Jump to content

Talk:Chorlton-cum-Hardy: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 134: Line 134:


Another mention, this time as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in [[Beyond Our Ken]] from [[1960]]. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. [[Special:Contributions/86.12.129.2|86.12.129.2]] ([[User talk:86.12.129.2|talk]]) 11:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Another mention, this time as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in [[Beyond Our Ken]] from [[1960]]. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. [[Special:Contributions/86.12.129.2|86.12.129.2]] ([[User talk:86.12.129.2|talk]]) 11:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Another mention, this time in [[Doctor in the House]]. I don't think it was the 'rude' bit of the name that script-writers found funny, just that it was used as a generic, comical Northern name. [[Special:Contributions/86.12.129.2|86.12.129.2]] ([[User talk:86.12.129.2|talk]]) 13:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Yet another mention, this time in [[Doctor in the House]]. I don't think it was the 'rude' bit of the name that script-writers found funny, just that it was used as a generic, comical Northern name. [[Special:Contributions/86.12.129.2|86.12.129.2]] ([[User talk:86.12.129.2|talk]]) 13:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


It's ironic that in giving the area a name they thought more bucolic and historic, the Victorians have triggered a century-and-a-half of public hilarity. i don't think it's so much the sexual innuendo, as the sheer incongruity that people find funny. [[Special:Contributions/193.63.210.2|193.63.210.2]] ([[User talk:193.63.210.2|talk]]) 13:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
It's ironic that in giving the area a name they thought more bucolic and historic, the Victorians have triggered a century-and-a-half of public hilarity. i don't think it's so much the sexual innuendo, as the sheer incongruity that people find funny. [[Special:Contributions/193.63.210.2|193.63.210.2]] ([[User talk:193.63.210.2|talk]]) 13:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:05, 11 November 2012

WikiProject iconGreater Manchester C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCities C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconUK geography C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Incomplete coverage]

I Really think its needs to cover the many different parts of chorlton. Like Nell Lane, and Mersey Bank.

Its not all Chorlton-Ville, We dont all Juggle and drink on chortlon green.


I should hope not. We Chorlton Green drinkers know how to spell and punctuate.

Although the "Estates" are technically part of Chorlton, they are classed as being part of "Barlow Moor", if you are interested. Anyway, what's to talk about two residential, largely council, estates anyway? Unless you want to talk about the crime stats of course.


See, Now that attitude the problem, You "Chorlton Greeners" act all stuck up like that, then you wonder why we steal your cars?

The Estates are the heart of chorlton, and manchester, without us there would be no "chorlton green"

Maybe you should into mersey bank or nell lane estates and express your views there? I doubt you would.


If you do steal cars it's because you are criminals. "The Estates" are residential add-ons and play little part in the culture or development of Chorlton. That's not a criticism, just a fact. Chorlton Green is hundreds of years old....[no, it isn't, it's just over a hundred86.12.129.12 (talk) 10:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)] can you say the same of the estates?[reply]

As for expressing my views in Nell lane or Merseybank? I wouldn't do that because a) there would be no point, and b) I don't want my head kicked in. This is common sense surely?

I don't live in Chorlton Green by the way, I drink there from time to time.

It is wrong to say that until the 1990's Chorlton was working class whatever that means. The development of the area was by those workers who could afford to live away from their work in Manchester. Many of these lived in rented properties in what is now referred to as Chorlton Green area and many followed with the building of the council and private estates between the wars. They kept the green pubs and local shops viable before the students and trendies took over the area.

Person A, you're an idiot and Person B, you're a snob. There are plenty of people living in the estates who can spell and punctuate and aren't criminals. Also, I know how to use wikipedia properly. 80.7.186.209 (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Val Stevens

The article for Val Stevens asserts no independent notability apart from representing the Chorlton ward. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abid Chohan. JASpencer 09:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added Sheila Newman. JASpencer 18:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Added Angela Gallagher. Rhyddfrydol 01:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose any political merging with these people. They are elected officials, and have no bearing on the area of Chorlton other than that.

It is sensible to mention their involvement, but to go further and attempt to absorb their own entries is inappropriate and I WILL oppose it. --Hardylane 22:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose the merger of councillors with their wards - not only does this make it much harder to keep track of which councillors exist and that the information is correct, but it adds information that isn't really relevant to the Chorlton-cum-Hardy article. Val Stevens is notable - she is the Deputy Leader of Manchester City Council. Thegraham 09:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These three councillors are only notable because they represent Chorlton-cum-Hardy on Manchester City Council. The individuals outwith their representation for Chorlton-cum-Hardy are not notable. I strongly support the merger. Rhyddfrydol 01:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the councillor entries should be removed altogether, since their existance in the Wikipedia only serve to publicise themselves. None of them have brought anything of merit or note to Chorlton. I continue to oppose having their name on the Chorlton page. Hardylane 19:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would support the removal of all these councillor links: two years later and Angela Gallagher is in another party and another ward. Councillors are not in practice going to stay as representatives for the same wards indefinitely. The information about who is a councillor should just appear in the article for the council itself.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. 5 years later, Sheila Newman's article still contains no information worthy of being on Wikipedia. Simply mentioning her name in the Chorlton article (as it currently exists) already covers everything of importance. - Frankie1969 (talk) 02:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but there's nothing to merge. Let's prod it and see what happens. Malleus Fatuorum 02:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Goodwin

Harry Goodwin was mentioned in this article and then edited out as not notable. As his connection with Top of the Pops shows he does have the notability: however he should really have his own article first and then a link from Chorlton.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Williamson

Mention of him has been removed: it could be added again with a reliable citation.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These "Söhne und Töchter der Stadt" (sons and daughters of the town):-* Joe Ridgway (* 1873; † unbekannt), Fußballspieler * Percy Courtman (1888–1917), Schwimmer * Edward Smouha (1909–1992), Sprinter * Anthony Powell (* 1935), Kostümbildner

Moving Manchester

The ISSN belonged to another work altogether (Manchester : BBDM Ltd, [2001]- a magazine). This one is both a volume in the L & C A S Transactions and an individual book apparently without an ISBN.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

etymology

Doesn't X-cum-Y normally mean two parishes, X and Y, were merged long after the period of naming? —Tamfang (talk) 05:18, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This etymology comes from Cooper's recent book and is the least convincing of those given as both names were quite separate. In this case Hardy was originally just a farm and Chorlton an Anglo-Saxon "tun". The combination with "cum" (Latin with) is much later.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:19, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The name is a competely invented form that first emerged in the late C19th.(Pawelmichal (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

" The boundary between the two is Chorlton Brook and Hardy is recorded at least as early as the 14th century.<ref>Lloyd (1972); p. 12-14</ref> John Lloyd's book includes part of a document in the Harleian Manuscripts in the British Library Harley 2112, fol. 172. How does the "incorrect source" apply? "completely invented" really needs a supporting citation.

The X-cum-Y names will not necessarily be parishes. Both Chorlton and Hardy are names from the Anglo-Saxon period long before the parish divisions which came in later centuries.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, most town names are early, but are there any early -cum- names? If not, then the combination must be late, and the two names Chorlton and Hardy cannot have an OE etymology as a single phrase. — Incidentally Ekwall says of Hardy, "Second element ĒG 'island'. The first is doubtful." —Tamfang (talk) 07:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have rewritten this in parts. It is only Cooper who gives the version translating it into a single phrase.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point about the citation. The manuscript JM Lloyd refers to may be a transcription or other error, as niether with- or cum- Hardy are mentioned anywhere else I have looked, prior to the period of gentrification. I knew JM Lloyd toward the end of his life [he was the sub-postmaster at Upper Chorlton Road, as was his father before him]. He contributed an enormous ammount to his community, and to historical studies of the area. He did, however, tend to draw conclusions and fill lacunae, and his maps are in no wise reliable. For instance: in his supposed 'Tithe Map' of 1845 he places the 'Pop Cottage' on the entrance to Dark Lane Farm off the Trafford Road [where Railway Terrace now stands]. Many accounts speak of the occupiers being called on to help travellers to Hulme cross the Black Brook when in spate. The Black Brook was culverted by Samuel Brooks, and follows the course of modern Upper Chorlton Road and the Trafford boundary. Therefore the cottage would have been several hundred yards north of his purported location.Pawelmichal (talk) 13:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There could be two John Lloyds confused here: the author of The Township of Chorlton-cum-Hardy (1972) was a retired schoolmaster resident in Chorlton who died in 1991.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History

Withington doesn't warrant a mention in the Domesday Book either. I wish I could remember which late mediaeval or early modern writer described the whole arc south from Manchester to the Mersey as "an reedy, marshy place".

The Manchester Guide. Manchester: Joseph Aston, 1804 has this on the same theme: "On the south side of the town, although there is no coal, there is a good equivalent in the extensive peat bogs, which furnish fuel (provincially called "Turf"), which in the absence of coal would be deemed invaluable. Scarcely any other fuel is used in the neighbourhood of the bogs, but in the town, it is only used for the purpose of kindling the more favourite fuel, coal." (p. 8)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson's Moss

I note your edit. You are of course correct that the area was not part of parochial Chorlton. However, prior to its' creation, the area of Whalley Range that was in the Manor of Withington, known as Jackson's Moss, would have been relevant to any overview of Chorlton, as it was a source of income and fuel, not merely a no-man's land. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.129.12 (talk) 10:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chorlton and class

Felix Folio Secundus makes a valuable point about Chorlton's class composition. Although the area was not mired in rural poverty, it was essentially a backwater until the construction of Wilbraham Road. The Egerton Estate, which controlled the reversion of agricultural leases, at first intended all development to be 'upper class', at both the Chorlton and Fallowfield ends. However,, like the developer of Whalley Range, they found the pressure to move into the highly-profitable upper-middle range irrestisable. This trend accelerated after the coming of the railway. We associate terraced housing with the working-class, but the terraces built here were for the new industrial managerial class. No artisanal building on any scale [apart from near the Green for the laundry, and on the site of the Priory was allowed]. It was only in the inter-war period, with the Egerton Estate relinquishing control to Manchester Corporation of large sections of land, that any social or working-class housing was built. Because this land tended to be on the outskirts of the district, it led to the us-and-them feeling personified in the exchanges at the beginning of this discussion page. The tremendous rise in the value of the land has meant that no significant additions to the lower end of the housing stock have been made since the Nell Lane estate was built in the early '80's. Even the bed-sit land element of local housing has gradually been phased out. In the circs, then, a certain ammount of class tension is perhaps, inevitable. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Slow Train

Mentioning Slow Train here is unnecessary as it is covered more fully in the article Chorlton Metrolink station.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC

Duly removed. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toponymy

Apparently some editors lack the sense of humour to appreciate the comic potential in the area's name. Shame. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest issue to deal with here is that of sourcing. The reference was there to support the fact that Round the Horne mentioned Chorlton-cum-Hardy in an episode in 1967. Everything else, the Hansard debates, the Goon Show and the Wilson quote, should have been removed per our policy on verifiability. That much doesn't need discussion. Whether this should have been included in the first place may boil down to what you would expect to see in an encyclopedia. Would you expect Britannica to mention that "cum-Hardy" is a funny name? To this end Wikipedians used how the subject is treated in third party reliable sources. It may be true that Chorlton was mentioned on the Goon Show and Round the Horne, but unless reliable sources independent of either show considers it important then it probably shouldn't be included here. Perhaps a newspaper article discusses the name and how comedians have used it? Nev1 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good points, well made. You can't compare WP to Britannica ? 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stranger things have happened. Nev1 (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Indeed you can't compare Britannica with WP, as Britannica doesn't even have an article on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. Malleus Fatuorum 17:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


It is a pity the form Chorlton with Hardy became obsolete: it was used in the 19th century as here (1830) and in the Victoria County History of the county of Lancaster (here (1911).--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While depriving the writers of Round the Horne, it certainly has a ring to it, even if the seperate existence of Hardy is debatable. Not faux-historic and bucolic enough for the Victorian property developers though. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 10:28, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another mention, this time as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in Beyond Our Ken from 1960. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 11:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another mention, this time in Doctor in the House. I don't think it was the 'rude' bit of the name that script-writers found funny, just that it was used as a generic, comical Northern name. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's ironic that in giving the area a name they thought more bucolic and historic, the Victorians have triggered a century-and-a-half of public hilarity. i don't think it's so much the sexual innuendo, as the sheer incongruity that people find funny. 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chorlton Conservative Club

Nice edits, FFS. Wasn't the Lloyds briefly a fire station of some sort ? Also, somewhere in an MEN article there's mention that Harry H Corbett of Steptoe & Son started his career in am-dram at the Con Club, but a quick search wasn't enough to locate it. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; according to page 97 of Lloyd's 1972 book the Chorlton hand-pump and ladder for firefighting was acquired in 1888 and kept under the wall next to the Lloyd's. Page 21 of Cliff Hayes's 1999 book has what he thinks is a picture of the Lloyd's with the fire equipment outside. I have heard that Corbett information somewhere in the past but cannot remember where. It should be possible to verify it in this new book: Corbett, S. (2012). Harry H. Corbett - The Front Legs of the Cow. The History Press, Stroud, Glos. ISBN 978-0752476827 --Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, life's too short to read a luvvie's autobiography - but someone, somewhere, will do it, sometime. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:15, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Egerton, pere et fils

These two men were, more than any others, responsible for the development of modern Chorlton. Where would it be more appropriate and accessible to enlarge on this - in this article, or in their biographies ? 86.12.129.2 (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on this page

Kudos to the excellent User:Mr Stephen and his anti-vandalism patrols.

The idea that Chorlton is full of wankers is merely unsourced opinion, until there's a valid study. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of wankers, at least it looks as if User:Onorem has ended his anti-Semitic vendetta against certain contributors 194.70.181.1 (talk) 09:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

500th Anniversary

Good call, FFS. An anniversary by definition is one date only. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What was Chorlton for ?

Given the dearth of materials, how can we be sure of anything prior to the foundation of the chapel ? And also, it's not on the way to anywhere, or at the confluence of any rivers, so is it possible that it was not a cohesive settlememt at all, but a series of isolated homesteads in a marsh ? 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There does not seem to be a cohesive entity called Chorlton prior to the establishmentof the Chapel. Even then, the disparate parts, such as Martledge, continued to have an identity until the mass housing boom following the construction of Wilbraham Road and then the railway. Settlement in river valleys made use of the flooded areas for crop growth - risky, but worth it. The surrounding forests would have provide adequate game. The marshiness of the area may well have followed on from the deforestation by farmers. The dearth of early material does lead to speculative entries such as in this article, but the chapel would have been established in Chorlton to fulfil a need, so some population would have existed in a cohesive manner in the area. And don't worry about abuse from Fatuous Fistula. As his Cod Latin name implies, he's not the sharpest tool in the box. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Beech Road was known earlier as Market Place, which indicates that the area was a focal point for the scattered and sparsely-populated settlements. It's also a clue as to why the chapel was sited there, on what otherwise was a cul-de-sac on the edge of the floodplain. Some confusion is caused by the centre of the village moving during the Victorian era, due to the construction of the railway and Wilbraham Road. By happy accident it allowed the preservation of the historical Chorlton, even if much of what we see today is a Victorian fake. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 11:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Economy

It would be nice if a section about the local economy were included, such as large employers, employment types, etc. FreeFlow99 (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you research it and add it then - that's the Wiki bit in the name 86.12.129.2 (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]