I'd raise this with JemmyH and at the Wigan Borough talk page. At a first glance it seems the terms are interchangable, but then-again, parts of Wigan Borough still use Townships, so may mean something else.
A district to me suggests a populated, or built up area - it may be best used for those kinds of areas, whilst component area may be better for rural or more obsure areas. Jhamez8401:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, Man2, you know where the population figure covers, it's your 'speciality subject', and it's not Wigan (which is the place the article is about). That number needs replacing with a true figure, but where do we find one? the only 'census' being the one taken for the 'Wigan Urban Area' by the NSO. 80.193.161.8915:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Thanks for the reply, in which you ask for a citation to show that Wigan covers three and a half square miles. Did I not send you a list of all the component parts of Wigan Metropolitan Borough, showing the sizes of all the towns and settlements that make up that borough? Did all the areas not add up to the seventy seven square miles that is claimed by the council? Of course it did. Where is the list which I sent? 80.193.161.8919:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH. PS more news to follow ....[reply]
I took one of my bikes for it's MOT today. Whilst it was waiting it's turn, I had a stroll around Wigan and took it upon myself to call in at the planning and regeneration office where, amongst other things, I asked about the 'population figure' for Wigan. The person I asked asked someone else, who disappeared upstairs and returned ten minutes later with some info.. This is what he said ......... "It's the 2001 Census for Wigan Borough this is, nowt to do with the statistics office, they're 'down south', don't know what they're talking about, how can you call Skelmersdale Wigan, it's full of scousers". We looked at the screen and a map, ten areas prominently marked. "Borough's divided up into these bits and there's ten of 'em". ... "Ashton but not the Garswood or Downall Green parts, Atherton, Golborne and Lowton are one, Hindley Abram and Platt bridge are one, Leigh, Shevington, Tyldesley and part of Astley are one too". "OK?". "Now then, Pemberton, Wigan and Ince are split into two, that bit's (points on map) called Wigan North, that bit's (moves finger) called Wigan South".
The 'Wigan South' section covered Worsley Mesnes, Goose Green, Pemberton, Newtown, Marsh Green, Kitt Green (in fact, Pemberton township). The 'Wigan North' section covered Ince, Whelley, Wigan and Aspull. So, 'Wigan', the place called 'Wigan', the town of the name 'Wigan', was 'in' 'Wigan North'. I say 'in' Wigan North because it was not the only place there, there was Ince, Whelley and Aspull too. The POPULATION FIGURE given for Wigan North (a combination of Ince, Whelley, Wigan and Aspull) in the 2001 Census, shown on the screen, in a Wigan MBC office, was ..... 35932!
When I asked him what he thought the figure for Wigan alone would be, he replied, "Well, Aspull's not so big, so it's all between Ince area and Beech Hill and Springfield half of Wigan innit, I'd say about half of that figure".
Add them all up and you'll get ... 301429 which is the figure quoted by the council for the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan Population. Man2, you can change the figure on the Wigan article if you want. Those Americans sure know their stuff, they know more about the population of Wigan than the population of Wigan. 80.193.161.8921:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH[reply]
PS. ... The roadsign in Pemberton will be from the 1904 joining of Pemberton with Wigan Borough.
The population figure in 2001, of Ince, Wigan and Aspull was 35932. How could the Wigan, alone, figure have been 60754 in 1901? Those census results I was shown by the council are 'official'. There is no doubt that Pemberton is part of Wigan 'borough'(along with several other towns). It's also part of Greater Manchester (along with several other towns). It's in England (along with several other towns). Chorlton is regarded as a town. Manchester, the part which IS Manchester and is known by no other name apart from Manchester, is 2.6 square miles. 80.193.161.8915:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Pemberton is not 'in' Wigan, it's 'next door'
A borough is a self-governing (to some extent) township, ie. has it's own council. A metropolitan borough is created by a joining together of several local councils to form one body, for administrative purposes. Pemberton council joined together with Wigan Borough council, in 1904, and formed a partnership which was still the Wigan Borough. It consisted of Wigan and Pemberton. Two places. If the same partnership had been called 'Pemberton' Borough, Wigan wouldn't have been 'in' Pemberton. That's because they are two separate places. The River Douglas DOES separate Wigan from Pemberton. All this 'council' lark that you lot are into really is ridiculous. Council areas are purely for organisational purposes. Take Astley for instance. Half is controlled by Wigan Borough council and the other half by Salford council. Take Ashton. Part of it is controlled by St.Helens Borough council, most by Wigan Borough council. Astley is neither 'in' Wigan or Salford. Ashton is neither in Wigan or St.Helens. They are merely governed by a 'unified council' that happens to carry the name of the head town. Is Wigan 'in' Manchester? Of course not. Was Wigan ever 'in' Lancaster? Of course not. Is Golborne 'in' Warrington? It has a Warrington postcode. Is Garswood on the banks of the Mersey? It's in Merseyside. Is Pemberton 'in' Wigan? Of course not, it's 'in' Pemberton! 80.193.161.8923:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Swinley, Beech Hill, Poolstock etc. are all settlements within the outskirts of the township of Wigan, built on land within Wigans boundaries(I'm not 100% on Poolstock though). Pemberton is NOT a settlement within the township of Wigans boundaries. Pemberton is a seperate place. It has 'officially recorded boundaries' and it contains other settlements within these boundaries.
You already know that the ONS include Skelmersdale and Upholland, as well as Ince, in their population figure. At least the councils census was taken using a more local area, only including Ince and Aspull, and the figure they came up with, including Ince and Aspull, is 35932! 80.193.161.8921:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.
PS ... and NO I'm not calling you a liar, I just think you don't know much about your surrounding area.[reply]
In the case of what is now the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, the County Borough of Oldham (Oldham now) was an autonomous local government district, because of it's size, population and industry. Crompton Urban District, and other such surrounding districts were not under Oldham's justriction at this level, though they formed part of the Oldham (UK Parliament constituency), and so civic infrastructure was based there for Westminster.
These issues meant that Oldham had the largest infrastructure, civic buildings and capability to be set as the administrative centre of a metropolitan borough.
This would be simillar in Bolton (county borough surrounded by urban/rural districts), Rochdale (same), Stockport (same), Warrington (same) and across the country.
Why Swinton, Greater Manchester was chosen for Salford, I do not know. Though it was a large local government district with a significant town hall.
Tradition in Action: The historical evolution of Greater Manchester is the best source I have (its really comprehensive); I'll take a flick through and try to find some answers. Any reason you ask? Jhamez8403:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Man2, I believe that if you read the available history books on England, Lancashire and Wigan, everything would fall into place.
Regarding the area of the 'original' Wigan Borough. Before 1904 the county borough of Wigan consisted of Wigan. It was granted in 1246. Then Pemberton joined up. I think it remained Wigan and Pemberton up to 1974.
Wigan was 'important' to the surrounding towns as a 'central place' for the meeting/getting together/dealing etc. of the business people/traders of the time. A 'common ground' if you will. It was where the church was built.
You mention Chorlton being a 'village', before being 'integrated' into Manchester. Maybe Chorlton is integrated 'with' Manchester, but in the same way as Manchester is integrated 'with' Chorlton and not 'into'. Chorlton is nowadays classed as a town. It's still called Chorlton and Manchester is still called Manchester. However, Manchester has 'city status' and people generally refer to anywhere around there to be 'Manchester', even Salford, which is also a city with city status. Wigan is a town in itself albeit an administrative centre. It doesn't include Pemberton. Or Ince. Or Orrell. It doesn't have 'suburbs' in the officially recognised sense of the word. It is, relatively small, covering 3.5 ish square miles.
Food for thought. London is smaller than Wigan, but much more important in the great scheme of things!
I've checked through your points on Jemmy's talk page. With regards to historic populations, www.visionofbritain.org.uk can provide figures, as well as supportive text.
If Chorlton became part of Manchester in 1904, as did Pemberton to Wigan in the same year, under what terms was this made? Why was it this specific year (was it an act of government?)... I think if we know the answer to this we may be onto something. Jhamez8417:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard a taller tale in my life than your last message. You're dreaming again. All you want to talk about is 'political areas'. An 'urban district' is a political control area, so is a 'borough'. Try to forget council areas. Pemberton is a different place than Wigan. Pemberton has smaller settlements within it. Wigan has smaller settlements within it. Wigan's smaller settlements do not include Pemberton. Pemberton's smaller settlements do not include Wigan. Pemberton is not 'in' Wigan, that's why it's called Pemberton. Ince isn't 'in' Wigan either, neither is Aspull, so the population figure you are replacing is wrong. If you look at the 'evidence' I provided, you will see that the population figure for Wigan North and Wigan South amount to 73184. That figure is for Ince, Wigan, Aspull and Pemberton. Wigan is less densely populated than both Ince and Pemberton. Wigan is listed in Wigan North, Pemberton is listed in Wigan South, so Pemberton is not included in the Wigan North population figure of 35932. You don't know what you're talking about! 80.193.161.8921:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Man2 said this ......
... You will notice the phrase 'Town Centre' appearing in both the North and South 'Townships'. It would be sensible to assume that the phrase 'Town Centre' is referring to that of Wigan town centre and additionally to assert that the said 'Town Centre' is one and the same locality, simply split into the 'Northern 'edge' of Town Centre' (in Wigan North) and the 'Southern 'edge' Town Centre' (in Wigan South), would appear to be acceptable. Would it not?
If the above assumption is accepted then the argument put forward by JemmyH is proven false. The Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council list the 'town centre' of Wigan in two adjoining 'townships', therefore JemmyH's assertion that "the town of Wigan is within a statistical area called Wigan North" is clearly wrong. (Wigan article discussion page).
I can now confirm that 'Wigan North' consists of .... Ince (Higher AND Lower), WIGAN (the town of), and Aspull. (population figure, 35,032 as of 2001 census). 'Wigan South' consists of .... Pemberton, Winstanley and Orrell. (population figure, 37,252 as of 2001 census). THIS IS CONDUCIVE OF MY CONTRIBUTED VERIFIABLE SOURCE ..... [[1]]
Man2, I have consulted Wigan MBC 'Wigan South Township Manager' to try to resolve the argument. This is the resulting e-mail from him .............................................................
>From : <D.Barton@wiganmbc.gov.uk>
>Sent : 26 March 2007 09:32:45
>To : jameshanson
>Subject : RE: Wigan South, Wigan North townships
>
>Go to previous message | Go to next message | Delete | Inbox
>
>Dear Sir,
>Wigan Town centre is wholly in Wigan North Township.
>Yours sincerely, D.Barton
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: jameshanson
>Sent: 23 March 2007 17:09
>To: Barton, Darren
>Subject: Wigan South, Wigan North townships
>
>Hello Darren,
>Would/could you please inform me as to the following .... What part of the
>Wigan 'town centre' is in Wigan North and what part of the Wigan 'town
>centre' is in Wigan South?
>Thank you, James Hanson.
The BOUNDARY between WIGAN NORTH and WIGAN SOUTH is the boundary between WIGAN and PEMBERTON, and is, for the most part, the RIVER DOUGLAS.
Conflict of sources
If there is a conflict of sources, and both qualify as reliable, then we need context.
An approach could be:
Some/most sources indicate that Pemberton forms part of the town of Wigan <ref>SOURCE1</ref>, reflecting the 1904 Local Government Act (????) which amalgamated Pemberton into the County Borough of Wigan. This approach is taken by some local government literature which includes the population of Pemberton as part of Wigan.<ref>SOURCE2</ref>
However, other sources indicate that Pemberton constitutes a settlement in its own right,<ref>SOURCE3</ref> being seperated from Wigan by the River Douglas. Pemberton for centuries formed as its own township<ref>SOURCE4</ref> ... etc
This could be adopted if there is no likely resolve in the short-to-mid term. However, this 1904 link appears to be a good lead. I must state that using personal e-mails won't qualify as reliable sources, as they have not been published, so this may be a dead end for both you and JemmyH. Jhamez8413:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is the right way forwards. This way we are not saying what Pemberton is, we are saying that sources say this, and that its status is ambiguous.
I've passed comment at the Wigan talk page about sources. But I am really pleased and impressed that you are both now using sources to counter each other, and showing a willingness to research and engage with reference materials. It's the only way to solve this.
Man2, how could you explain this load of garbage from the same Wigan MBC site page ..... 'The firm of Marks and Spencer was founded in Wigan when Michael Marks joined forces with Thomas Spencer in 1894 and for 3 years after this date the town was the company's headquarters.' TOTALLY FALSE, and Marks and Spencer have already told Wigan MBC about it. But that's another story. 80.193.161.8920:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Thoughts? Moi?
Hi Man2! Good to see you again back on the scene! I'd noticed you'd reduced the amount of editting time a little lately (a blasphemy for any upstanding Wikipedia addict I'm sure), which is a shame!
With regards to the coments left on my talk page - yes; until conclusive, reliable, contemporary, published sources are found, we should adopt the approach that Pemberton forms part of Wigan - the evidence is too great.
Assuming this is resolved, any plans to move other sections of Wikipedia forwards? I've identified several issues with which several quality editors could get their teeth into (some possibilities posted here). Any luck with the geograph thing? Jhamez8422:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What 'evidence' is that then? No-one has provided ANY evidence to say that Pemberton is 'part of' the town of Wigan. Pemberton HAS clear boundaries. It is definately 'part of' the Wigan Borough and 'part of' the Wigan Parish but not a 'part of' Wigan. The boundaries on this map remain unchanged ....[[2]] 80.193.161.8919:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.[reply]
Formal mediation
I'm tired of this issue about the status of Wigan and JemmyH's daily barrage of comments - I believe it's breaking the spirit of Wikipedia for the related articles.
He's constantly misquoting me, addressing me in talk page headings, sending messages to my talk page, using contradictive and ancient source material all for an absolutely trivial matter that has been verified several times over.
I think we should take our case to the Wikipedia:Mediation committee. They would naturally agree with us, and would possibly place resrictions upon JemmyH and the Wigan articles. I think it is the only way to stop this, as it's not fair to us as contributors, or the articles themselves. Jhamez8423:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a little research. This guy has done this on other webspaces, namely WiganWorld, and is a self-styled retired gangster, trolling in the same way, with nobody agreeing with him.[3]. We can use this for evidence. Jhamez8412:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He was blocked today for 48 hours (see here). He brought a case against me at the administrators notice board, but administrators checked his and my editting history and instantly enforced a block.
I'm not rejoycing, as I think it is a shame. Next time (assuming this may happen again) I think it will be a much longer block, if not indefinate.
On another note, I'm really sorry you are feeling bored of the Wikipedia project. Please don't! Hang in here, you've made some real good contributions and it would be a shame to loose a quality edittor such as yourself. Things are changing, and I'm keen to see your knowledge capitalised upon. Jhamez8401:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still around?
You still around? Your edits seem to have reduced (much like mine). Would be a shame to loose you as an editor! Hope all is well, Jhamez8413:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
May seem like old news now, but Manchester was recently listed as a good article, try and make as much effort as you can with trying to make it featured.
Manchester Airport has seen unprecedented vandalism from anonymous editors recently, on 24th September it was protected by MastCell for a period of 1 week. Make sure to visit the page (after that date) regularly so we can stamp out any "bad edits".
Try to invite more members to this project. As much as a streamlined team is good, the more editors we have the broader the range we can cover.
Your contribution history suggests you've not editted Wikipedia since around April of this year, which is a great shame. As such, I'm going to remove your usership of the Greater Manchester WikiProject - purely for cleanup purposes.
Should you rejoin Wikipedia again in the future you are, of course, more than welcome to rejoin the project. All the best in the meantime, Jza8402:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Sorry I missed your reply amongst some other messages I'd left! Great to see you back! Hope to see you around soon! -- Jza84· (talk)22:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationale for Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.png
Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.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.
Fair use rationale for Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.png
Image:Greater Manchester County Council Arms.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.
Great to hear from you! Yes I'd lost all hope of seeing you around again. It would b great if you do return, Wigan has been really neglected of late and we really need a local to help with a push to improve it. The problems of the past seem to have disappeared thankfully, so your usership should be much more productive and enjoyable. -- Jza84 · (talk)17:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Man2, and welcome to Wikiproject Greater Manchester! Thank you for your generous offer to help contribute. I'm sure your input will be much appreciated. I hope you enjoy contributing here and being a Greater Manchester Project Wikipedian!
As a project we aim to have all our articles compliant with the various editing policies and guidelines. If you are contributing an article, it is good practice to ensure that it’s properly referenced with reliable sources, otherwise any contentious content may be removed by another editor. A good starting point for articles about settlements in Greater Manchester is the WP:UKCITIES guideline.
If you have any questions, feel free to discuss anything on the project talk page, or to leave a message on my own talk page. Please remember to sign all your comments, and be bold with your ideas. Again, welcome, and happy editing!
Peterloo Massacre was nominated for FAC on 6 April. So far it has received support for FAS but feel free join the discussion here.
The reduction of WP:GM GAs, mentioned in the last issue, has been tackled with Buckton Castle and Oasis (band) being passed on 9 March and Upper Brook Street Chapel, Manchester on 7 April. We now have 13 GAs due to hard work of our contributors. Well done!
WP:GM still is still the leading local British WikiProject. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 6 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 FAs each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion (here) and is an important issue for WP:GM.
As mentioned above, new aims have been decided. See the right hand column for more details.
Member News
There are now 44 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester! A warm welcome to the 5 new members that have joined us since March:
Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!
New Aims
The completion of all but one of the short term aims set last December resulted in a discussion on WT:GM to set new aims for the WikiProject. They are:
Obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome.
But before rushing ahead with these new aims, let's not forget the one that got away last time: to obtain B -> GA status for Rochdale, Wigan, Bury, Bolton and Stockport. Most of these articles are in poor condition and in need of repair. Good quality images are urgently needed also. Let's make sure that this aim doesn't stay off our radar much longer.
Don't Forget...
Images! The shortage of good images was mentioned in the last issue and still hasn't been resolved! A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need in common.
Assessment "Assess and review all relevant articles for quality, importance and progress" is one of our mid-term aims. At the present moment, there are only 43 unassessed articles. This task could be completed well before the next newsletter is out.
The Peterloo Massacre article was promoted to FA on 12 April. One of our top priority articles, it had previously been only start class. The process began on 25th March and since then underwent over 700 edits before the end of April, with Jza84, Malleus Fatuarum, and Richerman making significant contributions to the rapid development of the article. Ddstretch and Mr Stephen also contributed to discussions on the article talk page.
Perhaps the most unusual event of April 2008 for the project has surrounded the Denshaw article. Denshaw is a village of about 500 people in Saddleworth, Oldham, which attracted media attention due to vandalism of the stub class article. Once this was brought to the project's attention, efforts were made to improve the article which led to a successful DYK? nomination and might even advance it to GA status with a bit more effort. In April there were over 19,000 visitors who saw the project in action. Contributors included Jza84, Ddstretch, Malleus Fatuarum, Hassocks5489, Nev1 and Mike Peel.
Also this month 5 articles featured on the DYK? section of the front page: Hulme Arch Bridge, Peterloo Massacre, Bolton and Leigh Railway, Barnes Hospital, Denshaw, and Platt Fields Park. This certainly puts into perspective one of the project's previous mid-term aims "feature on the Did you know? section with at least three articles related to Greater Manchester". If you've expanded an article 5 fold or started one with at least 1.5kb of prose in the past 5 days and it has an interesting and referenced fact don't hesitate to read the conditions of DYK? and nominate it here. It gets the project noticed!
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still leading local British WikiProjects. As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 7 on London and Yorkshire who have 15 Featured Articles each. Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still lacking GAs and falls behind London by 6 (we have 14, London 20). If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
Member News
There are 45 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. One new member has joined the project this month:
Kieran5676 on 30th April and is interested in south Manchester.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A rather large "thank you" goes out to all the editors who edited article related to Greater Manchester, or who edit the project itself.
Obtain GA status for one third (1/3) of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
It took us four months to get our last aims completed, why not try and see if these can be done in less time than before! All input is welcome but if anyone has any books or photos etc specifically related to these topics, they would be extra-specially welcome.
Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, if you thing you can help improve an article be bold and get editing. Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Our highest priority article is of course Greater Manchester, there is a peer review from March with issues still to be addressed before it can be put forward as a featured article candidate. Salford is another top priority article because it's the county's second city; it's under gone a lot of editing but still has a way to go before it reaches GA. Also active this month has been the City of Salford article – part of our aim to get 1/3 of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs to GA &ndash.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Reminders...
Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but more images are needed! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment When this section was written, there was only 1 unassessed article! This task has probably already been finished, but it might now have. To check click here.
Old Trafford, Murrays' Mills and 1990 Strangeways Prison riot all passed GAC last month! In previous newsletters, the issue of WP:GM's lack of GAs has been raised numerously, so a large 'well done' to all those who contributed, be it little or large!
Also, Milnrow and City of Salford have been nominated at WP:GAC. Feel free to join in with their discussions here and here respectively. To 'obtain GA status for a third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs' is one of WP:GM's short-term aims, let's hope the City of Salford won't be the last borough with this status.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on London! Although taking the lead in FAs, WP:GM is still flagging a little in GAs and falls behind London by 3. This is the closest we have ever got to taking the lead in local British GAs, if you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
And don't forget that the Manchester congestion charge article will need all input possible to keep it up to date with the government's new legislation (grumble grumble)...
Member News
There are 46 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. Our newest member is:
Let's not forget that Jza84 became an administrator this month! Congratulations on your new role.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A rather large "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed..
Obtain GA status for one third of Greater Manchester's Metropolitan Boroughs.
Most of the articles covered by our new aims haven't experienced much activity in the past month, except for City of Salford being nominated at WP:GAC. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Articles such as List of people from Bolton and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Greater Manchester is, of course, our highest priority article. Mr Stephen posted some milestones to getting this article up to FA status a while back. Please check them out and see what you can do.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Reminders...
Images! The rate of good images has gone up since it was mentioned in the last issue, but we'll need more if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 12th April, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, we still 151 of our 1551 article unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Delivered on June 12, 2008 by Polishname. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
Hi there
Hi there, nice to hear from you. I'm from Billinge myself and personally don't recognise St. Helens rule over part of my home. Neither do I recognise Greater Manchester. I was born in Billinge, Wigan, Lancashire...it would seem a bit odd to have a Merseyside Cricket Club or a Greater Manchester Cricket Club. Personally, I am pro the county borders prior to Whitehall messing in 1974 and would advocate a return to these. Darkieboy236 (talk) 15:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Hi Jza
Hello there! It's great to see you back around again - hopefully for the long term this time round! I hope you've come back to see Wikipedia a better place than when you left it!
I'm confident that User:Dmcm2008 means well, but I agree that his views on "real" Liverpool are problematic. I don't think the distance from Skem to Liverpool is troublesome, but saying it is on the "outskirts of Liverpool" would be inappropriate, certainly. I have tried, with limited success, to demonstrate to Dmcm2008 why this isn't the right way forwards. I suppose the best bet is to be bold, work in the spirit of WP:V and WP:A and find a way forwards that doesn't damage Wikipedia. OF course the same goes for User:Darkieboy236 who is working on Wigan content.
It's been three months since the last newsletter, but there's been a lot going on...
Promoted articles:
Greater Manchester is one of our project's top priority articles, the Greater Manchester article comprehensively covers everything to do with the county, from culture and history, to transport and demography.
Manchester United F.C. records and statistics is about the records of one of Greater Manchester's best know clubs, which feats like "the club currently holds the record for the most FA Cup triumphs with 11".
City of Salford is about the local government area and Greater Manchester's second city. Getting Salford to GA is one our the aim's of our project, so hopefully this may help.
Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is about the history and modern restoration of the disused canal running through the county. (It's now at FAC, so please improve the article if you can!)
Manchester Mummy is about Hannah Beswick, whose macabre fear of being buried alive lead to her demanding that her body was kept above ground and checked periodically for signs of life.
Milnrow is a small town in Rochdale with a long history. The wool trade was important to the town and was the basis of much of its industry. (It's also the first GA for Rochdale!)
Ordsall Hall is an important Tudor hall in Salford with a reputation for being haunted!
Bert Trautmann is the German goalkeeper who broke his neck playing for Manchester City... and carried on playing!
The Peterloo Massacre appeared on the front page on 16 August! Well done to everyone who contributed to the article about a key moment of Greater Manchester's history and managed to get it showcased.
A new portal has been set up! The Greater Manchester portal showcases some of the best articles to do with the county. Thanks to Polishname for single-handedly getting it up and running.
There is a proposal to move members who haven't edited for a while to an inactive members list, so if you've not been edited recently but still want to be a member let us know!
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 5 on Yorkshire and 11 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 5 more than London and 7 more than Yorkshire! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Although the project has had a lot of GAs and FAs recently, most of the articles covered by our short term aims haven't experienced much activity recently. Baby has undergone some change, but has a long way to go, and List of railway stations in Greater Manchester is very close to FL quality. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Articles such as List of railway stations in Greater Manchester already appear very close to FL status and may just require an editor to guide them through the FLC process.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
There are 53 members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. Since 12 June, the project has gained 7 new members:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help.
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 1st September, we have had 99.5% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, we still 157 of our 1662 article unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Usually this is where this month's promoted articles are listed, however there is something more important this month. In September, the project was notified which of its articles were selected for a DVD version of wikipedia. The 49 are listed here, although the quality ratings are a bit out of date. Twenty-two of the articles were GA-class or higher, and only five were below B-class. These are articles that have been selected by wikipedia, not simply as the best but the most important, so they require our attention, most importantly those that fall below GA standards. We still have until the 20th October to make changes to the articles, so please if you think you can improve any of them in any way please do so!
In other news, it's been a busy month with plenty going on...
Promoted articles:
The Manchester, Bolton and Bury Canal is a disused canal undergoing restoration. The canal, which travels between Bolton and Manchester with a branch heading north east to Bury, was abandoned in 1961.
Having previously been described as "bare, wet, and almost worthless", Ashton-under-Lyne rose to prominence in the Industrial Revolution as one of the most famous mill towns in the north west.
Henry Taylor is Oldham's forgotten Olympic hero. He won 3 swimming golds at the 1908 Olympics, a record for most golds in a single games by a Briton until Chris Hoy equalled it this year.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 15 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 5 more than London and 7 more than Yorkshire! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
There wasn't space in the last newsletter, but as of 24 July 2008 the project has a list of articles that have tags on them. As of 14 July 2008, 351 (21.8%) of our articles need a clean-up, although this should have gone down as some have already received attention (the bot does not seem to update the listing often).
In other news, the Merseyside Wikiproject has been set up. If you have an interest in the area or want to help out in any way, head over to the project page and pitch in.
In the past month we've achieved two of our short-term aims! The List of railway stations in Greater Manchester was expertly guided through the featured list process with hardly a problem, and now that Tameside is a GA a third of the county's boroughs are GA status or better. There's still plenty to do, some our our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in! If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! And please keep an eye on the 49 articles selected for the wikipedia DVD.
Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
No new members joined the project in September and there are 49 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester. A new list of inactive members has been started. Anyone who hasn't made an edit to wikipedia since 1 March 2008 automatically goes onto the list.
If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 4th October, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, 151 of our 1684 articles remain unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
It's been a quieter month than September, but plenty has been going on...
Promoted articles:
Born in Stalybridge and raised in Ashton-under-Lyne, Hugh Mason was a mill owner and politician. He was popular among his workers for shortening the working week at his factories without cutting their pay.
No articles were DYKs this month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 14 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 7 more than both Yorkshire and London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
Trafford was featured on the main page on the 12th October and was viewed 13,800 on the day (27,100 times over 4 days).
The project's cleanup listing has been updated with stats from 8 October. As of 14 July, 351 (21.8%) of our articles need a clean-up, this has risen to 447 out of 1689 (26.5%). Although this is disappointing, it reflects a more widespread use of tags on articles to indicate what needs attention rather than a decline in the standard of this project's articles.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Member News
There are now 53 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester as 4 new members joined the project in October:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
On top of these aims, some our our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in! If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Assessment As of 1st November, we have had 100% of our articles assessed for quality! Even so, 75 of our 1708 articles remain unassessed for importance. Please take a look and see what you can do.
November has been a successful month, with lots of progress made on articles, and more work in the pipe-line:
Promoted articles:
Scout Moor Wind Farm is England's largest onshore wind farm. Although it was opposed by environmentalists, the wind farm was opened on 26 September 2008 and provides enough power for 40,000 homes.
The River Irwell runs 39 miles from its source in Lancashire until it joins with the River Mersey. The river was important in the Industrial Revolution, and was left poluted with industrial waste and lifeless.
The Bridgewater Canal is currently a GA nominee and the Scout Moor Wind Farm is under scrutiny at WP:FAC. Please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them. Hopefully, next month we can report on two more promoted articles!
Scout Moor Wind Farm featured in the DYK section of the front page last month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as featured content goes, we have a lead of 8 on Yorkshire and 14 on London! WP:GM now is the leading project in terms of GAs too with 10 more Yorkshire and 11 more than London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Member News
There are now 50 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester as 2 new members joined the project in November:
Welcome to everyone, and let's remember to make these new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Already we're making great progress, and Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine and the River Irwell are already GAs, while Scout Moor Wind Farm is on the way to becoming an FA! The Congestion charging in Greater Manchester and Greater Manchester Transport Innovation Fund (TiF) are hot topics at the moment with the referendum currently open. As an aside, some of our top-priority articles need referencing or tidying up, so don't hesitate to dive in. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Articles needing attention Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester/Cleanup listing|list of articles needing cleanup]] are in permanent need of attention.
I know it's early but since there won't be a newsletter for a month... merry Christmas everyone, enjoy the holiday and mince pies.
Delivered on 5 December 2008 by Nev1. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add two *s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
Welcome return
It's good to see that you're back and want to get involved. I'm happy with the progress I'm making with the Wigan article, I think the governance and demography sections are essentially complete, while the history section has been expanded greatly (still more on 20th century to fit in though); the notable people section is taking a while to sort out but should end up ok, and I've got figures that will be useful for the economy section and there'll be some news articles about the arcades development etc. My long term aim is to improve the article to the point where it can be taken to WP:GAC, and any help would certainly be welcome. In particular, I know nothing about the geography of the town or the education and have very no local knowledge, so don't know if there are any glaring omissions in general. Nev1 (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Greater Manchester January Newsletter, Issue XIII
December has been a very successful month, with lots of article promoted, and hopefully more to come in January:
Promoted articles:
Scout Moor Wind Farm
Scout Moor Wind Farm is England's largest onshore wind farm. Although it was opposed by environmentalists, the wind farm was opened on 26 September 2008 and provides enough power for 40,000 homes.
The B of the Bang is the sculpture that was erected to commemorate the 2002 Commonwealth Games and for a while was the largest sculpture in the UK. And because of safety concerns, it may be dismantled.
Current nominations: January looks set to be very busy, with Chadderton, Cine City, Withington, and Nico Ditch at WP:GAN, the Greater Manchester portal up for Featured Portal status, and Sale a Featured Article Candidate. Please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them.
Abram featured in the DYK section of the front page last month. For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
The project has a new tool, a watchlist of all our project's articles. This should help us keep an eye on them and spot new editors who might want to join our project. Also, Jza84 has developed a map of WP:GM's GAs and FAs. It shows a gap in coverage in the north west of the county, something we should try to change.
WikiProject Greater Manchester is still the leading local British WikiProject! As far as Featured and Good content goes, our lead is extending, with 10 and 16 more FAs than Yorkshire and London respectively, and 13 and 14 more GAs than Yorkshire and London! If you see an article that you think deserves to be a GA, don't hesitate to nominate it at WP:GAC!
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Two of our aims were crossed off as Scout Moor Wind Farm became an FA, and Radcliffe, Greater Manchester a GA. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
Member News
There are now 46 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 14 members inactive since 1 July 2008) as 1 new member joined the project in December:
Welcome from everyone, and let's remember to make new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
With the new(ish) year, I think it's right to look back over the year just gone. Last year was massive for our project, with lots of successes building on a successful 2007. In terms of featured content, we became the leading wikiproject in 2007, but 2008 saw us cement our status as one of the UK's leading wikiprojects: having started the year with most FAs (two more than London and Yorkshire), but falling behind in terms of GAs, we now have more FAs and GAs than any project under WP:UKGEO. While our aim is to improve all articles related to Greater Manchester, not collect trophies, we now lead the field by a long way and everyone deserves to feel proud for their part.
We've had articles featured on the main page, both in DYK? and as today's Featured Article, but success is more than a matter of numbers; the project has grown into a community where editors join together to provide information and improve Wikipedia. A great example of this is the work our project did on Denshaw. Back in April, it was targeted by vandals and as a result was featured in national news. We stepped in and improved and protected the article, showing what WP:GM is capable of. This is undoubtedly the noisiest project in the UK and it's strength comes from the wide range of interests of its many members. We've even been so successful that we were accused of forming a claque.
During 2008, our numbers have increased and, while some have left, we've welcomed many strong editors who will help bring the project more success. With so much emphasis on Good and Featured articles, it's sometimes easy to forget that a lot of effort goes into articles that don't get recognition. The table below shows that the number of B-class articles has increased since the start of 2008, and that the proportion of stub-class articles under our project has gone down.
My own experience of Wikipedia has been positive and enjoyable, especially due to WP:GM. I've worked on interesting subjects with nice people, and hopefully the experience is similar for others. We've covered subjects as varied and interesting as castles, mummies, computers, Olympic swimmers, and wind farms, stuff I probably wouldn’t know about if it wasn’t for Wikipedia. I enjoy being a part of this project, and as we approach the WP:GM's second birthday (24 February) I'm sure it will continue to go from strength to strength in 2009.
Would you like to write the next newsletter for WP:GM?? Please nominate yourself at WT:GM! New editors are always welcome!
Project News
January has been a very successful month, with lots of article promoted, and hopefully more to come in January:
Promoted articles:
View of Broadway in Chadderton
Chadderton is a town in the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham. It has a long and interesting history beyond that of its mill town façade; a Celtic hill fort, a medieval lordship and still an important industrial and metropolitan town.
Nico Ditch stretches from Ashton-under-Lyne to Stretford and according to legend was dug in a single night to defend against the Danes.
Article news: Cine City, Withington is at WP:GAN, please keep an eye on these articles and if any issues are raised in their reviews help to address them. Unfortunately, despite User:Joshii's effort the Greater Manchester portal did not become featured.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Member News
There are now 48 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 14 members inactive since 1 July 2008) as 2 new members joined the project in January:
Welcome from everyone, and let's remember to make new members feel included in the project! If you need help, you can go to the project talk page, or perhaps look at the list of members to see if anyone can help. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Thanks
A big "thank you" goes to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Happy birthday! It was the project's second birthday on 24 February, so thank you to everyone who's helped improve and Greater Manchester related article, not just our members, your work is very much appreciated. The last month has been very successful, with lots activity:
Nico Ditch stretches from Ashton-under-Lyne to Stretford and according to legend was dug in a single night to defend against the Danes.
Cine City in 2004
The Cine City, Withington, was the third cinema to open in Britain and when it closed in 2001 it was the third longest running cinema in England. It was opened in 1912, and demolished in 2008.
Current nominations: As of the completion of this newsletter, there are no GA nominations, but Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine and Buckton Castle are at FAC. The articles detail the world's first stored-program computer, and the best preserved castle in Greater Manchester. There's a good chance that one or more of these interesting articles could be promoted, so please keep an eye on them in case there's any way you can help!
Charles White (physician) and Worsley featured in the DYK section of the front page last month (actually, Worsley featured in January but was missed out of the last newsletter!). For details of the DYKs by the project that have appeared on the main page, see Did you know?
The project's cleanup listing has been updated with stats from 24 February 2009. As of 8 October 2008, 447 (26.5%) of 1689 our articles needed a clean-up, this has risen slightly to 455 out of 1809 (25.2%). This is encouraging as the proportion has gone down, and indicates the standard of the project's articles are steadily improving. While the high-profile successes of GAs and FAs are important, the project's aim is to improve all GM-related articles.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Sister projects
In an attempt to encourage communication between related wikiprojects, or to at least raise awareness, this section is dedicated to the important goings on of WP:Merseyside and WP:Cheshire, our sister projects and the only other user groups dedicated to improving articles in North West England.
WP:CHES – After a period of low activity, the project has picked up recently, with initiatives (such as beginning a newsletter and sending a questionnaire to its member) to encourage greater participation from its members. This has paid dividends with two GAs being promoted in February and greater activity in general.
WP:MERSEY – After being set-up in September 2008, the project is experiencing a period of lowish activity. While the project has a handful of FAs and GAs, most of its articles are unassessed; assessing requires no familiarity with a subject, so any help WP:GM members can lend would be greatly appreciated.
Other news
There is a meet-up scheduled for 14 March in Manchester for anyone interested. It is not organised by WP:GM and is open to all wikipedians. More details can be found here.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
After a flurry of activity in January, progress on the Salford article has slowed, but it is steadily progressing towards a good standard. If you think you can help improve an article, be bold and get editing! Although these are the project's explicit short term aims, we endeavour to "improving all Wikipedia articles that are concerned with Greater Manchester", so every edit is valuable.
The project compared
The Greater Manchester WikiProject is one of the leading UK-based groups. Some other projects are no as lucky as we are in the numbers of active enthusiastic users. Below are some statistics of the other leading UK projects and some geographically close to Greater Manchester.
There are now 46 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 17 members inactive since 1 September 2008) as 1 new member joined the project in February:
Majorly is an experienced editor who has recently decided to join WP:GM, and has been working hard on Cheadle Hulme. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Machester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Sorry there's not been a newsletter for three months, it's not that there hasn't been anything to say but that there almost hasn't been time to say it...
On 20 March 2009 Manchester was "today's Featured Article" and received over 44,000 visitors. This was the culmination of about 2 years of effort from a lot of editors who found the article in this state before the founding of the project. Along with Greater Manchester, it's our flagship article and for it to reach the mainpage is a great achievement. It was an incredible collaborative effort and shows what the project is capable of, and since then we have gone from strength to strength. The Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine was Today's Featured Article on 30 May, with 33,000 visitors.
Promoted articles:
Carrington Moss is an 1,100 acres (450 ha) peat bog in Trafford; in the 19th century, it was reclaimed to be used agriculturally and for the disposal Manchester's waste, and is still used for farming.
Manchester Mummy is about Hannah Beswick, whose macabre fear of being buried alive lead to her demanding that her body was kept above ground and checked periodically for signs of life.
The town of Sale in Trafford was probably founded in the Anglo-Saxon period and is best known as the home of physicist J. P. Joule the founding place and former home of and Sale Sharks rugby club.
Cheadle Hulme is a suburb of Stockport that formed from several small hamlets, rather than growing around a church which was usual for medieval villages. (also Stockport's first GA!)
Mellor hill fort is the only Iron Age hill fort in Greater Manchester and was only discovered in the 1990s.
Partington, in Trafford, is a town and civil parish that was until the Manchester Ship Canal opened in 1894, a mainly agrarian community. With the opening of the canal, Partington became a major coal port and following the Second World War was expanded as an overspill estate for deprived parts of Manchester.
With all the project's success, we must be careful not to become complacent. In March, David Beckham was delisted as a Good Article because it lacked enough references and was poorly written in parts. Improving an article and getting it reviewed for GA is a lot of effort and it's a real shame to see the article delisted, but a reminder that our role as an article writer is two-fold: once we improve them, we have an obligation to maintain them. Beckham is the kind of person who is regularly in the news, so the article will get a lot of attention and need regular updating, and it was written by members of WP:FOOTBALL, but let's take it as a reminder of what's needed from us.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Over the past three months, we've succeeded in our aims of bringing Eccles and Worsley to GA status, thanks largely to the seemingly inexhaustible Parrot of Doom. Recently another aim was added: bringing Stockport to GA standard. It's currently C-class and has some well developed sections. It will be a difficult task, but worthwhile considering it's Greater Manchester's third largest settlement. Also, the importance of bringing Salford to GA has been emphasised; it's currently B-class and should be the easiest of our aims to accomplish, although it's been there for a long time. Let's see if we can put this one to rest soon.
The project compared
Over the past three months, WP:LOND and WP:YORK have had a massive upsurge in the number of articles under their auspices. And interestingly, WP:YORKS has had an upsurge in GAs (10), and WP:LOND has had an increase in both GAs and FAs (8 and 10 respectively), closing down the gap with WP:GM. Although WP:DERB appears to have lost a GA, one of their articles was incorrectly tagged; however Derwent Valley Mills is being prepared to become a Good Article candidate, and hopefully will be the project's first. With the recent retirement of Ddstretch and Espresso Addict, WP:CHES has lost two of its most active contributors, but is still managing to produce good articles such as list of castles in Cheshire (FL) and John Douglas (now a Good Article candidate). The majority of WP:MRSY's articles are now assessed and will hopefully go from strength to strength.
There are now 48 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 17 members inactive since 1 September 2008) as 2 new members have joined the project since the start of March:
The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Manchester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
Reminders...
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Part of the seven arches railway viaduct in Cheadle Hulme
Cheadle Hulme is a suburb of Stockport that formed from several small hamlets, rather than growing around a church which was usual for medieval villages, although there is evidence of activity dating back to the Bronze Age.
Did you know that after the collapse of the Broughton Suspension Bridge in 1831, the British military introduced the order to "break step" when soldiers were crossing a bridge? Featured on the Did you know? section on 6 June 2009.
Other news:
Recently Salford was turned into a disambiguation page with the article on the settlement moved to Salford, Greater Manchester. This will hopefully make it clearer to the reader that Salford, Greater Manchester, and the City of Salford are not the same thing. Just remember to specify which Salford next time you're adding a wikilink to an article!
Although it wasn't technically this month, list of people from Wigan was created on 2 July, and any help populating the list with sourced names would be great. It's one of nine such list for the boroughs in Greater Manchester (Bury doesn't have a list yet) and they all need populating.
Remember to be careful about editors claiming places are still in Lancashire, today I had to revert someone insisting that Leigh isn't in Greater Manchester and recently the Friends of Real Lancashirevoiced their dislike of the Lancashire article so this issue isn't going to go away.
Just remember that the project watchlist can help us catch vandalism and is worth checking from time to time.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Recently another aim was added: bringing Stockport to GA standard. It's currently C-class and has some well developed sections. It will be a difficult task, but worthwhile considering it's Greater Manchester's third largest settlement. Also, the importance of bringing Salford to GA has been emphasised; it's currently B-class and should be the easiest of our aims to accomplish, although it's been there for a long time. Let's see if we can put this one to rest soon.
Member News
No new members joined the project in June and there are 45 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 20 members inactive since 1 January 2009). The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Manchester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
The project compared
In June, WP:LON has a massive upsurge in the number of FAs, with some great work by Iridescent in promoting a swathe of bridge articles to FA. WP:YORKS has over taken WP:GM in terms of GAs, and for the first time since June 2008 (when WP:LON had the lead), WP:GM is not the project with most GAs. In June, the Derwent Valley Mills became a GA and is WP:DERBY's first GA although there are more likely candidates in the pipeline. WP:CHES continues to perform strongly considering it has few active editors, and in June John Douglas (architect) was promoted to FA and there is currently a FLC. In June, there was discussion at WT:MERSEY about how to generate more audited content (ie: GAs and FAs) and since then one article has been promoted to GA, there is one GAC and other articles being prepared for GAC.
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
Salford is Greater Manchester's second city (although it is the wider district which has city status), but for most of its history it was larger and more important than Manchester. The Salford Quays area will become the home of CBBC and BBC Sport in 2011.
The Peak District was the first national park in Britain and spans Cheshire, Derbyshire, Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, Staffordshire, and West Yorkshire. It was used by the Dam Busters and used as a location for the film based on the story.
Other news:
There's been a lot of article activity in the last month, especially in Wigan-related pages. Wigan is the only borough in Greater Manchester without a GA or FA to its name, and it would be great if this could change. A lot of work has been put into Tyldesley, any and help to get it to GA would be great. There's also been a high-profile new article created: media in Manchester. Pitch in on the talk page if you're interested!
Just remember that the project watchlist can help us catch vandalism and is worth checking from time to time.
WT:GM: The project's talk page is a forum for discussion and to keep up to date with the latest project developments and initiatives put it on your watchlist! Recently there have been discussions on articles to be deleted, the congestion charge, how to get members involved and working together, and plenty of other stuff.
Get a lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county.
Last month, we achieved our long-standing aim of bringing Salford up to GA status. It's been a fine effort and perhaps we can concentrate on our other objectives, especially getting Stockport, the largest settlement article not to be at least B-class, to GA.
Member News
There are now 47 active members of WikiProject Greater Manchester (with a further 20 members inactive since 1 January 2009) as two new members have joined the project since the start of March:
J3Mrs has done some fine work on Wigan-related articles, especially Tyldesley so hopefully we can help him with his efforts. The project is always looking for new members, and if you spot an editor who makes good changes to Greater Manchester related articles why not invite them to join up by adding this template to their talk page: {{SUBST:Welcome WPGM}}.
The project compared
In July, WP:LON almost doubled in scope and now has over 12,000 articles – far more than any other UK county WikiProject. Last month, the Peak District was promoted to GA; the area is mainly in Derbyshire but covers several other counties and is a massive achievement for all involved. WP:CHES continues to perform strongly considering it has few active editors, with one FL promoted in July and another in the pipeline. WP:GM is still the leading UK county project in terms of FAs and by proportion of audited content (ie: GAs and FAs). A lot of effort has gone into producing this project's articles, so let's make sure we keep tags on them and that they don't degrade.
Images! There are some good images around, but more are still needed if we're going to get a "lead/static image in every infobox of every town in the county"! The requested photographs category lists some of the articles needing images.
However, population figures represent a number of inhabitants. This 'number of inhabitants' can then be taken in comparison with the actual 'size' (in area) of a place to give it's population 'density' in 'head per square kilometer'.
Now, the town named Wigan (the subject of this article) has an area of approximately 10 kilometers.
If the population is taken as 81,000 (which it isn't) the 'population density' of the town called Wigan would be 8,100 head per square kilometer.
This would put Wigan in third position in the most densly populated countries in the world, and on a par with Singapore which happens to be over 70 times the size of Wigan.
This is certainly not the case. So, in a nutshell, population is not directly proportional to size.
What's more, Wigan is not the largest town in the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan, so why say it is, in the article, and purposely mislead those who don't know any better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.71.235 (talk) 10:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Worldwide perspective
I have reverted the good faith edits you made on Wigan Warriors and DW Stadium. Wikipedia is meant to be written from a worldwide perseptive, however your edits have made the article's perspective more national rather than global. For someone who isn't British or English, it is better for us to use the country/state's name rather than the county's. Furthermore, a lead section should not contain its own "special information" as your edit summary seems to imply: a lead and its infobox is there to reflect information already written elsewhere in the article (with a few exceptions, geography not being one of them). GW(talk)09:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edge Hall Road
In light of the above post Jemmy, would you care to explain your edits to the Edge Hall Road article? Man2 (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Of course.
Orrell is not a 'district', it's a place. To address Orrell as 'a district in Wigan Metropolitan Borough' is intrinsically contradictory to Wikipedia's accepted meaning of 'district'.
Look it up.
Secondly, Edge Hall Road rugby ground wasn't sold to Wigan Warriors. It's lease was sold, by Mr. Ronald Pimblett, to Mr. David Whelan. The freehold was then sold to Mr. Whelan's company, Whelco Holdings, by the executors of the estate of a Mr. Thomas Standish, for the sum of £880,000.
It was all instigated by a group of businessmen from around the area with the main aim being for housing development on land which was part and parcel of Orrell RUFC's ground, ie. their training pitch, and access to other surrounding land.
.jpg)
![[2]](http://www.british-history.ac.uk/image.aspx?compid=41379&filename=fig15.gif){kind=link}
