This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DDStretch (talk) 19:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
• Does anyone agree that this section is incredibly rambling and needs tidying up?
The article as it stands confuses the geological feature of Alderley Edge with the village of Alderley Edge. According to National Trust sources the village was in fact called Chorley until comparatively recently. In 1842 the (new) railway station was called "Chorley for Alderley Edge", renamed in 1876 to just "Alderley Edge". This was to avoid confusion with Chorley in Lancashire. Thus the village was named after the geological feature, not vice versa.
== Think this has been covered - quote from page - The railway also gave Alderley Edge its current name. As the railway network expanded and travel became easier, the railway company did not want its station called Chorley any more because of the possible confusion with Chorley in Lancashire. So, in 1880 they renamed it Alderley Edge railway station against much opposition, taking the old name for the village and the name of the sandstone escarpment already known as The Edge.
Agreed that this is referenced quite far down in the article, but many sentences (for example, "The first written evidence of Alderley Edge") are ambiguous as to whether they refer to the village or the geological feature. I think it would be clearer if "Alderley Edge village" was consistently used for the former and "Alderley Edge" for the latter unless the context is self-explanatory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlin Cox ( talk • contribs) 09:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Agreed, just thought you may have missed that point but otherwise what you say is fine. (sorry for not signing last time) Geotek ( talk) 11:25, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
References (selected) have been added for the article about the mines. Pictures have been added also. Let me know if more detail is required. Nigel —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nigeldibben ( talk • contribs) 10:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
• Do you think it is worth creating a new page for the Alderley Edge mines - they take up a large proportion of the Alderley Edge page. They can still be referred to, just more briefly under the landmarks section...
"Population 4808 not 4809 according to the improved reference now cited". Oops, has somebody died recently ??
Jotel 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to give the same information twice: in the narrative and in the table?
--
Jotel 21:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
"The civil parish was enlarged on 30 September" in the section Boundary changes. What was the year? The Roman Candle ( talk) 16:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alderley Edge. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Alderley Edge. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9780719081989/
©Geni ( talk) 00:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
The article currently asserts a height of 215m (= c.705ft) but not being referenced, quite where that figure comes from, who knows? There is no contour exceeding the 190m (= c.623ft) contour on OS 25K mapping where the interval is 5m. A spot height of 637ft (= c.194m) appears on the last 1" OS mapping whilst one of 193.2m (= c.634ft)appears on more detailed OS digital mapping on a track at grid ref SJ 8604 7688. Anyone have any further insights? cheers Geopersona ( talk) 10:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
DDStretch (talk) 19:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
• Does anyone agree that this section is incredibly rambling and needs tidying up?
The article as it stands confuses the geological feature of Alderley Edge with the village of Alderley Edge. According to National Trust sources the village was in fact called Chorley until comparatively recently. In 1842 the (new) railway station was called "Chorley for Alderley Edge", renamed in 1876 to just "Alderley Edge". This was to avoid confusion with Chorley in Lancashire. Thus the village was named after the geological feature, not vice versa.
== Think this has been covered - quote from page - The railway also gave Alderley Edge its current name. As the railway network expanded and travel became easier, the railway company did not want its station called Chorley any more because of the possible confusion with Chorley in Lancashire. So, in 1880 they renamed it Alderley Edge railway station against much opposition, taking the old name for the village and the name of the sandstone escarpment already known as The Edge.
Agreed that this is referenced quite far down in the article, but many sentences (for example, "The first written evidence of Alderley Edge") are ambiguous as to whether they refer to the village or the geological feature. I think it would be clearer if "Alderley Edge village" was consistently used for the former and "Alderley Edge" for the latter unless the context is self-explanatory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlin Cox ( talk • contribs) 09:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Agreed, just thought you may have missed that point but otherwise what you say is fine. (sorry for not signing last time) Geotek ( talk) 11:25, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
References (selected) have been added for the article about the mines. Pictures have been added also. Let me know if more detail is required. Nigel —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nigeldibben ( talk • contribs) 10:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC).
• Do you think it is worth creating a new page for the Alderley Edge mines - they take up a large proportion of the Alderley Edge page. They can still be referred to, just more briefly under the landmarks section...
"Population 4808 not 4809 according to the improved reference now cited". Oops, has somebody died recently ??
Jotel 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to give the same information twice: in the narrative and in the table?
--
Jotel 21:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
"The civil parish was enlarged on 30 September" in the section Boundary changes. What was the year? The Roman Candle ( talk) 16:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alderley Edge. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Alderley Edge. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
https://manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9780719081989/
©Geni ( talk) 00:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
The article currently asserts a height of 215m (= c.705ft) but not being referenced, quite where that figure comes from, who knows? There is no contour exceeding the 190m (= c.623ft) contour on OS 25K mapping where the interval is 5m. A spot height of 637ft (= c.194m) appears on the last 1" OS mapping whilst one of 193.2m (= c.634ft)appears on more detailed OS digital mapping on a track at grid ref SJ 8604 7688. Anyone have any further insights? cheers Geopersona ( talk) 10:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)