From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Marsh or March?[edit]

This article states: "Marsh is a corruption of march, which means boundary."

Whereas the following website [1] (along with various others with identical text) says:

"The much misunderstood 'in Marsh' was originally 'Henmarsh', meaning boggy land where wild birds were to be had. This was added to many local place names from the 13th to the 17th century, when improved drainage gradually cleared the area and the district name disappeared."

Which is correct? Both seem plausible. However, I tend to leans towards the latter, given that the four Shire Stone (boundary) is a good 2 miles from the settlement propper. Any thoughts? 80.255 16:20, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

There is a lot of marsh land around the village and it is of that flat and boggy type. So I'd go with that to be honest. It floods a fair bit too. (talk) 00:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Four Shires Stone[edit]

"A mile west of Moreton the Four Shires Stone marks ..." Im pretty sure the four shire stone is a mile EAST of Moreton, see e.g. (the stone is at the tip of the salient of Oxfordshire). But I'm not quite confident enough to alter it myself. Maproom 22:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I've checked elsewhere - the Four Shire Sone is east of Moreton. I have altered the article. Maproom 13:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a mile and a half east, so I've altered it too. Motacilla (talk) 00:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

info box[edit]

Can any one make an infobox? Snowman 12:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Cities[edit]

Since when has Moreton-in-Marsh been chartered as a city? It's a parish with a town council which has the same status as a parish council. Is its inclusion in Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities appropriate? Motacilla (talk) 00:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

{{Request edit}}

Suggested historical reference material[edit]

Inviting contributors to expand the article using the following accounts:

--Bhogrok (talk) 12:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I've cancelled this edit request for now - no offence; I hope people will discuss it, but, otherwise - it needs to be really specific - ie, "please change THIS to THAT with THIS REF" - if others agree, or if nobody disagrees, please just re-request in clear terms, and I'd be happy to change it. Thanks for understanding, 22:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure what it is you cancelled other than some suggested references that should have just been added to a new section instead of making an edit request. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Flooding in 2007[edit]

Who would ever challenge this fact? I see no need for a citation on a statement like this and support the removal of the TAG. - Saffron Blaze (talk) 06:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)