This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Rowton Heath article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Battle of Rowton Heath has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on September 24, 2011, September 24, 2013, September 24, 2017, September 24, 2018, September 24, 2021, and September 24, 2023. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork * YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll take a look over the next few days and then start to make some comments. SilkTork * YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I'm going to have limited internet access over the weekend as I'm going to France visiting relatives. I'll be back on March 3rd, and I'll finish dealing with this review then. SilkTork * YES! 18:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
A useful article which summarises the main events of the day and puts them in context. It follows the sources I was able to check, and appears to be uncontroversial and neutral. I did some minor tidying up - the article was essentially sound and no need for any further work to meet GA criteria. SilkTork * YES! 17:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Here is the official local plaque...
.
So why is this article named incorrectly as Rowton Heath? No one round here calls it Rowton Heath, it's always been Rowton Moor, as can be seen by it own name on the official plaque. The name of this article is wrong. My grandparents grew up near here and they always called it Rowton Moor, too, never heath.
More interestingly on Wikimedia Commons, there are 20 images listed by, I assume local people, who have taken pictures of "Rowton Moor" whereas there is but one by a visitor who uses the term "Rowton Heath". Is that how history is corrupted, take a name but it's only official if an "official" makes one up for it?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.75.96 ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree with the solution suggested by Ironholds. Both titles are used "commonly". Incidentally the Victoria County History account of the Civil War here does not give the battle a title, but names its site as Rowton moor ("moor" being in lower case). -- Peter I. Vardy ( talk) 08:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I just saw this article link in another link about Morgan's Mount and saw the title of Battle of Rowton Heath. What?? So I come here only to find that there has already been a years old disussion about this very issue. It's frustating to see that instead of accepting the name is Rowton Heath is an error, the established editors have doubled down on the IP, kept the wrong name as the article title and put the correct name as a mere addendum. Unbelievable!
It just reinforces my view that Wikipedia editors will live with wrong facts (to win an argument) than accept an error and make it right. It's always been the "Battle of Rowton moor", Rowton Heath is a modern collaqualism. To double check this I just did a recheck with a google search and found that "Rowton Heath" is the diminutive name with 151,000 hits while Rowton Moor remains double that with 313,000 "hits". It's quite obvious who is right! I live in Cheshire, so I am better qualified than an American and whoever to know what the proper name of this battle site should be. But for a global audience, that means a false name chosen by powerful editors who have no clue about what they are talking about. The name of this article should be the "Battle of Rowton Moor" and the redirect should be to "Battle of Rowton Heath". 194.75.10.114 ( talk) 10:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Battle of Rowton Heath article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Battle of Rowton Heath has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on September 24, 2011, September 24, 2013, September 24, 2017, September 24, 2018, September 24, 2021, and September 24, 2023. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: SilkTork * YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I'll take a look over the next few days and then start to make some comments. SilkTork * YES! 01:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
I'm going to have limited internet access over the weekend as I'm going to France visiting relatives. I'll be back on March 3rd, and I'll finish dealing with this review then. SilkTork * YES! 18:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
A useful article which summarises the main events of the day and puts them in context. It follows the sources I was able to check, and appears to be uncontroversial and neutral. I did some minor tidying up - the article was essentially sound and no need for any further work to meet GA criteria. SilkTork * YES! 17:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Here is the official local plaque...
.
So why is this article named incorrectly as Rowton Heath? No one round here calls it Rowton Heath, it's always been Rowton Moor, as can be seen by it own name on the official plaque. The name of this article is wrong. My grandparents grew up near here and they always called it Rowton Moor, too, never heath.
More interestingly on Wikimedia Commons, there are 20 images listed by, I assume local people, who have taken pictures of "Rowton Moor" whereas there is but one by a visitor who uses the term "Rowton Heath". Is that how history is corrupted, take a name but it's only official if an "official" makes one up for it?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.155.75.96 ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree with the solution suggested by Ironholds. Both titles are used "commonly". Incidentally the Victoria County History account of the Civil War here does not give the battle a title, but names its site as Rowton moor ("moor" being in lower case). -- Peter I. Vardy ( talk) 08:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I just saw this article link in another link about Morgan's Mount and saw the title of Battle of Rowton Heath. What?? So I come here only to find that there has already been a years old disussion about this very issue. It's frustating to see that instead of accepting the name is Rowton Heath is an error, the established editors have doubled down on the IP, kept the wrong name as the article title and put the correct name as a mere addendum. Unbelievable!
It just reinforces my view that Wikipedia editors will live with wrong facts (to win an argument) than accept an error and make it right. It's always been the "Battle of Rowton moor", Rowton Heath is a modern collaqualism. To double check this I just did a recheck with a google search and found that "Rowton Heath" is the diminutive name with 151,000 hits while Rowton Moor remains double that with 313,000 "hits". It's quite obvious who is right! I live in Cheshire, so I am better qualified than an American and whoever to know what the proper name of this battle site should be. But for a global audience, that means a false name chosen by powerful editors who have no clue about what they are talking about. The name of this article should be the "Battle of Rowton Moor" and the redirect should be to "Battle of Rowton Heath". 194.75.10.114 ( talk) 10:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)