&Z=120 to http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=398890&Y=275425&A=Y&Z=120
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140226220542/http://www.bcgs.info/BCGS_Newsletter213.pdf to http://www.bcgs.info/BCGS_Newsletter213.pdf

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) 11:14, 15 May 2017 (UTC)