User talk:J3Mrs: Difference between revisions
→Wigan Warriors: reply |
Easiwriter (talk | contribs) →Free Trade Hall - Events: new section |
||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
Re: Recent claims in the Wigan article I have made this edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wigan_Warriors&diff=533042552&oldid=531800394] to the [[Wigan Warriors]] article that makes the same claim. Might be worth seeing if we can find a reputable source otherwise we're going to get stuck in an edit-war with the IPs [[User:GimliDotNet|<font color="000001">'''GimliDotNet''']]</font><sup> ([[User talk:GimliDotNet|<font color="FF0000">Speak to me]],[[Special:Contributions/GimliDotNet|Stuff I've done</font>]])</sup> 15:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC) |
Re: Recent claims in the Wigan article I have made this edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wigan_Warriors&diff=533042552&oldid=531800394] to the [[Wigan Warriors]] article that makes the same claim. Might be worth seeing if we can find a reputable source otherwise we're going to get stuck in an edit-war with the IPs [[User:GimliDotNet|<font color="000001">'''GimliDotNet''']]</font><sup> ([[User talk:GimliDotNet|<font color="FF0000">Speak to me]],[[Special:Contributions/GimliDotNet|Stuff I've done</font>]])</sup> 15:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
:Wigan is a good article and not the place for unsupported claims, I thought about asking for it to be protected from anonymous edits. It's up to the editor to support his claim not us but you can look if you like. [[User:J3Mrs|J3Mrs]] ([[User talk:J3Mrs#top|talk]]) 15:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC) |
:Wigan is a good article and not the place for unsupported claims, I thought about asking for it to be protected from anonymous edits. It's up to the editor to support his claim not us but you can look if you like. [[User:J3Mrs|J3Mrs]] ([[User talk:J3Mrs#top|talk]]) 15:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Free Trade Hall - Events == |
|||
Thank you for pointing out that the article is about the building, which I understand. However, you have provided a list of memorable events, so if you are going to mention any of Bob Dylan's then I think you should also mention why the 1966 concert was controversial. Otherwise people (like me) might wonder why the first one (which I attended) is not mentioned. |
|||
[[User:Easiwriter|Easiwriter]] ([[User talk:Easiwriter|talk]]) 20:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:15, 28 January 2013
Template:Archive box collapsible
Thanks
Thank you for your support for the list of Lancashire churches. The review had got a bit "stuck". --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's made it to FL. Now for Cumbria! Thanks again. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations Peter, never in doubt. :) J3Mrs (talk) 15:48, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Wigan Articles
Hi, Thank you for your recent edits regarding Wigan. Unfortunately I have had to reverse your good faith edit regarding Orrell. The area is not designated officially as a town or village rather simply as a component area of the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan. Additionally as the eastern section of Orrell directly adjoins Pemberton (an integral area of the town of Wigan itself) using the "3 miles west of Wigan town centre" helps the reader to understand a) the areas proximity to the town centre and b)the better explain how Orrell and Pemberton are one contiguous residential area.
Wigan Council seem to have a propensity for over complicating geographical designations ! We had major issues with the Wigan articles several years ago and we have finally it seems come to a consensus regarding them.
I am originally for the area myself so take a keen interest in keeping the articles updated. I hope to work alongside you on them soon. Happy editing !
Thanks Man2 (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- I have changed it back with a reference from the WMBC site and clarified its unclear (to me at least) relationship with Wigan town centre. J3Mrs (talk) 13:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Thank you for your message. The designation if town on the MBC website is a recent addition. Previously the council did not designate areas as towns or villages (hence the confusion ). As this is not a verifiable designation through the website I agree that it should be now left as town. I will advise future editors if the change also.
Regarding your point about the significance of the town centre. Orrell does not have the traditional town "boundaries" one would expect to see. There exists essentially one contiguous area from Orrell on the west of the borough to Ince on the east. This was originally included by consensus back in c. 2009. It was put in place to inform the reader of the differentiation between Orrell and an area such as Standish or Shevington, in relation to the town of Wigan itself.
Of course if this consensus has now changed I am happy to comply.
Again I look forward to working on the articles with you in the future
Thanks Man2 (talk) 21:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
P.s. I have typed the above on a mobile, apologies for the terrible grammar! The above should of course have read that this is now a verifiable designation not that it is not one ! :-). Man2 (talk) 21:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for replying, my take on it, whatever Wigan MBC says, is that all settlements are something other than a "component part". Anyhow I have spent some time looking for online "stuff". Hopefully it will improve a bit in the next week or so. J3Mrs (talk) 21:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I've just been taking a quick look at the 'about the borough' saw croon of the MBC website. In the traditional spirit if confusion by the council they have listed a "Billinge and Winstanley" and "Shevington and Appley Bridge". These of course constitute four separate places and no explanation is provided to show why they are grouped together. Appley Bridge is not within the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan, rather it is in West Lancashire, additionally the discription of Billinge has included "Billinge Hill" which is within the adjoining Metropolitan Borough of St Helens.
The problem we now have is determining what to list Billinge and Winstanley as. The first point is that "Billinge" refers to Billinge Higher End as the village if Billinge itself is within the Met Borough of St Helens. The site of "Billinge Hospital" was in the Met Borough of Wigan called Higher End or Billinge Higher End. As you mentioned previously it is your opinion that areas are more than simply 'component parts' or 'districts' of a borough , as the council have not designated Billinge or Winstanley as villages or towns, what is your feeling regarding how we should go ahead with the designation on the article?
Thanks Man2 (talk) 08:52, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- I only referenced it to the Wigan site because it used the word town and you appeared adamant it wasn't. Mostly you have to apply common sense regardless of what Wigan says. J3Mrs (talk) 09:24, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
No problem, I apologise if I appeared adamant. As you can appreciate we have had so many problems with the Wigan articles in the last few years that I am keen to keep them as accurate as possible and within consensus. On the whole I think they are approaching a good standard now however I do feel its important to iron out seemingly insignificant details simply to prevent multiple re-edits. The issue of Orrell is a long-standing one. Several editors even objected to the inclusion of the phrase 'suburb' in relation to the area. It is fortune that we now have an authoritative source for the designation and thus the issue can be put to bed.
I only bring the issue of Billinge and Winstanley up as a result of having no verifiable way of confirming their designation. As it stands we cannot call them a town or a village (despite the fact both began as villages) and as you rightly assert 'area' or 'district' is too vague. The fact they are grouped together on the MBC website could lead some to assume they are in fact the same place. I fully agree that a degree of common sense is required when dealing with these articles, however I am reticent to designate either a specific title until it can be cleared up. Billinge Higher End does not possess the traditional boundaries of a village, nor does Winstanley.
I do recall working alongside you on these articles several years ago and I'm sure you recall the issues with had with an editor called 'JemmyH', fortunately it appears they no longer contribute. Hopefully we can establish an updated consensus regarding designations asap.
Thanks Man2 (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Orrell
Hi, I just wanted your thoughts on the contiguous nature of Orrell to Pemberton. I noticed your recent edit in the lead to the article (from "The area today forms a predominantly residential suburb along with the adjoining area of Pemberton" to "as is neighbouring Pemberton" and wanted to speak with you regarding how we should go about clarifying to the reader that the two areas are essentially the same residential mass. Do you feel that a)the point is needed and relevant to the article and b)if so, how we should best go about placing it back in there?
Many thanks Man2 (talk) 20:16, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
Have you had any further thoughts on the above? I don't want to edit anything until everyone has had the chance to contribute their interpretation.
Thanks Man2 (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, I've not been here much over the last week. I don't really think it needs nuch, I'll look now but this should be predominantly about Orrell.J3Mrs (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I wanted to thank you first off for the great cleanup you did on this page. It really was a mess after the school marketing director got in there, and I wasn't sure anyone would want to put in the time and effort to sort out the good from the bad, which it looks like you really did a great job of. One thing I wanted to point out though was this old revision, which has two sections that were deleted by the COI editor and got lost in the shuffle afterwards (Financial Worries and Notable Alumni). Do you think either is worth re-adding? InShaneee (talk) 22:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, no problem. I don't usually go for notable people but I might in this case, I wouldn't bother with the other but it's up to you. J3Mrs (talk) 22:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Wigan Warriors
Re: Recent claims in the Wigan article I have made this edit [1] to the Wigan Warriors article that makes the same claim. Might be worth seeing if we can find a reputable source otherwise we're going to get stuck in an edit-war with the IPs GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 15:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Wigan is a good article and not the place for unsupported claims, I thought about asking for it to be protected from anonymous edits. It's up to the editor to support his claim not us but you can look if you like. J3Mrs (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Free Trade Hall - Events
Thank you for pointing out that the article is about the building, which I understand. However, you have provided a list of memorable events, so if you are going to mention any of Bob Dylan's then I think you should also mention why the 1966 concert was controversial. Otherwise people (like me) might wonder why the first one (which I attended) is not mentioned. Easiwriter (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)