Talk:Partington

To the Anon user of ip. 89.241.103.31 who edited the Partington page.

Thanks for taking an interest. It's great to see new users on wikipedia. The information you supplied was great, but unfortunately Wikipedia does not allow cutting and pasting from other webpages because copyright may be infringed. I have therefore removed your last edit, but would be eager to see you restore the new information on Partington's history as long as you are willing to rewrite it in your own words and cite the link which supplied you with the facts at the bottom. For more information on wikipedia rules about citing sources, see Wikipedia:Citing sources. This will show you how to add footnotes and external links within the article. Please don't let this put you off, we were all new once and we all need to find our way around the rules when we first begin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amatire (talk • contribs) 12:36, 2 December 2006

Transport

"The town was served by a railway station to the north of the town, the Cheshire Lines Committee Glazebrook to Stockport Tiviot Dale Line. The station was opened in 1873, eight years after the line opened, and was in use until 30 November 1964."

This isn't quite correct. The original line was much lower than the present one, with the construction of the canal an embankment was built immediately south of the old line and led to a bridge over the canal tall enough for ships to pass. The old line remained in use as a terminal - indeed even today you can still approximate the layout of the sidings as seen heading north from the old line here. The old line goes underneath the road (you can see the new road bridge, the road now is on a slightly different alignment, the old alignment was more northerly), the new one goes over it on a now closed bridge. If you look southeast and northwest you can clearly see the two lines. Have a look on www.old-maps.co.uk - it will help explain what happened. The old station is no longer visible, the one pictured is the new station. Parrot of Doom (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Partington, Greater Manchester/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 12:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A interesting article

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article, I'm awarding GA-status.13:36, Pyrotec talk 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Sentence fragment

What does "Although served by buses in the day, bus services to the town at 6:30 pm" mean? Its not clear from the context.--Jackyd101 (talk) 02:48, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Woops, thanks for pointing that out. The sentence now makes sense [1]. Nev1 (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: unanimous support, will ask for the redirect to be speedily deleted (have fixed the dab page into a surname page). Kotniski (talk) 10:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Partington, Greater Manchester → Partington — The other entries on the disambiguation page are just part title matches. Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 12:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• The suggested move makes sense to me. Malleus Fatuorum 12:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support as primary (only) topic for this title. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support. There doesn't seem to be any competition for primary topic. After some time, if a significant proportion of readers are going to the disambiguation page, the question can be reconsidered. older ≠ wiser 13:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support Pretty much per the above. Nev1 (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support so long as the disambig is linked at the top of the page for those seeking Partington elsewhere.Koncorde (talk) 14:32, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support Per everyone above. AD 15:11, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support Although there are about a dozen people with the Partington surname all of whom are likely to be searched with this ambiguous term, this page gets about 1,000 views per month and a spot check indicates none of the persons get more than a fraction of that, so this topic clearly meets the "much more likely than any other" criterium and almost certainly meets "and more likely than all the others combined" condition at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Born2cycle (talk) 05:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. – ukexpat (talk) 18:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Deprivation

According to [2] Partington is still a deprived area. J3Mrs (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2016 (UTC)