Talk:Twyford and Stenson

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This 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.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Derbyshire Low‑importance

The article on Twyford and Stenson is supported by the Derbyshire WikiProject, which is a collaborative effort to improve the quality and coverage of Derbyshire-related articles on Wikipedia.DerbyshireWikipedia:WikiProject DerbyshireTemplate:WikiProject DerbyshireDerbyshire articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	At least one photograph is included in this article
	This article has a map
	This article has an infobox
	This article needs statistical information to be added

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

Copied from User Talk to give context

Stenson developments[edit]

Stenson hamlet itself is still fairly tranquill, (because of the high ground between it and the 'new road'), but Stenson Fields and Stenson Road are not (even though in living memory they both were :-). Perhaps you can explain more about the threat you perceive to Stenson Fields on the Stenson Talk page.

Also, note that Stenson Fields is (still?) a Civil Parish outside Derby City, so I've deleted this from Derby Districts. (Arleston _Used_ to be in with Sinfin as a CP). Bob aka Linuxlad 20:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

There is a small amount of tranquil ground between Stenson Fields and the "new road". But a developer is trying to turn Stenson Fields into Stenson Urban Sprawl. Underground though, lies a trojan lake which could cause building problems. The proposed development would build on farming land and on the historical ground around the Derby and Birmingham Railway. --Ð 20:55, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heatherton[edit]

Is Heatheton Village within Derby City though? --Ð 19:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC). Yes I'm fairly sure Heatherton Village is well inside the City boundary. Bob aka Linuxlad 10:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stenson v Twyford[edit]

I gather from i cognoscenti that Stenson is indeed only a hamlet but Twyford, despite being smaller, is a village by virtue of having a church... Linuxlad 11:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split article?[edit]

It seems to me that there is no good reason why this article is attempting to cover two distinct settlements. I suggest a split. Thoughts? DWaterson (talk) 21:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for one article is that they are both part of the same parish (by virtue of only having one church between them), as explained in the text. However, if the settlements are socially distinct and there is enough material for two separate articles, then I cannot see that being a single ecclesiastical parish is in itself a prohibition on splitting this into two separate articles. -- MightyWarrior (talk) 21:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The church argument is an irrelevance (these are civil, not ecclesiastical, parishes) - they just happen to be rather diffuse communities which run together. I'd leave it be, but the tendency on WP seems to be to write on smaller and smaller units - it's only disc space I guess... Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 06:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stenson lock[edit]

The entry reads that Stenson lock is claimed to be the deepest on the canal. This has no citation. It is also not correct as it is 12'2". The deepest lock on the canal is number 40 (Etruria Top Lock) 13'2" http://www.penninewaterways.co.uk/locks.htm 213.107.105.156 (talk) 17:15, 25 February 2012 (UTC)rob[reply]

Stenson Bubble[edit]

The text says the pub is named "The Stenson Bubble" after a spring. There is no citation. I always understood the name is from the outlet of the bypass culvert in the lower pound of the lock on the south side which sometimes sucks air down from the sluce at the top pound and bubbles out. This is illustrated in the photograph and it's accompianing description. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stenson_Bubble.jpg 213.107.105.156 (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)rob[reply]

Proposed move[edit]

The article at present contains information not just about Stenson, but about Twyford as well. As such, I think moving the page to the parish name of Twyford and Stenson – which currently redirects here – would be more appropriate. Jellyman (talk) 10:15, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have now had the page moved as suggested. Jellyman (talk) 18:13, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]