Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:30, 9 February 2007

• To whom it may concern. If you check my contributions, you will see that I have NO CONNECTION to anyone called 'Irate'. We have NO coinciding articles and our subjects are clearly different as are IP addresses. So, whatever a 'sock puppet' may be, I'm not one! 80.192.242.187 01:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.

I will add that while I have had my disputes with this user, and in fact had my talk page vandalized by him, I've examined the edits made by User:Irate, and I very much doubt that Irate and JemmyH. are the same person. The editing and language style is completely different. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 03:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

November 2006

Your recent contribution(s) to Misplaced Pages are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Misplaced Pages accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Misplaced Pages by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! Dylan Lake (t·c·e) 09:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page St Helens, Merseyside on Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. SkerHawx 21:45, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Helpful(I hope) suggestion

The primary problem with your edits simply seems to be you didn't write them in correctly. If you're telling the truth, instead of writing comments in the article about how false it is, correct the false data.--Vercalos 22:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I second that

Regarding your complaint about my reversion of the edits to St Helens, Merseyside, if something is incorrect, simply correct the information. Your edits said things like "this information is wrong. The Sankey Brook doesn't start on Billinge Hill at all. It starts in Rainford and comes through Windle and Haresfinch, meeting the Sankey Canal near to the sewage treatment works between Parr and Haydock."

Just correct the information as needed, and be bold. If you editorialize or point out errors in the actual article, it will be deleted. If you correct the errors, particularly if you cite the corrections, recent change patrollers won't revert your edits. Be Bold!! This is an encyclopedia, not a message board. If you'd like to understand Misplaced Pages's policies better, please visit the welcome page. Also, please remember to sign your comments (not edits) with four tildes. Happy editing. SkerHawx 22:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Wigan

I'm currently looking at your edits and checking them myself, however they don't tally from what i know. if you would care to cite your references please, this would make your edits reasonable. However, until you can, i shall revert them to the user:Man2 edits in the meanwhile. Once you have got your sources, please consult the Misplaced Pages help to find out how to revert my changes to the document. Thanks and keep editing! Random articles 21:30, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Wigan. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Random articles 21:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

This has to stop now. If you have a problem, discuss it on the talk pages. in the meanwhile, i'm issuing you a warning.

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to Wigan, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Random articles 21:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Final Warning

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Wigan, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Random articles 21:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Alright...

Fine. after checking several documents, you can your edits as long as you CITE YOUR REFERENCES, then edit to your hearts content. HOWEVER, this page is now being checked and having its information sorted and corrected by admins once the article has been put on the list. if you still have a problem with the corrected document, take the issue up on the talk page, NOT on the actual article. I shall revert your edits one last time, so that anyone else needing the document will have an article that can be relied upon to have possibly correct information. Thankyou Random articles 21:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Blank Pages

Please do not replace Misplaced Pages pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Misplaced Pages because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. ––Alex LaPointe 18:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

If you could please leave a brief editing summary in the edit summary boxes it would really be helpful. Edit summaries help other wikipedians to know what your doing and it helps us to distinguish vandalism from constructive edits. Thanks, –Alex LaPointe 20:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Please avoid adding original research to articles. This includes using sources to draw independent conclusions on your own. Thanks. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Wafulz 02:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages, as you did to Wigan. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. —Lantoka 10:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. If you dispute that Wigan is 18 miles from that place then remove the entire sentence. Adding "not" like that looks like random and disrputive vandalism, which we do see a lot of here on Misplaced Pages. —Lantoka 11:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Metropolitan Borough of Wigan

Please stop adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages as you did with Metropolitan Borough of Wigan. The text you added was misquotation. MRSC • Talk 11:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Lancashire

Please stop adding nonsense to Misplaced Pages as you did with this edit. To be clear, adding false/misquoted text is nonsense. MRSC • Talk

See here: Association_of_British_Counties#Commentary. MRSC • Talk 12:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

My reversion of Wigan

I have to make it clear that what I reverted was obvious vandalism ("Woof! Woof!") I did not at all revert anything else that you added to the article and thus would not ask to be recognized for having a greater knowledge of Wigan than you. -- Ouishoebean / 14:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I must also point out that "Woof! Woof!" was in reply to an equally ridiculous statement, made by another, saying 'a dog would be a Wiganer if he was born in Billinge Hospital'. I notice that has not been removed. Also, the statement was made in 'discussion' and not on the Article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.242.187 (talk • contribs) November 24, 2006 @ 15:35 (UTC)

I apologize that I did not see that comment, but you should have removed that comment, stating the reason as vandalism instead of adding more vandalism to it. Vandalisms in discussions are not permitted. Also, please sign you replies with 4 tildes (~) in future. Thanks. -- Ouishoebean / 09:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

• Hiya, sorry if the post to my discussion board (Man2) was not from you. I also live in Wigan and dont understand where u find the 'massive open space' between town and Orrell. Pem and Orrell are practically the same place (the whole area from Orrell through Pem to the town centre is urban, you dont drive down country lanes to get to Orrell (you do see a bit of green driving from Orrell to the bottom of Billinge.) The point about Skem is that it is included in something called the 'Wigan Urban Area', not that its in Wigan.

• Hiya, yes your spot on there is some green near the motorway bridge. I also agree that it is wrong to take away the identity of smaller English places, however I honestly think that to treat areas like Pem/Orrell/Ince/Platt Bridge etc as totally separate to town is pushing it a bit. I've never heard one person say I live in 'Pemberton' (etc) to anyone from outside the Wigan area. Im not sure where you live but unless you a) live in Skem or b) are not originally from the area im sure you refer to yourself as a 'Wiganer'/'from Wigan'. Whilst im not advocating everywhere being refered to as 'Wigan', to describe Orrell/Pem or Ince as villages/small towns these days, given the urban development around them and their role (rightly or wrongly) as suburbs of the town centre, is ridiculas. On a lighter note, im glad to finally see another local sorting the mess that the 90% of editors (who have never even been to Wigan, let alone lived here) have made of the articles.

• Hiya sorry to keep banging on about the point regarding Orrell as no longer being a village, but I think you should take a look at Misplaced Pages's articles on 'villages' and 'suburbs'. To go through a quick list, do any of the following circumstances exist in Orrell today, a)in a rural area - N0, b) Tiny population - NO, c)clear green belt around it/distinct boundary - NO (Orrell only ends just before the KFC in Pem, it is in a built up area), d)NOT under the administrative control of an adjacent town or city - NO (it comes under Wigan) e)local economy based on agricultural production - NO, f) majority of population work in the village - NO, f) have little to do with nearby urban aras (i.e. economy/social)- NO. Now consider if the factors for a suburb exsist, a)residential area on the outskirts of a town - YES, b) densisty of habitation is lower than inner city/town - YES, c)transporting systems allowing for commuting -YES d)consequence of 'urban sprawl - YES, d)majority of the poulation commute to nearby town- YES e) under the administrative control of adjacent town -YES. Im not completely dismissing your points I just believe that there is no way the place can now be called a village, to give the impression that Orrell is like the villages around Wrightington would be wrong. It is a urban area directly connected to places like Kitt Green, which could never be described as a village. The Orrell/Billinge/Winstanley Township forum on the 26/04/05 (found with a google search) even discussed if Orrell was a suburb or a village. I believe that the article for Orrell (and Pem/Ince) should show that these places are residential suburbs under the dominant influence of Wigan, not separate entities. Thanks. Man2.

• • • Wigan Metropolitan Borough is under the dominant influence of Greater Manchester. Does this mean that Wigan is 'in' Manchester? Belfast is under the dominant influence of England. Does this mean that Belfast is 'in' England?

• the articles you quote are not official. Neither is 'Misplaced Pages'. They are the ramblings of people who have an 'idea', and stick by it. Don't believe what you read in these articles, it isn't always fact. Orrell is not 'under' Wigan, as you, and lots of others think. It is 'in', 'part of', the 'Wigan Metropolitan Borough', which is made up of a group of individual areas, each one being represented by it's own 'ward' council. It just has the same name as the town of Wigan, but don't be misled. You also say that there is no green-belt surrounding Orrell. Look again. Orrell Village is completely surrounded by greenbelt and agricultural land. Billinge is completely surrounded by the same. Winstanley is not, that's why I have not brought Winstanley into the discussion. These places are seperate, and the Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council regard them as such. So do other 'official' bodies. Suburbs of Wigan are places like Beech Hill, Swinley, Scholes, Whelley. Ignore forums etc. as they consist of people who don't know, the 'we are in', 'we come under' and 'we are part of' brigade. The fact of the matter is, Wigan is where the sign marks the boundary.

• • • Hi, no of course Wigan is not 'in' Manchester, nor Belfast 'in' England. Wigan (as Im quite sure you are aware) is 'in' Greater Manchester and Belfast is 'in' Northern Ireland. Why you point blankley refuse to accept that Orrell is no longer a village in the traditional sense im not sure. I wholeheartly support your opinion that the identity of smaller places need to be (where possible) preserved, however the circumstances that exist in Orrell today can find no argument for the description of Orrell as a village. My above descriptions came from my studies of geography and town planning at university and while I, like you, would like to see places such as Ince and Pemberton given recognition, the fact is that they are all suburbs of the the town. They all fill every criteria for the description of a suburb and non of a village/small town. The fact you live in the area makes this even more unbelievable, you must concede that non of the above areas are treated by anyone in Wigan as separte settlements. As I mentioned above to give the impression that Orrell is similar to the villages found in the Wrightington or Rainford areas is simply misleading, no one driving through the area who does not know it, will make any distinction between the centre of town and Orrell. There are no distinct country roads to travel down, there are no farms/agricultural centres to pass at all, there is simply nothing to suggest a settlement in a rural area (which is one of the official descriptions of a village).

• The last line of your statement clearly shows that you are blind. If the bridge was removed from Moor Road, over the M58, Orrell would be completely isolated from Wigan.

People who live in Orrell refer to the 'Village'. They have pride in their 'Village'. (by Orrell, I mean the village of Orrell, not Orrell Post, Gathurst or Lamberhead Green). They do not consider themselves to live in Wigan. I live in Wigan Metropolitan Borough, but I don't consider myself a Wiganer, just the same as a Wiganer would not consider themself a Mancunian and, likewise, someone from Garswood wouldn't pretend to be a St.Helenser, or a 'scouser'. (even though they are in Merseyside). Why do you mention Ince and Pemberton? They are clearly connected to Wigan by development, so are more difficult to distinguish. The government statistics class these places as 'standalone urban areas'. Wigan MBC themselves do not consider these places suburbs. I would consider places like Winstanley, Hawkley Hall, Goose Green, Worsley Mesnes, Beech Hill, Poolstock etc. to be 'suburbs' of Wigan. Orrell, Shevington, Standish, Aspull, Ashton in Makerfield, Golborne etc. are all outside Wigan boundaries. Wigans boundaries are clearly defined and signs are placed at these boundaries to tell you this. I can't understand the mentality of anyone to think otherwise, it's as clear as day. Any rumour that is started in Wigan goes like wildfire and every man and his dog believe it.

• And what about the fact that Orrell does include Orrell Post and the other places as 'Orrell', are you just going to pick and choose what you want 'Orrell' to be now?. Never in all the time I've lived here have I ever heard anyone say they do not live in Wigan. I dont know where in the borough you live but if your from the following I will accept your point about not being 'Wigan': Leigh, Ashton, Hindley and the places next to Salford, otherwise you are from Wigan. Your point about the government saying Ince and Pemberton are standalone urban areas is also wrong, these with Orrell and the town itself are called the 'Wigan Urban Area', Shevington and one or two other places are defined as standalone urban areas and the places to the east of the town are in the Greater Manchester Urban Area. Unless you are blind (which for some reason you called me) you may have noticed that as Orrell is connected to Pemberton 'through development' and Pemberton is connected to Wigan 'through development' so by your own assessment Orrell therefore must be connected to Wigan through the develpment between Wigan and Pemberton. Also by your way of thinking seeing that 90% of the town were born in Billinge Hospital how many people come 'from Wigan' , is that limited to the people born in houses in Swinley?

• Can't you read and understand? I said you are blind in answer to you saying that there is no agricultural land / farms between Wigan and Orrell, that is a crackpot statement. Go on Google Map, Satellite, follow the M6 motorway north from the Wigan/Goose Green exit, you will clearly see agricultural land on either side of the motorway until you reach the Orrell junction. If you follow the M58 motorway west of the junction, you will clearly see greenbelt/agricultural land on either side of the motorway, therefore, completely separating Orrell (def: Orrell Village / Centre / Original Orrell / the Middle of ) from the newer / outskirts of Orrell, which is separated from Pemberton by the M6 motorway (which was built on agricultural land). If you go with the theory that a road is 'connecting development' then everywhere is connected, by road, and indeed Wigan is continuously connected to Liverpool, by development. Standish is connected to Wigan, by development, but it has been pointed out, in the Wigan article (discussion) that Wigan MBC say that 'Standish is not a suburb of Wigan'.

I find it strange that you think that everyone living near to Wigan are minded to consider themselves a 'Wiganer', as I find this not the case unless they actually 'do' come from Wigan.

Anyway, I will have no more to say on the subject. I will leave saying that Orrell is, in my opinion and a great many others opinions, not in Wigan but is, and always has been 'near' Wigan.

• Thats fine I respect your opinion, (last time I checked my reading and comprehension were of sufficent standard to study a degree by the way), anyway moving on where you get the statement that a 'great many people' see Orrell as simply being 'near Wigan' I do not know. I have been an Orrell resident all my life and have continuously heard Orrell people refer to themselves as Wiganers (obviously people not originally from this area will not do this), and write and give, "Orrell, Wigan, WN5 ***", as thier address. Orrell as I keep pointing out to you starts nowhere near the motorway junction, it starts near the Fishergate Pub, now demonstrate where the clearly identifiable country road and agricultural centres are that I drive down from there. You cannot use 'Orrell centre' or 'old' Orrell as an argument because despite your protest Orrell covers a much larger area. I have now doubt that you do not consider yourself a Wiganer and that is fine, however to back up your opinion your cannot simply ignore reality, Orrell in 2006 is no longer a village, it bares no resemblance to a village whatsoever and is the polar opposite of the 'true' villages found in the Wrightington area,it is now a suburb of the town of Wigan. The majority of natives of the area do and always will refer to themselves as Wiganers. I hope this will be our last words on the subject as Im sure you will agree this is getting boring. Thanks

• I find it amazing, that in the last few weeks, in relation to where 'The Verve' formed you have been changing the address of Winstanley Collage from 'Wigan' to 'Winstanley near Wigan' or 'Billinge' or Lancashire, now you have decided Winstanley college is in 'Orrell'. You just can't stand the fact that the verve have Wigan connections and keep changing history and places to suit your own pathetic needs. Your prejudice towards Wigan and Wiganers is quite clear. You are an idiot and yet I find you a constant source of amusement as the way you can never control your temper or frustrations provides me with many a good laugh. Good day Sir!

• • What a clown! Read it again, lad. I said that Winstanley College is in 'Orrell Ward'. In fact, the government said it, I'm just passing on the information. Anyway, look on the map and you'll see that Winstanley College is joined, by 'ribbon development' to Orrell, so it is in Orrell. Official. Billinge hospital too, is connected by 'ribbon development' to Orrell. Hey, I'm not prejudiced against Wiganers at all. I've made myself a good living, over the years, out of Wiganers. And Orrellers, Billingers, Ashtoners, Bryners, Warringtoners an' all! I'm only prejudiced towards people not knowing where Wigan starts and finishes. That's all! I know, you see, because I own a lot of it!!!!

• • Talk a lot of it too!!!

If it helps, Homer Simpson lives at 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield, which if I'm correct, is only a few hundred yards walk away from the old Wigan Athletic football ground.

Anything to be of assistance.

Wigan clowns. Live in Wigan, no life, no wife, no money, stuck in a timewarp. I feel for you all.

Billinge Disambugation

Please do not add nonsense to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Regan123 01:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I will also post this as a reply on my talk page. This is what I considered nonsense:

Billinge could refer to two nearby settlements both formerly in the historic county of Lancashire: However, Billinge is Billinge, no matter which 'council' run the show, or which town it's near, part of, in the same borough as, pay your rates to, postcode, phone number, football team, my brother's mate's the cock of, etc. etc. etc. (long list of small-minded quotes), so the article on Billinge should be reinstated as 'Billinge' (the place called).

* Billinge Chapel End, in Metropolitan Borough of St Helens, Merseyside

* Billinge Higher End, in Metropolitan Borough of Wigan, Greater Manchester. This link will direct you only to Billinge with Winstanley, which is only a past council area and does not exist. Billinge Higher End, which does exist, does not have an article. Why? Probably because Misplaced Pages Admin. seems to be interested only in 'Councils' and 'Local Authorities', rather than Places, Towns, Villages, historical or otherwise.

I have put in italics the text was added from this IP address (see diffs). If someone else posted this then please make a note. I would recommend that you register if you are going to hang around. It's free, painless and makes everything a bit easier. If you read the link in the above standard statement you will see what they mean by vandalism. Misplaced Pages articles are not there for making a point, which rather too many people seem to be trying to do in the Wigan / St Helens area articles. Regan123 13:29, 16 December 2006

(UTC)

Recent Comments

• Hiya just wanted to post a response to your comments on Regans talk page. Firstly I did not remove any 'local schools' from any article (i was not aware schools were even listed on the articles)so I'm unsure as to why you blamed me for that. The point about Winstanley is this, do you consider Worsley Mesnes to be 'true' Wigan? (i.e. part of the town itself, not an area in the Metropolitan Borough). If you do, then how does Winstanley not adjoin Wigan? I include 'Metropolitan Borough of Wigan' in the articles where it was omitted and needs including, simple as that. You protested (rightly) about everywhere being described as 'Wigan', now you are protesting about places in the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan being called 'Metropolitan Borough of Wigan'. Where does this end?. You cant have it both ways. Considering the Billinge Hospital article refers to a place in the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan, it should be 'Wigan area' concentrated, (just like the Billinge Chapel End article should be 'St.Helens area' concentrated). Billinge Hospital was the principle maternity facility for the Wigan area so why omit that point?. How could it have been the principle maternity facility for the St Helens area? people from places in the Metropolitan Borough of St Helens, other than Billinge Chapel End and probably Rainford (i.e. areas within about 3 or 4 miles of Billinge Hospital) whould have used Whiston Hospital seeing as its closer than Billinge wouldnt they? (someone in the middle of St Helens would not go to Billinge Hospital to give birth they would have gone to Whiston, those in areas such as Swinley in the middle of Wigan would however have gone to Billinge). Man2

• No it didnt, St Helens people have been born at Whiston Hospital for years. Before Billinge shut they would have gone to Whiston not Billinge. Man2

• Billinge Hospital served as the principle maternity facility for the Wigan area i.e. Wigan. Orrell, Pem ,Inc , Platt Bridge, Shevy, Standish, Hindley, etc and the parts of St Helens and West Lancs that were CLOSE to it (i.e. Up Holland, Rainford, Haydock, Garswood, bottom of Billinge. St Helens town centre is closer to Whiston Hospital than Billinge was. The MAJORITY of the St Helens Borough were born at Whiston, not Billinge. What is hard to understand?

• Instead of changing ever article why not approach me with your disagreement?

Three revert rule

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Billinge Hospital. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you..

This is the standard template and I am not directing this at one person, but as a friendly pointer. I will be posting this to the other editor's page. Please try and achieve a consensus. If not consider Misplaced Pages:Resolving disputes and Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation. Thanks, Regan123 01:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'll explain it again shall I. Bilinge Hospital was closer to Wigan than it was to St Helens. By road Billinge Hospital to St Helens= 6.9 miles, St Helens to Whiston Hospital= 4.8 miles. Why would someone drive to Billinge from the middle of St Helens when their wife was giving birth when they could be at Whiston faster?, what would be the point?. Why would I want to put 'Wigan' in every article. A good 75-80 per cent of the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan were born at Billinge Hospital (not just the immediate area i.e.Wigan. Orrell, Pem, Ince etc etc). A much smaller percentage of the of the Met Borough of St Helens (i.e. Rainford, Haydock, Garswood, Billinge Chapel End) were born there, most were born at Whiston (including those from the centre of St Helens, as Whiston is closer.) Why is this not reflected in the article? I put the word 'Wigan' in the article when it needs to be in it i.e. Bilinge Hospital was the prnciple maternity facility for the Wigan and northern St Helens areas. What is wrong about that? Man2

• • • The only way you are going to get 6.9 miles from Billinge hospital to St.Helens, is by going to the M6 at Orrell, south to Haydock, then back on yourself along the Lancs.. Anyone who knows the area will tell you that Billinge hospital is 'local' to the Billinge side of St.Helens. Whiston area is like the 'back of beyond' to most St.Helens people. St.Helens has 'inherited' those far out places by means of having it's name put to a 'Metropolitan Borough', in the same way as Wigan has inherited places like Tyldesley and Astley. Astley is no more 'in' Wigan than it is 'on' Mars! Like I have said, Billinge Maternity unit was for THE SURROUNDING AREA. Wigan happens to be on one side, St.Helens on the other. What about Leigh, Golborne, Haydock, Newton, Earlestown, Parr, Skelmersdale, Upholland? It was the 'PRINCIPAL FACILITY' for those places too. What makes Wigan or St.Helens more important?

• go on AA route finder type ST Helens to Billinge Hospital, click 'get a map of the route' you will see the route they tell you to take does not go on the M6, and still takes over 6 miles. By the way Orrell is 'as the crow flies' 3 miles west of Wigan town centre (I'll provide citations), in fact where Orrell starts on the east side of the M6 is ever so slightly less than that 'as the crow flies'.

Wigan town centre can be taken as the Parish Church? That's where I'd call the town centre. Wigan itself starts at the River Douglas. I'll measure it tomorrow. Not as it matters anyhow, because Billinge Maternity Hospital was for the 'Surrounding Area', which includes everywhere in the 'surrounding' area. I am from neither Wigan (6 miles away) nor St.Helens (5 miles away), but I consider Billinge to be 'the local maternity hospital', for my area.

• I tell you what, lets agree to disagree. I'll leave the Hospital article alone with the words 'surrounding areas' and you leave the Orrell article alone. Then we'll both be happy. Agree? Man2

Trenchfield Mill Engine

You have removed from Wigan that it is the largest in the world. This is where the information comes from. It is also cited here and here.Regan123 19:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

3 Revert Exceeded on Wigan

You're edit here appears to be the 4th reversion of this within 24 hours which exceeds WP:3RR and could get you blocked as I explained above. I would adivse that undo this otherwise you could be blocked. Thanks, Regan123 20:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I hate to be a pain about this, but can you undo this? Thanks, Regan123 21:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Undo what?

,in a more north western area, replacing in the same. See diff. Thanks, Regan123 22:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but I cannot bring myself to replace what is correct with something that is wrong. The Antonine Itinerary does not mention a settlement in the 'same' area, it is in a more north westerly area than Wigan. This is said by people involved in Roman studies, not by me. The Wigan Historical Society are a group of amateurs who have an interest but only carry on the rumours because they 'sound good'. I'd sooner believe the academics. 80.192.242.187 22:28, 26 December 2006 (UTC) JemmyH.

Jeremy, regardless of whether or not it is correct it is a violation, put it back now and I'll raise it on talk. If the consensus is to include it then we can put it back on tomorrow with a citeable source. It's only one day and it keeps us all within the rules. Regan123 22:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Please don't call me Jeremy, as that is not my name. If you feel so much about the correct entry, you change it to a wrong entry, then change it back when you find out what is correct. I don't understand how it can be a 'violation' to enter correct information onto an article. Did you put that Wigan 'lies on the meeting point of the A49 with the A577'? because that is wrong too. It doesn't. Jemmy.

sorry that was a typo on the name. I can't change it back becuase then I would violate WP:3RR. All I am asking is that we follow the rules. If you self revert then that is acceptable and the admins are quite often happy. If I don't report I can get into trouble unless it is dealt with. As for the roads, clearly shows them meeting in to the town centre. Regan123 22:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

• The A577, as Ormskirk Road, meets the A49 to the west of Wigan as well. It seems to disappear then, for about 1 mile, before it re-emerges in Wigan as Manchester Road. Let's leave the change till tomorrow, just to make sure neither of us is ousted. Jemmy. (stands for James, Jimmy, Jemmy.)

• Hi Jemmy, glad we were able to find consensus on the Hospital/Orrell areas and finaly agree about something!. I'm certainly with you on the point you mention above about relying on academia rather than any 'historical societies' that often have never read an academic journal in thier lives. Hope we can work together on any future articles, because lets face it, we are probably more informed than most about this area. Thanks. Man2

Wigan and related controversy

Many thanks for your message regarding recent developments with regards to Wigan. May I firstly state that I am not from the Wigan area, and feel no partiality towards its contents and have little to gain from either point of view here which is being expressed, including that of Regan:- I feel this is important to establish.

Given there are alot of unregistered users involved I'm also unsure of the exact troubles of who is distrupting and who is not, so please also believe me when I say that using the term distruption was not directed at any particular indivdual (although there has been a number of obscenities added to the Wigan talk page which are wholly distruption, and since been removed).

The issue has come to my attention of late however and it is somewhat sad (in a disappointing sense) that this has not been resolved earlier, and I will try to resolve this as an impartial editor, inline with wikipedia's policy WP:3O.

Firstly, neither the presentation of "local views" or "truth" actually form part of Misplaced Pages's remit of establishing facts and are wholly discouraged. The approach taken by Misplaced Pages is that of verifiability - this can be seen at the policy statement page at WP:V.

Another important principle of Misplaced Pages is that of writing with a Neutral Point of View, specifically "All Misplaced Pages articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias." (see WP:NPOV)

That said, doing some quick research, Pemberton, Greater Manchester, according to the British Place Name Archives is part of the Metropolitan Borough of Wigan (per here) - I trust this has been established by all the involved parties as it is 100% verifiable. Also, from some very preliminary research (studing a number of maps) it appears closely related, and contiguous with Wigan, but appears to be a settlement in its own right (as opposed to a district of Wigan town proper).

I am inclined to think that Pemberton is indeed a seperate settlement to that of Wigan, albeit very closely related.

I recall this issue popped up for the Oldham article a long time ago, though a quick compromise was made (given that larger towns are often the most useful geographic frame of reference for readers). The consensus was to state as a section lead that the notable residents "may come from the wider Oldham area, including its satelite towns". This approach is not only verifiable, but was considered a fair compromise and has endured for a long time.

I would like to know your response to this as a possible suggestion/compromise (those on the Wigan article which may be from Pemberton - and I'm assuming we have seperate evidence for this - could perhaps have a "*" indicating this), before taking this matter forwards with all involved parties.

Your talk page is somewhat distressing and I would urge you register with Misplaced Pages (you obtain greater editing features as well as your own webspace), and encourage a culture of healthier debate and wider community involvement.

I hope this helps somewhat, and I welcome your response at the earliest opportunity. Jhamez84 21:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Your conjecture regarding Marks and Spencer appears to be a truism (the M&S article itself does not mention any part of the Wigan borough and thus does indeed appear to be in contradiction with the articles you mention), and I'm most surprised by this.

I wouldn't suggest the breaking down of people's birthplaces to the smallest of land division (specifically suburb, distirct or ward level) as this is not the convention of Misplaced Pages. However, please allow me some time to review the content and check the relevant policies and I'll get back to yourself within the next 24 hrs, if not by the end of the eve. Jhamez84 22:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Just from some very quick research, it appears that although contiguous with Wigan, and not nearly as significant/widely known, Pemberton is very much a settlement in it's own right.

The Wigan council website actually appears to back this up with much of its literature, particularly this map (which shows wards in white and towns/villages in black) and a number of webpages stating that Pemberton has a town centre (see here).

There are a number of historic sources outlining that Pemberton had a seperate township status from that of Wigan itself; specifically the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, and the Royal National and Commercial Directory and Topography of the county of Lancashire (Pigot & Co. 1828).

The postal town for Pemberton is WIGAN. Though the towns of Royton, Shaw and Crompton and even the Saddleworth area all have an OLDHAM postal despite being settlements in their own right, and it is not convention to categorise people according to postal town. What is interesting is that Pemberton is included in the second line of address labels, like say Royton, indicating it is a seperate settlement from that of the postal town, rather than a district of it. This all adds weight, in my view, that the birth place should be more clearly defined with regards to the Wigan area and that if a source says Pemberton, it should be removed from the Wigan article (but not strictly the Wigan categories as towns that give their names to boroughs, double up as such) and vice versa.

With regards to stating exactly where a person was born, we should provide references, otherwise it should not be included at all - "The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not on those seeking to remove it". WP:MOSBIO, WP:LIVING and WP:NCP are all indepth policies on how to write about people, though the key wikipedia principle of verifiability and reliable sources keeps poping up. To resolve disputes about where people are from/born/lived, none of them should be included in any articles or categories until sources are found. Autobiographies, biographies or local history books would almost certainly settle this swiftly, though would be laborious for those disinterested in reading. Providing sources for this type of birthplace list is also part of the Misplaced Pages UK Geography guidelines, and so should be acknowledged.

I hope this clears things up a little. In short, we should not use any lists or categories until reliable sources are found. If a biography states that a person is from Wigan, despite local knowledge that it is otherwise, we should still use Wigan, as this is verifiable. The same goes for the contrary.

What I would put to yourself now is, would you consider registering and begin to outline this with the fellow contributors? If so, I'd certainly be inclined to help. Jhamez84 00:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm well aware that Wigan is a town within the metropolitan borough of the same name, which also cotains other towns. This is not the issue here, nor the one being discussed. Can you please re-read my previous reply. Jhamez84 01:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries and hectares

Given you have decided not to register, nor respond, can you please note the convention on edit summaries:

When editing articles, a small "Summary" field under the main edit-box appears like this:

It is good practice, as well as good manners to fill in the Edit Summary field with a brief explanation as to what you are contributing/changing. It need only be a few words; it helps everyone to understand what is changed, such as when perusing the history of the page.

Filling in the edit summary helps other users understand that you intend to make justifiable changes to the content rather than (potentially) spoil the page. This is particularly useful for IP/anon users such as yourself to assume good faith in your edits.

With regards to your recent inclusions of hectare areas of land for the Wigan Borough, can you please cite your source? That kind of infomation is more suitable in the geo-admin section also per the UK geo wiki project. Regards, Jhamez84 21:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

England

reply Thanks/wangi 13:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Please follow Misplaced Pages practice

Your edits fail to meet Misplaced Pages standards in a number of ways. Firstly, you never sign your comments or other edits. Please do so by typing four tildes at the end of them. Second, you don't use the summary box to describe your edits consistently. Please do so.

More importantly, you really need to educate yourself on Misplaced Pages standards for verifiability. I strongly suggest you read WP:REF and especially [WP:V} on verifiability. Your assertion on my talk page that "I strongly disagree with your comment ... 'it is more important to be verifiable than it is to be correct" is against Misplaced Pages policy. It is precisely the verifiability of facts that PREVENTS the imposition of "personally opinionated writings", of which offense your edits are a prime example. Where I live and how many times I have seen the Sankey Canal is irrelevant. If I can verify and you cannot, my edits are right and yours are wrong.

You appear to have an agenda with this canal, of obliterating all traces of the name "St Helens Canal", which annoys you. If you want to do so, you had better have some sources to back that up. I gave mine. Your assertion that the Ordnance Survey, which has been the official mapping body for the United Kingdom for more than 250 years, is equivalent in authority to a bunch of men standing around in a pub, you're not going to be taken seriously here. Misplaced Pages is not a collection of ramblings; it's an encyclopedia. The OS is a source. It is in fact the premier mapping agency in the history of the world. Your observation of a sign is not a source. Your website of enthusiasts is not a source.

My problem with your English usage has nothing to do with American English versus British English, which are not in fact significantly different in grammatical usage; and I am well aware of those differences that do exist). My problem, is with your, runaway, usage, of, commas, after almost, every, word, you, write. Commas are used to separate various types of clauses within sentences. May I suggest the article Comma (punctuation) for an overview. You also make trivial mistakes like "it's" for "its" on a regular basis. Your worse offenses, however, is extremely long sentences which ramble across three or four separate topics, and the insertion of paranthetical remarks which do not belong in the body of an article.

The word "truism" is an example. You have not grasped my objection to your use of it. It is not dependent on its meaning; it's about its placement in parentheses with no hint of a suggestion of what you mean by it. If you have a problem with a sentence as written in the article, the correct course of action is to rewrite it to express your intended meaning. This article, when I first came across it, barely expressed any meaning at all. From the point of view of an encyclopedia reader, the only thing one could gather is that a collection of cranks get very annoyed when you call it the St Helens Canal. Instead of putting "(truism)" after the dreaded "St Helens", why not say instead "Although 'St Helens Canal' is popularly used to refer to the entire length of the canal, the official name of the original, middle, section is 'Sankey Canal'" or something like that.

My intention here is not to impose beliefs on you but to make a better article. My edits have been attempts to extract sense from a mush of unfocused run-on sentences that repeated themselves, asserted popular local beliefs as if they were fact, mixed up a variety of random trivia with real history, and overall made up an unintelligible stew. In doing so, I used correct, or at least more correct, English, and on matters of fact I used an official document produced by your national government. I welcome your contributions to this article and others, but you must adhere to Misplaced Pages standards such as these. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 17:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks and shouting

Your remarks on my Talk page are inappropriate. Shouting is always inappropriate. For the record, although you write "AND, THE WAY YOU REFER TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SANKEY CANAL RESTORATION SOCIETY AS A 'COLLECTION OF CRANKS WHO GET ANNOYED AT IT BEING CALLED THE ST.HELENS CANAL' IS VERY CHILDLIKE", a quick glance at what I actually wrote reveals that I said no such thing; I was not referring to the Society at all, but to the impression a casual reader would get from looking at the page. In point of fact, I was referring to you.

You continue to fail to understand how Misplaced Pages works. If you have better information than is what is there already, the presecribed course of action is to edit the article to reflect the facts, keeping in mind that verifiability is crucial. What you have done instead is insert your grumbling remarks in the middle of the text with no regard for English usage or sense.

My remoteness from the Sankey Canal is a GOOD thing; it means I am impartial, which is a fundamental Misplaced Pages requirement. You are not; your every edit, in this article as well as most of the others, is steeped in Point of View, which is forbidden here. I don't care what the Canal is called, in part or in whole. I care about having the article be accurate, verifiable, and understandable. You, in contrast, care only about pushing a POV.

I'm done here; I'm not going to argue with you any more. You are not responsive to argument. Your belligerence is apparent in nearly every article you touch. If you would put half as much energy into making this article better as you have in attacking me and my motives, it would be good article. Alas, it is not, and I fear it never will be. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 00:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:V

Misplaced Pages's Misplaced Pages:verifiability is not MY policy; I had no hand in writing it. It is however official policy; it says right at the top "This page is an official policy on the English Misplaced Pages". It also says "the threshold for inclusion in Misplaced Pages is verifiability, not truth". Again, this is not me, it's Misplaced Pages.

Verifiability is not some arcane procedural rule that no one takes seriously; it is "one of the core content policies of Misplaced Pages. The other two are Misplaced Pages:No original research and Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Misplaced Pages articles. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should try to familiarize themselves with all three."

What you are doing when you go out to the canal and observe the sign is original research. Misplaced Pages is NOT THE PLACE to hash out the truth or argue about what's what. It is an encyclopedia. If you are looking for a place to argue endlessly about local affairs, may I suggest you take it to the pub, not here on Misplaced Pages.

Seriously. Read the article. Read it all the way through. Understand it. It's for your own good and the good of Misplaced Pages. Think about it; I don't know you from a hole in the ground; how do I know that you're not some sort of nut case who's never been within a thousand miles of the canal, and who is deliberately filling Misplaced Pages with garbage? How do you know I'm not the same? BY OUR SOURCES. Use them.

Calling me playground names like "Prick" and "a Gay" as you have done is not going to make Misplaced Pages any better. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 17:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Fnarf999

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalise Misplaced Pages, as you did to User talk:Fnarf999, you will be blocked from editing. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 20:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Misplaced Pages as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated.-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Post Towns

Ok. I'll start with the assumption I'm dealing with with someone who simply has not understood what a Post Town is and that you are in good faith, rather than what I suspect is the case that you are just having a laugh and doing what you do to wind people up. Now before you read on, please go and read the link that explains what a Post Town actually is. OK, now you have read it I will elaborate it. YOUR postcode is WN4, so that means that you could just write;

Jemmyh

xxxx road

WIGAN

WN4 xxx

Then the letter will come to your address.

A post town is NOT the town you live in but the LOCATION of the central SORTING OFFICE when postcodes where actually assigned in the late 1960's.

Now this is an easily checked fact, just by clicking on the link which says Post Town in the info boxes. It is also an easily understood fact which is why other users have been reverting your changes so often. Not through any animosity to yourself or any grudge but because they see a faulty change and undo it.

You have not helped your case by becoming extremely abusive to Fnarf999 and vandalising his page. This is what leads us to suspect that you are not in fact 49 but much much younger. As what was written is normally what we find from pre-teens rather than adults.

Now I have done this explanation in good faith to help you understand why people are responding to your edits the way they are. What I would suggest is that you make your own account, giving background information on yourself and your interests, only edit what you KNOW to be 100% correct and can check from other sources, also avoid the behaviour that has upset so many other users over the past few weeks. Galloglass 13:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I'm not going to explain the difference between a postal district and a postal town. That is readily understandable to someone who who wishes too. You clearly don't want to UNDERSTAND which I suppose is your privilige. Don't then act all surprised when people who DO understand such things undo your edits. You clearly ARE the windup merchant everyone seems to think you are. I gave you the benefit of the doubt but it appears I was wrong to do so. Galloglass 20:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry your highly esteemed self over it, cockle, I've already explained 'the difference between a postal district and a postal town', according to the Royal Mail, to you, on your talk page. 80.192.242.187 14:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.