Talk:Shropshire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.
United Kingdom Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. (Add assessment comments)
High This article has been rated as high-importance within the UK geography WikiProject.
England Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
To-do list for Shropshire: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Lists to prose (sport, places of interest)
  • Some text for economy section
  • Transport - more detail on waterways
  • Generally more citations
Archive
Archives

29/09/2005


Contents

[edit] Archived talk

Salop is NOT Abbr of Shropshire, its a completely different name! Salop was changed to Shropshire as it was deemed highly offensive to French speakers. Also if it ever appears anywhere today it is merely out of date or some older member of the community getting confused.

Taken from Shrewsbury:
Shrewsbury was known to the Anglo-Saxons as Scrobbesburh (dative Scrobbesbyrig), which has several meanings; "fort in the scrub-land region", "Scrobb's fort", "shrubstown" or "the town of the bushes".[1][2] This name was gradually corrupted in three directions, into 'Sciropscire' which became Shropshire, into 'Sloppesberie', which became Salop/Salopia (the historical name for the county), and into 'Schrosberie' which eventually became the name of the county town, Shrewsbury.
Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Emperor Norton

It appears that this character had no connection with Shropshire - there is a Joshua Norton listed as born in what is now Telford, but it's almost certainly not the same one. I've deleted the reference. Jon Rob 14:19, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. David 16:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Highest Point

Looking the the highest point in several counites and cna't find shorpshire's highest point int he geography subsection, anyone know??? Pickle 01:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Brown Clee Hill 540m. David 09:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
You may also find this page useful - List of English counties by highest point. David 19:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Largest County?

On our local radio station CFM Radio the other day it was stated in a quiz contest that Shropshire was England's largest county how is this so as it is neither the largest in administrative, historical or cermonial terms. Anyone got an answer? Penrithguy 16:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

It's 16th in traditional county terms, 14th in administrative terms, and 13th in ceremonial terms; are you sure it wasn't a joke?!? Owain (talk) 17:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Shropshire is England's largest INLAND county. David 18:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
I dont think it was a joke though I didnt hear the radio very well as it is played at work and I was quite a bit away from it plus its sometimes hard to hear over the noise of the machinery it may have been the largest inland county Penrithguy 21:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits by User:Justkindness

I am concerned that User:Justkindness is pushing a pro-Shrewsbury POV in this article. Furthermore, this user is making additions (which although good faith) have numerous grammatical errors. Further, this user is failing to cite sources. Anyone else any thoughts?81.79.44.74 19:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that some of the edits are perhaps not best suited to the introduction of the Shropshire article, particularly the level of depth of description of the constituent parts of Telford, but perhaps it would be best if the issue as a whole were discussed with all parties to help manage this issue. Mouchoir le Souris 21:10, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
I try to re-edit his/her edits so that the POV/grammatical errors are reduced. Would like some help though... David 08:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
It's getting silly now. The introduction should be just that. No rambling about Mount Gilbert or whatever. Please stop adding stuff to it! Add additional info to the relevant section of the article. David 15:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I object to your comments. I am not "pushing a pro-shrewsbury POV." I am concerned that you are pushing an Ironbridge and telford POV. Clearly the main thrust of this introduction to Shropshire should be a hierarchical one, concerned with the larger and more important aspects of the county first. These include the major towns, landscape features etc. You say that the Wrekin is not an important feature, which I think is a ridiculous statement. It is the most significant landscape feature in the area apart from the River Severn. What we need to do is work from the major to the minor, not throw in bits about Ironbridge being "the birthplace of industry" (a very questionable thing anyway, thought up by advertisers of the new town.)This is also dealt with later in the article. I have added significant amounts to this article, including much of the historical stuff. I strongly object to you criticising my grammar too. This is a personal statement by you and insulting to me. I have not criticised any of your input and certainly not your grammar, even if I thought it inadequate. I suspect you are either very young and intolerant or just unable to work with others. Please believe I am trying to do my best for this and other articles. If I happen to disagree with you, it is because I disagree, not because I want to annoy you! I suggest that if you cannot tolerate alterations by others, you should give up working for Wikipedia.

The Wrekin is only prominent in eastern areas. The Shropshire Hills area can be seen from much further afield than the Wrekin. You failed to add any of that until I had mentioned it. The only objection I have with most of your contributions is that you insist on adding unnecessary information to the introductions to both the Telford and Shropshire articles. Whether I may or may not be young does not affect my ability to contribute correctly. Your grammar WAS inadequate, and I only posted that comment after you had inserted inadequate text a couple of times. Despite this, I failed to mention how you're probably an elderly person with a superiority complex, which would indeed be an insult. Similarly, I find how you brand me as some kind of adolescent who you can easily dismiss with long-winded statements quite condescending. Either way, I have accepted that some of your contributions were fine, so I am unsure why you feel it necessary to demand my 'giving up' of 'working' for WP. 81.79.44.74 17:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
For goodness sake "Justkindness" your view on Shropshire is so Shrewsbury-Wrekin centric it's getting ridiculous. The Wrekin is not that amazing, it's not even in the top 10 highest hills of Shropshire. That is a fact. Your edits are mostly your own opinion. This is an encyclopedia, not your view of Shropshire (which is a very narrow one). And adding that some hills are the oldest in the country - well that's just nonsense, I'm sorry. David 18:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

David, try looking up Shropshire Hills in a proper encyclopedia as I have! They are the oldest, being Pre-cambrian, in the country. That is a fact.

As for the user with the numbers,81.79 etc, I refuse to be drawn into a childish exchange of insults. My point, which is a valid one, is that the Wrekin is the most important landmark in the county. You may not like it, or agree with it, but if you look in most reference books you will find it is mentioned as such. You say that the edits are mostly my own opinions. I suggest that that is in fact the case with your own contributions. Most of mine are based on research and reading. The reason I suggest you give up working on Wikipedia is because you do not like your views being challenged. If you read the introduction to Wikipedia, it says, if you can't stand people changing your contribution, then don't contribute.

The Wrekin is no more important of a landmark than Caer Caradoc or any of the other large hills which can be seen from most of the county. It's not that I don't like it; I really don't even have to disagree with it; it's just not factual. If you want to state things like that then CITE A SOURCE or two. If my contributions are so opinionated then why has nobody reverted them? I have contributed for a long time, albeit anonymously, and my additions are rarely reverted. You waltz on in as a new user and make sweeping changes to the introduction when they are un-needed. If you have actually got research and 'proper' encyclopedic reasoning to back up your claims then cite them. As regarding your final comment, I can stand people changing my contributions, WHEN they are factually correct and NPOV 81.79.44.74 19:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It's impossible working with you - you obviously have some axe to grind and I shall leave you to grind it. You are obviously beavering away under various pseudonymns cutting out other peoples' material, attacking their contributions, implying yours are best and so on. Can you honestly say your contributions are unbiased? They smack so much of the partisan. Incidentally, you do not cite any sources yourself - your inability makes Wikipedia a laughing stock amongst people who actually know Shropshire well - which you obviously do not.

What a ridiculous response. I do not 'beaver away' at peoples WORTHY contributions. I don't cite sources because I rarely add anything controversial or non-neutral, hence why my contributions aren't reverted often. What does me being anonymous have to do with anything? My opinion is still just as valuable as yours, just because I don't assign myself some ridiculous alias like 'Justkindness' (oh the irony). You say 'amongst people who know Shropshire well', so would that be all the other editors apart from you? I'm not the only person who has a problem with your contributions. How do I not know Shropshire well? I live in it, I study within it. I'm fed up with arguing with you anyway, you still fail to take on board any of the concerns raised here, and simply readd all the contributions people revert of yours in a different form. 81.79.44.74 12:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits to "History" section

I recently deleted the "Ludlow" subsection of the "History" section of this article, but have found lately that this edit has been reverted. I would like to explain my reasoning for this deletion of information, but I do welcome open discussion about it. My belief is this: The content of the "Ludlow" subsection is really more worthy of the Ludlow article, as it is only to Ludlow that the content is relevant. While I agree that Ludlow is in Shropshire, it is not necessary to clutter up the Shropshire article with information that really fits elsewhere, in that: users reading the Shropshire article for the History of Shropshire will be interested in information about Shropshire itself. Those looking for information on Ludlow, and for that matter, Shrewsbury, will look at the dedicated History of Shrewsbury article, or the Ludlow article. As a result, we should barely touch on the histories of constituent parts of Shropshire in this article, as any more detail wastes space and makes it harder to acquire relevant info from the article, and I feel that the large subsections dedicated to Shrewsbury and Ludlow are simply excessive. Perhaps the content should be moved to the relevant articles (Ludlow, History of Shrewsbury) where it is not already present in those articles. Mouchoir le Souris 20:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

True, and the article is already stated as 'too long' by the wikipedia software when one comes to edit it anyway. Perhaps a short section (a paragraph maybe?) should be dedicated to notable towns in the main history section?.Asdfasdf1231234 20:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
That seems like a good way forward. Mouchoir le Souris 21:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] french translation

Just wanted to let you know I have soon finished the translation of this page in french. I'm not sure that's the right place to do so(if it isn't then somebody will delete this notice anyway) but I thought it would be polite to let you know your work was used to create a new wikipedia page in french. Thanks for this comprehensive web page, I hope to make discover lovely shropshire to my fellow citizens thanks to that.

[edit] Citations

I've added quite a few references to the article, mainly in the introduction and economy sections. More are needed however. 84.64.103.64 19:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] District map

Why is Telford and Wrekin (Unitary) highlighted? — DIV (128.250.204.118 02:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC))

Because it is a unitary authority and the other districts are not. It forms part of the ceremonial county but not the non-metropolitan county. This is standard practice across Wikipedia's English county pages. David 15:23, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:EH icon.png

Image:EH icon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image queue

The following images were removed from the education section, which is now too small to hold them. The order below is the same as the order the images appeared from the start of the section to the end. Mouchoir le Souris (talk) 20:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Shrewsbury School

Adams' Grammar School

Shrewsbury Sixth Form College

Where has the education section gone, actually?84.66.212.99 (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The section is still there; what had happened was a user had reduced the section's length considerably, and this reduction caused image overlapping, so I moved the pictures concerned here for queueing until such a time as there is space in the article to fit them. Mouchoir le Souris (talk) 23:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image of Beatties - suggestion

As Beatties has been bought out by House of Fraser, perhaps the image should be changed or deleted? 77.198.170.218 (talk) 19:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Shropshire

Is anyone interested in becoming a member of a WikiProject dedicated to the county of Shropshire? If so, please sign your name underthe proposal. Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2009 county map

I have edited the map in the Towns and Villages section to come into line with the 2009 government changes. I also added a few more settlements (Clun, Cleobury Mortimer, Donnington, Shifnal, and Baschurch) to fill the gaps left by the border removal. The new map can replace the current one in 2009. On a side note, has anyone prepared any changes for the article post-2009? ChrisJB (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I propose a Shropshire Council page needs creating, dealing with the new unitary council (but NOT the area it covers - this can adequately be covered in the Shropshire article, especially as 90% of the county will be the new unitary area). David (talk) 16:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the map - the locations of Bishop's Castle and Whitchurch are rather out-of-place. David (talk) 16:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, you're right. I'll get on to fixing it ASAP. ChrisJB (talk) 22:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Done. Their positions have been adjusted accordingly. ChrisJB (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Well whilst you're at it, could you also correct Craven Arms (should be slightly further SSE - ie further down the A49), Wem (should not be on the A49 - ie move it SW a bit) and Newport (should be slightly further W - ie to the west of the A41). Cheers! David (talk) 00:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Lol, well would've been handier to tell me before I did the other modifications! Oh well, I'll get on to it soon, need to correct the EP in Telford anyway. :) ChrisJB (talk) 20:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, they're all done. Hopefully it's alright now. ChrisJB (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Should this map actually be implemented now, as the new version just shows how things are now really, as the districts of the county are not of the same subdivision as the Telford & Wrekin Unitary Authority and Shropshire ceremonial county. The new version is clearly more factually accurate, and I'm not going to update the current one just for the sake of a few months when it seems unnecessary. What does everyone think? ChrisJB (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Yeah just use the new one now. It's fine as the two sub-divisions of the ceremonial county are both non-metropolitan counties. (This won't change upon the creation of the second unitary authority, which merely involves the abolition of the existing districts in the main non-metropolitan county.) David (talk) 20:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I've added the '2009' map to the article, replacing the older one. David (talk) 22:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shropshire Council

I have established the Shropshire Council article. Please read the Talk:Shropshire Council page. Thanks. David (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Towns and villages

Why is Wellington listed seperatly to the rest of Telford? It is 3rd in the list for population, but hasn't it been part of the new town since '68? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Person642 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Politically, Wellington is a part of the new town of Telford. However, it still retains an independent character, and is geographically seperated from the rest of the conurbation to a certain extent. But I do accept it is somewhat of a curiosity, so I'll add a footnote next to the town on the list explaining the situation. Thanks, Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 16:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Having "an independant character" does not make it any less a part of Telford. Nor does a geographical seperation, which I assume is non urban land. I have always considered Wellington to be in Telford. Person642 (talk) 13:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Wellington is in Telford but retains its own independent identity within the larger urban area, a bit like how many of the towns which are now part of the London metropolis do. David (talk) 18:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] M54 motorway

Just a note that I've recently managed to get the article on the M54 motorway to Good article status! I hope we can get more Shropshire-related articles to GA status or better! Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)