Talk:Southport

Gas Tower

Should we add photos of it's removal? --Anappleadaykeepsthedocaway (talk) 03:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Please! Certainly in a category on Commons, even if they aren't embedded directly in the article. The gas holder is a significant landmark - I have a feeling it's even notable amongst gas holders, as a rare survivor of that "cage" style. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You may put them on a seperate article called Southport Gas Holder. We need more images on that page and in paticular Commons. I am looking forward to your contributions. 93gregsonl2 (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Peter Pan's Playground

Does any one have any photographs of this long lost part of Southport? It would be fantastic to also make a page for it as well. Sadly I can not find any ref. as of yet... Can anyone help? Anappleadaykeepsthedocaway (talk) 05:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Education

Tried to clean it up a bit. As I did, I spotted Southport College was not listed... So I have added it. Might be worth putting a link to the Ofted reports for the area? Anyone have any views on this? Anappleadaykeepsthedocaway (talk) 05:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Politics

Merge

There was previoiusly a note to merge the Politics section with Southport (UK Parliament constituency). I removed this in light of recent plans to rename/redefine Southport's constituency to allow time to see what actually happens. --me_and 14:43, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

History of Southport in Merseyside

I've copied this over from User_talk:IanDavies, as it's relevant to the article:

I know that Southport is now part of the (administrative) county of Merseyside(!), but think it's important to also mention that it was part of the (administrative) county of Lancashire before that, which is what I put. (It is still part of the traditional county of Lancashire however - the borders for that have never changed).

I just tried to give a bit more detailed idea of the history behind the decision, which I think is important to include as it was (perhaps still is!) a contentious issue in the town. I can see it was a bit fuzzy though, so I've rewritten my earlier effort and I think my new version makes the situation clearer and shows the distinction.

(I was also trying to point people towards the distinction between different types of county, and the different roles they play by referring to them by the technical terms administrative, ceremonial and traditional counties, and pointing towards those articles in Wikipedia).

Have a read at my new version and see what you think - hopefully you'll like the new version more!

PS I agree with your removal of the sentence about the traditional county in the Lancashire article - I was going to do it myself (I didn't write it, I just moved it). The problem is that there is only one page for 'Lancashire' , a term which relates to two different areas according to which type of county you're referring to. We'll just have to make it clear each time the difference is important, and refer to the ceremonial [ie modern] or traditional [ie old] county specifically. Aquilina 13:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Having looked at you edit's. Are you doing this as part of the Campaign for Real lancashire?--IanDavies 14:05, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I have no agenda. It's just that it's more complicated a situation than saying "Southport is in Merseyside" makes out. That is true, but it's not the full picture at all.

Please clarify what you feel is wrong with adding the extra information. It doesn't contradict your version, just gives a fuller picture. Aquilina 16:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Aquilina 17:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the content but I think it should be in either a section of it's own or the History section. The status in Merseyside is a fact of life. An easier way to do it would be to produce a good article on the debate from a National POV.--IanDavies 20:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

If you think it should be in a section of its own, that's where you should have put it rather than simply reverting! - it's basic wikiquette, and far more constructive. I would disagree with putting it in the history section, as Southport's status within the *traditional* county of Lancashire is still current [just as much a fact of life as its presence in the *administrative* county of Merseyside], and relevant - many people in Southport still give their county as Lancashire, and for this reason alone it deserves clarification and explanation. Southport's status in both of these different types of counties is not a POV matter - it's plain fact.

I will put the information in a separate section; if you disagree with this version, please edit it constructively or, if you feel you must revert it, why not RfC it at the same time? Hopefully this will be a good compromise option, but if this fails we might as well try and seek mediation. Aquilina 15:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I did edit constritivly I spelt out the exact Historical relationship and modern one. It is you edits which seek to give some offical status to the taditional counties that is bad editing. --IanDavies 16:01, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Either way, the current version should hopefully be ok for both of us. There is no mention of Lancashire till the new third section. If not, please just edit the *specific* bits you disagree with, rather than reverting the lot, as I've added extra stuff [about the merge with Bootle and so on] which shouldn't be lost. Aquilina 16:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

It's fine with me.--IanDavies 18:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that both the current administrative status of Southport and its position within a traditional county are key aspects of the town's identity, and therefore should be mentioned in the introduction. I hope that my edit reflects this from a neutral point of view, and avoids offence to the partisans of the new and the old. Countersubject 01:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

npov

The page smacks of an advert for southport, specifically on the transport side of things. I think we should point out that there is no direct rail link to Preston and the town is not well connected by road.

Moved this section to the end of the page. New items are by convention appended to the page. Countersubject 11:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Location of Steve Jones's Photography

I see from the page's history that there's some uncertainty about the location of SJ's photography. Under or over water? Is this significant? Have I been away from Southport for too long? Countersubject 00:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Southport in Relation to Surrounding Areas

I've removed the paragraph 'It is called Souwie by the Scousers' from the intoduction, added by 82.152.209.70 at 11:32, 18th July, as it doesn't really fit in the introduction. Perhaps it could belong in a new section on the interaction of Southport with its surrounding areas, from a number of angles: economy, society, geography, language etc. BTW - Wikipedia encourages those who edit pages to do so through a Wikipedia account. Countersubject 12:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Pier Picture

If anyone could upload a picture of the pier for the Southport Pier article I would appreciate it. --Paul E. Ester 01:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Just spotted your request. Will add one for you as soon as I can register. --81.129.235.13 (talk) 23:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)newuser-appleman

I have just got a few shots to go on of the pier. Just need to scan them now. Also need to sign up to upload them. But do you want up to date only or old photos as well? --81.129.235.13 (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Signing-up-tomorrow

Rail- Present

Why is there a load of stuff about Pleasureland in the rail section? Should we make a Pleasureland section, or mention it in economy?

Population

I have added up the Ward statistics on the UK National Statistics website for the 7 wards that cover Southport within Sefton to come up with an accurate figure for the population (see reference on article).

On the subject of the UK Office of National Statistics, could it be worth mentioning that Southport is home to one of its four branches, at Smedley Hydro? ONS is a relatively significant government agency, and to my knowlege, one of the towns largest employers. 81.156.205.69 (talk) 22:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Southport Reporter

The para on the Southport Reporter under History verges on a commercial, Talk:Southport/Archive,reporter

Is my Memory Faulty or Correct? Someone please help!

Having been brought up in Southport in the 1950s I seem to remember there was a large explosion at a petrol station not far from Meols Cop Secondary School. This would have been around 1957. I'll continue to attempt to find out if this actually happened.

Soarhead77 16:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Media

Just a quick log on and off... Thought I should put this before making any more changes...

Ref - Should Liverpool Echo etc. and all media names carry ref? Might be a good idea to do this.

I have spotted a bit about Southport GB? Is this site media or not? No ref made and reads very poorly...

A newly popular website covering the (unofficial) news of Southport is Southport GB. This website covers minor/trivial stories usually relayed from local taxi drivers to the website owner. Southport GB also contains a forum for its residents to moan/gossip about trivial matters and express their right-wing, reactionary and usually inappropriate comments about anyone or anything.

Should this be removed? Also it has a link to an article on Wikipedia with this exact name. This does not look good for the section and in my view it should be removed. 89.243.241.240 (talk) 19:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Well it looks like the orginal article was removed as not being notable, hence the dead link. So probably it too should be removed. - Galloglass 23:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Added the following paragraph, which was subsequently removed by 91.109.13.49:

"In addition, there are four other local radio stations that transmit to Southport: BBC Radio Merseyside, Radio City 96.7, Juice 107.6, and Rock FM 97.4."

On reflection, is this relevant to the article? I think it is, but understand that you could argue that more stations should be included. Any opinions? Snowy 1973 13:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Added a note that other forms of media are available in the area, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.235.13 (talk) 02:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Notable people

Notable people in Southport

Disappointed to find that the list of notable people from or resident in Southport has recently been edited without, in my view, proper justification. A good example of the kind of arrogant 'I know better than you' messing about that means Wikipedia is so much less valuable and reliable than it could be.

There are no firm rules on what constitutes 'notability' as far as I am aware. So, it's a subjective thing and therefore one person's opinion is as valid as another as long as people are not merely listing their friends and neighbour, etc.

However, some of the alterations made do not even make objective sense; the writer Tony Jordan has been a figure of considerable influence in British TV drama for 10 years or more and has had more impact in his field than, say, the guitarist Ollie Halsall. I'm wondering if the person making the edits is unaware that Tony Jordan grew up in Southport, and his parents still live in Ainsdale.

When the 'notable people' list was first added to the Southport page, it was to give an idea of people who not were not only born in the town but who, by living here, have made an impact on the town's identity. By that token, people like Dr Barnardo, Kenny Dalglish and Alan Hansen should certainly still be included. It's ridiculous to say that because someone was not born in the town, they don't have an influence. This is information of general interest.

Also, I don't believe that just because a person does not have their own Wikipedia page they should not be included. The best example of this is the Rev Marcus Morris, a figure of great influence in the field of comics publishing. There's a certain kind of weird paradox at work when someone is deemed unimportant because they're not on Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gleamhound (talk • contribs) 29 October 2007

Unfortunately so many marginal and non famous people have been added to this list that many users who read this list judged its was ok to add their friends, mother, sister brother etc. Now the main test for inclusion on Wikipeidia as a 'Notable Person' is pretty strict and laid down in WP:BIO. Many of those that were removed failed this test, some simply because of any lack of referencing on their article, others because their connection was minimal. I would very like to include Marcus Morris on the notable list but with no article extant there seems little chance of it meeting the test of WP:BIO at the present time. When such an article is created, you can be sure he will belong on the list. By all means propose any individual for re-inclusion here and we can all discuss their merits. Thanks Galloglass 19:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I happened to see this conversation, and have now created Marcus Morris stub page - certainly notable, as he's in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, and there were 3 different redlinks to him already. (Almost anyone in UK could have done this, as most public libraries provide online access to ODNB, from home, through their subscription.) PamD (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

---

Mark Ronson's mother Ann Dexter-Jones is from Southport, and Ronson has personally announced at his Liverpool gigs that he himself is from Southport (which was met by a roar of boos last time he was there). Despite her being a successful author abroad, can anyone explain why this is not worth adding? I tried to add it myself, and just because Ann Dexter-Jones was not a Wiki page it got repeatedly removed by some blithering purist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.241.58 (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Presumably the "blithering purist" had actually read WP:BIO, unlike yourself; but if you can establish notability for the women (say, enough to write an article about her) then she can be added. Swanny18 (talk) 20:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

References

I have just added section to the page to fit in with Wikipedia rules for references. If any one can add more please do. The more we have that backs up our information on this page the better it will be, as it will comply with the ref. rules on Wiki better. --81.129.235.13 (talk) 01:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)newuser-Appleman-Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.235.13 (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Magazines And Newspapers

Just added Lancashire Life but it does not appear to have a Wiki page. I think it should, so I am not 100% if I have missed it... Does it have an entry? If not should we add one? Can any one help?

This has been added to mainspace as Lancashire Life. Nk.sheridan   Talk 22:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Also what are the other two magazines in the Southport area. I know that the Champ. and Vis. do one each... If anyone could add them I think that would be fantastic. --81.129.235.13 (talk) 01:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Appelman-martin Sorry not been able to register tonight as I had hoped... Just a quick added section... Does any one know the start date and end date of the Southport Star newspaper? Also the Southport Advertiser? I have it on file in one of the books, but I can not locate it. I am also adding Coastlines, a magazine made by Sefton Council Ranger Service. --81.129.235.13 (talk) 02:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Will get to register some day.

Cleanup of Article

Hi all, I had a go at the lead today. I'm surprised this article got a B-Class rating. If we want it to go to GA class as is Runcorn it needs more work.Nk.sheridan   Talk 23:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation into Chinese Wikipedia

The 15:54, 8 August 2008 The Rambling Man version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 18:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Architecture

The section opens with :-

"Southport has many fascinating buildings and features. Buildings and Gardens of architectural interest to note are:"

It then goes on to list numerous buildings, six of which aren't actually there any longer, along with at least one garden that has been built on. The list is then followed by a comment which clearly violates the neutral point of view policy. This whole section needs an overhaul, and perhaps a bit of information adding on the various sites. Maybe even incorporate into the Landmarks section? Any comments? Skinsmoke (talk) 01:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Whats wrong with the section? ithink its much better than the "landmarks" section, which should actually be called "Attractions"

It doesnt matter if there are buildings in the architecture list that have gone (demolished), as the buildings that have gone have been important parts of southport and its history and architectural history, and maybe influencing other buildings.

As for the comment at the end i dont see what is wrong with it as it is more of a statement saying there are many other buildings that are private houses, (now surely you dont want every individual one listing) which are architectually important, that have been demolished/ or may be luck to still remain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.67.243 (talk) 20:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

In that case the section should start:-

"'Southport used to have many fascinating buildings and features but these have since been demolished. Derelict sites that once housed buildings and gardens of architectural interest to note are:"

The problem with the final paragraph is that it expresses an opinion, which is directly contrary to Wikipedia rules. It needs rephrasing in a neutral tone per WP:NPOV. If in doubt about how to improve this section, check out a few of the Good articles or Featured articles from the United Kingdom. Skinsmoke (talk) 11:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

Despite the names, it's standard practice to use Template:Infobox UK place for settlements and Template:Infobox settlement for boroughs. Hence the Trafford article uses Template:Infobox settlement whereas Sale, Greater Manchester, uses Template:Infobox UK place (both FAs). It's detailed in Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Infobox*, although not explained as such. I'm not sure why one is preferred to the other, presumably the fields are considered more appropriate for different types of places, but it's likely that someone will revert the current infobox. If there are any concerns, using Template:Infobox UK place has been no obstacle to many articles on towns getting FA status. Nev1 (talk) 23:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

History

As you can see I have re-shaped and editted the history section of this article. I know it looks a little limp at the moment, but I will improve it shortly. I have been reading about local history lately and so I have lots of good information. But I still need people's help to get this section... and article to a good tandard. I would love to see people's contributions.

I aslo think there should be a sub-section on Southport's role during the WW's, but my knowledge is limited on that area.

Just incase you don't know our aim is to get this article to GA Satus. --93gregsonl2 (talk) 17:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)