Jump to content

Talk:Slaughterbridge

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) at 08:01, 17 February 2024 (Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Old English

[edit]

Changing Anglo-Saxon to 'Old English' is unnecessary: it is the same language under different names and some linguists refer one rather than the other.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 11:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images added

[edit]

I have uploaded images of Slaughterbridge to Wiki Commons and embedded them in the article. Therefore I have also removed the photoreq template. Andy F (talk) 16:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Split proposed

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Not split. Very stale, with only two opposes since 2018. Salix alba (talk): 13:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article appears to comprise information on three separate settlements under the name of one. If this is the usual method for handling adjoining settlements, then I withdraw this proposal. However, I cannot recall seeing this practice elsewhere and if the settlements are not split to independent articles, I would expect a page title that indicates that it is about multiple settlements and text that explains why they are grouped together. —Ost (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Split into three seperate articles; quite strange why they are together. SmartyPants22 (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; nothing would be gained by making three articles except the enforcement of a rule. Their location can be understood very well as it is.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 14:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment:I don't think any of the settlements are significant enough to justify three separate articles, but I don't think grouping them together on a whim (and with an inadequate title) is particularly satisfactory either. WP:UKCITIES advises covering small settlements under the relevant civil parish in these cases, so I would be inclined to merge the Slaughterbridge content to Camelford and that for the other hamlets to Forrabury and Minster. Jellyman (talk) 18:18, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dowager Lady Falmouth

[edit]

"Charlotte Boscawen, Dowager Lady Falmouth (the daughter of Hugh Boscawen" I'm pretty sure she was Hugh Boscawen's widow, not his daughter, otherwise she wouldn't have been Dowager Lady Falmouth. Bodrugan (talk) 11:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]