Talk:Manchester - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 195.212.52.6 (talk) at 00:03, 8 July 2007 (→Revert of "constant vandalism"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:03, 8 July 2007 by 195.212.52.6 (talk) (→Revert of "constant vandalism")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Template:V0.5

Manchester was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 23, 2007). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Manchester article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

UK geography Unassessed

	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 Misplaced Pages. 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article needs a map.
	This article needs census data.

Greater Manchester Unassessed

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Vote for Image

It is a good photograph, but I don't believe it's good enough. There is nothing in that picture that says "Manchester" in the same way that would a photo of London containing the Parliament building or the London Eye. Or the Gherkin.

Though Manchester doesn't have an icon quite in the ball park of those mentioned above, it would be nice to be able to point at something and say it is definitively Manchester. I would suggest a picture that captures the Beetham Tower and it's weird blade-thing on top, with perhaps Castlefields in the foreground, if that's possible? Or perhaps the commercial area by the Triangle/revamped Arndale? That has the advantage of showing the old Printworks to emphasise Manchester's synthesis of old industry and modern commerce. It wouldn't be my first choice but it's 'got' to be better...

The main problem with the current picture is that it is taken at night. Could be anywhere. If somebody could provide a picture taken during the day that would be marvellous. I'll try and get out there soon but if somebody's got something ready then perhaps they could do it now?

Any reason not to change it?

Alun 4th June 2007 22:30 BST

I've just looked at the pictures on London's page. The "Night view over the eastern side of Central London" picture illustrates my point quite well. It is hard to know what you're looking at. The London article quite rightly includes it, but lower down and after the Palace of Westminster and the Gherkin/London-Eye skyline. Suggest shifting the current first picture down and replcing the headline picture. Suggestions for the main picture? I've detailed my preference above. There's also Piccadilly Gardens (not bad), Market Street (too generic?), The Portland Tower (ditto) or the circular Library/Town Hall (mmmmmm). Maybe if someone's got a picture of the scary Santa that appears climbing over the town hall every Christmas...;@)

There's been no discussion on this issue over the last 3 weeks, and I feel strongly that the headline image is not goot enough. Therefore I am unilaterally swapping 2 picture around. The city centre picture is being promoted and the night-shot from the Beetham Tower is being relegated. Please do not revert. If you feel I am wrong to do this, please discuss below and then a consensus can be reached. Alun 17:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I really don't see why you have changed the image for Manchester, for the reasons you stated above it seems that the image that was in place seemed more appropriate to your requirements instead of one that you have promoted that was relegated more than 3 months ago?

R_Orange 17:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments R_Orange. I don't think the image I've promoted is perfect but it's better because there are recognisable Manchester icons visible. The Beetham one would be great, nay perfect if it were daytime. We just need to see some landmarks that are Manchester, not a dark picture of streetlights and little else. I took a few last week, and I was going to use one of them in the change, but I noticed that the one I've promoted is better than any of mine. I'll have another go next weekend if the weather's good, but for now can we leave it open for discussion? Alun 18:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Any Image of Manchester is preferable to a black-out vision from Deansgate. That isn't Manchester? Was It Salford? Was It Warrington? That Beatham Tower pix stinks. We do have summer in Manchester. Pic is sufficient at mo plz no reverts. Mike33 06:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The main image has been changed. Personally I like it less than the skyline one I put up there, but I'm not going to change it without a vote. The three options I propose are: 1. Original night-time shot from the Beetham Tower 2. Central Manchester Skyline daytime shot 3. King Street daytime shot

My vote is for 2.

My vote is 2 Mike33 23:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

My first choice is 2, my second choice is 3. Number 1 is definitely no-no. --Jotel 12:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I recently changed the top image on the article to one showing Beetham Tower and a canal barge moored which shows Manchester's industrial past with the canal and its new future with the skyscraper. Here are the pics that have been swapped around for the top image:

Candidate 1 Night time shot. Candidate 1 Night time shot.
Candidate 2 Shot of skyline.
Candidate 3 Shot of City Tower with King Street.
Candidate 4 Showing Beetham Tower with Castlefield.
Candidate 5 Showing Urbis and "Wheel"

anybody have a strong preference? XAndreWx 02:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems we have a fourth option then. I've rejigged the order of the gallery to reflect the original options. I'm not changing my vote, however, so as it stands I'm still going to change the image back. I'll wait a few more days for discussion first though.

Oh, and is the canal photo actually in Manchester? I'm wondering the foreground is Salford. I feel like that ought to matter. Does it?Alun 06:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

There aren't any canals in Salford anywhere near that point. It looks like the spur on the Bridgewater to me, but perhaps XAndreWx will confirm. Mr Stephen 08:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Then we'll assume it is a valid Manchester picture. As there's not much activity on this discussion anymore, I'll assume that we are approaching consensus. So far based on discussions, comments and voting I think picture 2 is preferred. I'll change it within 24 hours unless there are any new points made. Please let me know if you are unhappy with this.

User:Manc has recently uploaded a picture of Manchester, (and displayed it on the page), with the ferris wheel and Urbis exhibition centre in the background. According to User:Alun's description of what is thought to be a "good picture" it seems superiorly better than other choices that have been shown in the gallery provided. (See page for picture) - R_Orange 14:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't believe it is a better picture at all, and please don't use my name to back up the choice to change the picture. You can't know that I'd agree with that prior to asking me, but more importantly it is not up to me! I was trying to bring a consensus about, and a number of people have discussed this issue. The overwhelming (so far) favourite is choice 2, so I have reverted to that choice. This isn't my decision alone, and I will gladly yield if discussion moves towards an alternative.

I agree that a picture of the big wheel might be a good idea, but there are two problems: firstly, I believe such a picture should show more than just a third of the wheel and a sliver of Urbis, and secondly, the wheel is not a permanent feature of Manchester in the way the Millennium Eye is of London. The big wheel (does it have a name, even?) is a temporary, albeit recurring, attraction. Let's be clearer, perhaps. If the picture shows more than one obviously visible feature of Manchester that has its own significant (non-stub) Misplaced Pages entry, it is acceptably representative of Manchester.Alun 18:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I propose the the two added images as at least candidates for feature on the Manchester page MancMancManc 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I've had to remove the two extra images from the candidate gallery as the correct copyright information is not tagged to them. They are therefore unsuitable as a candidates for any sort of picture, let alone the feature. Please visit the images' pages and view their speedy deletion notices.Alun 07:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I Vote 2: I think this is the best of a mediocre bunch to be honest. Are their no budding photographers out there able to get a professional shot of Manchester's skyline? Jza84 20:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

If his/her name suggest anything User:Manc photographer may be worth contacting? Alternatively, User:Alcazaba states that there main reason for being here is to provide pictures and is listed on Misplaced Pages:Photo_Matching_Service#Greater_Manchester. However, he/she hasnt responded to a message I left on his talk page about Category:Misplaced Pages requested photographs in Greater Manchester.Pit-yacker 19:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The mini-gallery of candidates 6 and 7 has now been removed; the images look to have been deleted for not meeting copyright requirements from hereon, any further candidates should be referred to as candidates 8, 9 etc. Reserve numbers 6 and 7 for the deleted images purely to avoid confusion. Not that I'm suggesting anmy more images be put forward. I think consensus is strong for our current headline image in the absence of any further discussion.Alun 19:36, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to throw another option into the mix; there are some professional (and not free to use) photographs avaliable here. I contacted a photographer from this site some time ago who had no problem releasing the photograph used at the top of the Oldham article to Misplaced Pages. Some of the images are a little dated now (pre-beetham), but they may be able to help. Jza84 20:30, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I've just had a look at these and you're right; there are some fabulous shots of Manchester. I'm referring to the skyline ones from a long distance away. If we could get an up-to-date one of those with Beetham in it would be perfect. Some of them might be better than what we've got even without Beetham.

I'm going to try to get out there with a tripod if this dirty weather ever clears up, so I might upload one like it if I can get a good shot. In the meantime if somebody wants to ask permission from this photographer I think that's fabulous. How would we go about selecting one to ask permission about? We can't just copy into a gallery to select because there might be copyright issues. Perhaps somebody should sound him/her out generally first. At least we don't have the selection problem if it's a flat "no"...Alun 22:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree with my tastes and sensibilities! Each image (once clicked) gives the name and contact details of the photographer. I asked for the Oldham image some time ago, but stated that this site is non-commercial and would credit him as the photographer, and so he agreed with no problem!

Is there an image (or images) you think would work well? I could contact that specific photographer then to see if they are willing to release that image, or even better, release a post-beetham one! Jza84 23:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

British Council HQ in Manchester

I think that its been established before that the 1991/2 British Council headquarters move to manchester was a de-centering and that both headquarters have different directorates.

This isn't actually the case, I reverted the first mention, (on a previous query (archive passim)) of metropolitan centres. but a reference was cited but not added to the page quote:

_{The UK is the base of our operations. From our headquarters in London and our metropolitan centres in Manchester, Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh and a network of regional offices across the UK, we engage with a broad range of partners to present the best of the UK in all its diversity to a worldwide audience.}

Its actually on the first page not page 65 that the editor listed see 261kb dont click if ur on dial-up. - you can google the words

_{british council metropolitan Manchester Belfast}

and get the same result. Mike33 15:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I meant page 65 of the annual report in the pdf format. I did not realise the pdf and html versions are not the same :-(
Jotel 15:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Thats cool Jotel, just try and source in talk after u edit - things get very complicated without quoting sources and we both end up being banned. but thanks for a very useful contribution. Mike33 16:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

So called official city guide

In what sense is http://www.geocities.com/leedsguide/manchester the official city guide ? It seems to be an advertising site, with no reference to anything official.--Jotel 15:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Being a Geocities site, it is not a reliable link, therefore should not be used as a link at all. - Erebus555 15:33, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Avro & Manchester

Apparently during WW II Manchester "was home to Avro (now BAE Systems) which built countless aircraft". Not exactly countless... But my real question is: the Avro article says Avro left Manchester for Woodford in 1920s. So shouldn't this sentence be deleted ? --Jotel 15:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I've added a tag requesting citation. This means that someone can find a source that supports the sentence. If this sentence is true, then the Avro article may need some checking over. I think the sentence may need to some rewriting anyway - especially with the use of "countless". - Erebus555 15:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

GA failed

I have reviewed this article according to the GA criteria and have failed this article at this time. The main reason for failing this article is the multiple citation needed tags. Sources should be added or the statements need to be removed. Go through the article and make sure to add inline citations to any statements that may be questioned about their verifiability. Once you have addressed this, please look over the rest of the criteria to see if the article is ready to be nominated again. If you disagree with this review, then you can seek an alternate opinion at Misplaced Pages:Good article review. If you have any questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Nehrams2020 08:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Statments needing citations listed below. Mr Stephen 15:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Doing... The Pennines and Rossendale Forest hills that surround the city to its east and north receive much snow in the winter and many roads leading out of the city can be closed due to snow ...

Two refs, I've another from the met office somewhere, between them I should be able to finish & modify the passage. Mr Stephen 10:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199899/cmhansrd/vo990201/text/90201w15.htm. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). House of Commons. 1 Feb 1999. col. 467–. {{cite book}}: |chapter-url= missing title (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)

"Snake Pass". High Peak sightseers guide. Retrieved 2007-07-06.

Not done Around the 13th century, Manchester grew heavily due to an influx of Flemish settlers who founded Manchester's new cotton industry ...

"The prosperity of Manchester in the late Middle Ages and the Tudor period was already weaving. About 1375 Edward III settled a colony of Flemish weavers. The materials used were wool and linen, though import of cotton from Smyrna and Cyprus had already begun on a very small scale." Pevsner, Nikolaus (1969). The Buildings of England: South Lancashire. London: Penguin. pp. p265. ISBN 0-14-071036-1. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help) Mr Stephen 17:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Not done Manchester quickly grew into the most important industrial centre in the world, and, significantly, the first industrial society.

Done The docks functioned up until the 1970s, with their closure leading to a large increase in unemployment in the area.

Re-written & three WP:RSs added. The docks closed in 1982. Mr Stephen 19:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Rejected During World War II Manchester was involved in heavy industrial construction. It was home to Avro (now BAE Systems) which built countless aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF), the most famous being the Avro Lancaster bomber.

I've removed "It was home to Avro (now BAE Systems) which built countless aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF), the most famous being the Avro Lancaster bomber." The whole country was mobilised in the war. Avro's main base was certainly at Woodford by then, but parts (and planes) were made in many places. Mr Stephen 19:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Done The completion of the renovated Manchester Arndale in September 2006 allowed the centre to hold the title of Europe's largest city centre shopping mall.

The ref says it's the UK's largest, not as above. Article amended. Mr Stephen 18:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Done (Spinningfields) Other buildings include a 110 metre tall office building, a new justice centre and new Crown Court, to be built over the next few years.

Done It has been estimated that around 35% of Manchester's caucasian/white community are of Irish ancestry.

I'm unconvinced by this ref. Does anyone else have an opinion? Mr Stephen 19:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Done Manchester's St Patrick's Day parade is one of the world's largest.

The given ref states that the Irish Festival, not St Patrick's day parade, is one of the largest in Europe. Article amended. Mr Stephen 19:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Done Greater Manchester has a higher percentage of the motorway network than any other county in the country. According to the Guinness Book of World Records, it has the most traffic lanes side by side (17), spread across several parallel carriageways (M61 at Linnyshaw Moss, Greater Manchester, close to the M60 interchange)

The ref is second-hand. The Guinness Book of World Records is supposed to be one of the biggest-selling books of all time. Hasn't anyone got a copy? Mr Stephen 19:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I found & added a ref in the 1993 edition that should be OK for now, but a more recent version would be better. I've also added a ref from the Telegraph. Mr Stephen 10:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

That's as maybe, but it's not in Manchester - it's not even in the area that people tend to think of as "informal" Manchester, being along the Salford/Bolton borough boundary (or about 6.5 miles outside the city boundary). Should it really be in here at all? Personally, I think it deserves to be in one of the Greater Manchester articles. Fingerpuppet 12:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair point, but it is very much part of Manchester's transport links. The same applies to "The Pennines and Rossendale Forest hills that surround the city to its east and north receive much snow in the winter and many roads leading out of the city can be closed due to snow ..." (see above) which is proving a pig to reference with the stuff available to me. Mr Stephen 15:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm not surprised! I'd also suggest that by the time you get to either of those or Snake Pass mentioned elsewhere in the article, that you're well outside the city in its widest sense. I understand exactly why they're all in there and I'm just vaguely uncomfortable with them - I'm not about to throw wobblies about them being in! Fingerpuppet 19:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ga Failed

Some Links

Machester was certainly the first industrial centre in the world, but most important???? surely not. Arndale centre was the biggest in 1979, but nothing can compete with the megoliths, that have shot up since. Irish community, would be very hard to say, it wasn't mentioned in the census and its probably more of a self descriptive term. Based on Irish imigration in the 1850s onwards it could well be true but very hard to source. Mike33 18:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

This link has been added If it is going to be a good article its just to blind - who says that? Mike33 20:38, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Unique Selling Point

We shouldn't actually laugh at vandalism, but the the vandalism - Manchester is often described as city of gay boys... Did amuse me. I think the guy got it right, everytime I see a letter from Pat Karney in the evening news, he tells us the same thing! Albeit interlaced with vibrant, 24 hour city, integrated public transport!, If he'd have found a quote from councillor Karney, we wouldn't have battered an eyelid! Mike33 20:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Swiss Consulate

I went to the Swiss consulate and it was in Portland Towers on Portland Street, but it was 18months ago. I don't think it has been in Piccadilly Plaza for 5yrs. I google turns up both addresses plus a solicitors on Deansgate. User:Jotel cleaned up some of the consulates today, so it just reminded me. Mike33 20:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Climate Section

Does anyone agree that this section seems to contradict itself somewhat? First it says that Manchester's reputation as rainy is undeserved; later it explains how that reputation came about - although it doesn't rain large volumes, it rains quite often. Checking here Manchester's mean rainy days are far higher than the two cities to which it's compared in the article (New York and Rome), but similar to the other UK cities listed. This considered, it is my belief that whilst the reputation warrants a mention; assessing the validity of such isn't really feasible, considering the inexplicit nature of the term rainy. Adzz 23:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree here. I think we need to improve some of the citation in that section. Some quotes about it's "rainyness" may help better establish context. Do you think you can improve the section in any way? I'd certainly welcome it. Jza84 13:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Some mis-leadings on the Manchester site...

within the paragraph talking about Granada TV it also mentions Top of the Pops. Anyone reading that paragraph from overseas would be mislead into thinking that Granada made Top Of the Pops. It should be placed within the BBC paragraph.

Also as you talk about BBC other studios, why not mention Granada's other studio's in Liverpool and Lancaster, as at the moment it some sem a bit biased towards the BBC.

Coronation Street is the Worlds longest running television soap (in terms of years).

ITV Children's presentation did come from Manchester when they closed Central Lenton Road studios in Nottingham. But the department has since been closed down and sold off.

BBC corrections --- A Question of Sport is made at the Granada Studious and not BBC studios (although it is a BBC programme) and is also made in London. Mastermind is also made at Granada studios whilst Real Story has now been axed.

No mention about BBC and ITV Granada back-staff working together under 360media banner so that programmes for each channel can be made at either BBC or Granada studios.

Transport - also mention that Manchester is split into 2 (North and South) as there are no cross city routes. South having a wel-maintained more stable network from a few bus companies whilst the north is more fragmented and many more indepedents due to the policies of the main operator and as such not as easy to travel around unlike the south of the city.(staying neautral of couorse!!)

Also mention that Manchester has the largest student population Europe.

Beatham Tower is the largest residential building in Western Europe.

Royal Bank of Scotland in Spinngfields in NOT their headquarters. It is their main English office and it is not just 1 building but 2. The one on Deansgate is called Spinningfields whilst they have another building behind (also within the Spinningfields area project) and that building is called 1 Hardman Boulevard. RBS main headquarters for the whole of the UK is in Gogoburn in Edinburgh. (I used to work for RBS!!) - reference note (29) only refers to the BRanch that is situated underneath the office block and it is actually a NatWest branch (although still part of the RBS group!)

Thanks

Amosc99 83.116.137.187 06:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert of "constant vandalism"

Seeing as this reference to Birmingham being a contender for second city status is constantly removed under the title of "vandalism", I have since removed a similar reference to Manchester from the Birmingham page. Personally, I feel that having such references are actually useful in showing a balanced view on the matter.

I request that if this is removed again, please do not label it as vandalism and assume good faith. - Erebus555 10:32, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Challenges (for want of a better word) from other cities should be mentioned in the article, but not the lead I believe. Stating it is considered by many as the 2nd city is quite helpful for context, but challenges clutter up the article are are in breach of WP:LEAD.

It's not just Birmingham's people (as opposed to Birmingham which is not sentient) who claim Birmingham is the 2nd city, many Scots claim Edinburgh and Glasgow, whilst there are claims for Liverpool too. This is all covered in the second city article. Both Birmingham and Manchester should not have the counter claims (they're just going to be reverted for better or worse) in the lead, but perhaps later in the prose.

I must urge the anon in question however to desist his/her work as they are in breach of multiple policies, including WP:3RR and WP:POINT. Jza84 12:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Good to see that the grim mill town of Manchester's nonsense propaganda campaign to laughingly promote itself as the second city has been stopped in its tracks on the Birmingham page - UNLUCKY!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.212.52.6 (talk • contribs) 13:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC).

Manchester is a city not a town, and has no textile industry. Manchester is not sentient and cannot promote itself - the claim of second city status (which has no official baring in the UK) is one which is (merely) supported by all claiments by various sources, groups and people. Manchester's are quite high profile, reliable and citable in this instance, and are presented as such for context in a neutral frame of reference. Please do not use the talk page, or indeed articles, for asserting personal points of view (see WP:TALK and WP:POV), as any such contributions are likely to be removed by the editting community. Jza84 14:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Manchester does indeed have many mills and an extensive textile industry Manchester Textile Manufacturers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.212.52.6 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC).

As Does Birmingham. Please sign your comments from hereon, or consider registering if you would like to continue contributing. Jza84 16:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Added refrences to international media sources to illustrate general reporting in the media of Manchester as the UK's third city, as current statement is misleading and does not reflect an independent viewpoint as per WP:LEAD which specifies a brief explaination of the main controversies. In agreement with this discussion, these references are not a direct claim by the city of Birmingham of second city status. Please assume good faith and inform me if similar references of general reporting can be found for Birmingham as the UK's third city as I was unable to find any?...wonder why that may be? :-) 212.139.103.140 01:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

lol "...Wonder why that may be?" It reminds me of a quote from Brian Redhead, I came accross while seeking a neutral source (Polls are very rarely neutral) - "Ask anyone on a street in Manchester what is the second city of England and they'll tell you - it's a toss up between London and Birmingham." Don't lynch me guys, It made me giggle. Mike33 05:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I must insist that the anon halts this campaign to devalue the status (unofficial, but contextual) of Manchester and citation provided within. The anon is misappropriating citation, claiming two references in the media (which could easily have been written by biased Brummies) represent the entire bredth of the published realm. There's nothing wrong with the statement how it is currently written - it's neutral, referenced and established context. The MORI poll that asserted Manchester holds 2nd city status by it's nature demotes Birmingham to 3rd city (if that), but I don't think that's suitable.

Asking the editting community to "assume good faith" does not qualify as a licence to breach WP:POINT and WP:NPOV. What I suggest is that both cities include that they are often cited as 2nd city - and take the neutralist standpoint (given it's so close), that they jointly hold 2nd city status. Jza84 22:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd certainly second that - one of the strangest sources they used was a correction from the New York Times going back to 1995. That was 12 years ago!!! Mike33 22:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. There is a requirement to cite sources, but there is also a policy which dictates both to check the reliability and verifiability of the source. Again, by checking against WP:RS, the anon is in breach of policy by misappropriating the source material, as those sources categorically do not statisfy all aspects of reliability.

May I make the anon aware that the three revert rule applies; multiple reverts or instances of edit warring can be reported, and will likely see accounts being blocked and the article protected. Jza84 22:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I've put a 3RR warning after yours on his talk page - his obviously has an agenda (see grimy mill town above), but if he does it again in the next day our only recourse is to {{test4}} and report to WP:AIV - its certainly not about addressing the balance. A few hours in the sin bin does wonders. Mike33 23:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Other members of the editing community without partisan interests in promoting Manchester view such edits as perfecly acceptable and substantiated source. Please do not try and intimidate me whilst using Misplaced Pages.

Such additions were discussed on the Manchester discussion board prior to amendment in line with WP:CIVIL - no counter sources have yet been put forward reporting Birmingham as the 'UK's third city' as I do not believe any credible news organisation would report such. I believe these sources are still fully valid but will comply with WP:CIVIL and discuss further to have them reinstated. Should a satisfactory conclusion not be reached I will take the matter further, as I believe the Manchester article represents only a partisan POV and not that of neutral Encyclopedic content and deliberate attempts are being made to ensure this remains the case. I should however make it clear from my past experience in life that I will not tolerate any form of intimidation as I have regularly experienced when accessing other Manchester related websites.

I've put a 3RR warning on the talk page of Jza84 - who obviously has an agenda and has no right to try and bully and assert greater authority over newer contributors 'because they have been here longer' as can be seen on my talk page. This is certainly not a good exaple to set when trying to encourage new contributors to Misplaced Pages. 195.212.52.6 00:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

"First industrial city"

With regards to the claim made in the lead section that Manchester was the world's first industrial city. I don't believe this is historically accurate. Manchester was certainly among the first industrial cities which emerged during the early industrial revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries, along with Birmingham and Sheffield and even Derby. If you read History of Birmingham or History of Sheffield you will see that they have histories of industry dating back centuries and industrialised at about the same time. I can't see that Manchester has any special claims to having beaten any of these.

I have therefore altered this claim from 'the first' to 'one of the first' several times but it keeps being added back. G-Man * 01:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I do have a number of sources (one of which I added) which explicitly states the "first industrialised city". I've no real objections to "one of the first", though I'm conscious of not misappropriating the citation. I'd be interested to know what the criteria is used for "first industrialised city"; perhaps it means in terms of its architectural landscape, or economy, or "first fully industrialised city" (as opposed to partly industrialised which of course all settlements would have had some form or industry). A curious problem Jza84 12:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Naah, Manchester really is regarded as the first industrial city. Go to google scholar and enter "first industrial city" and see what you get. Cotton & Ancoats seem to be the criteria, but I'm happy to be corrected. Mr Stephen 20:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Quite. I have a printed source, and Google scholar also seems to back the claim. I think G-Man's intentions were admirable and perfectly understandable, but I think we should rephrase the statement how it was. Of course every settlement would have had industry as soon as trade was invented, but I think Manchester was the first fully/truly industrialised city, in economy, landscape, demographics, and spirit. Jza84 23:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I dunno, look at this. G-Man * 23:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Touchet! Hmmmm. An interesting counter claim, and quite a verifiable source - perhaps then we ought to use the phrase (as used for every other it seems) that it is often/sometimes decribed/credited/quoted as the first industrialised city? Objections? Jza84 23:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The quote is here.

"Meeting here, by appointment, Mr. Bakewell, who being related to some gentlemen in the manufactory no time was lost; they had the goodness to shew me every thing I wished. The circumstance in the fabric which most excited my surprise was the small, or rather no use, that is made o water; in the town there are no mills; and the number in the vicinity, for the direct operations of the fabric, are inconsiderable; the number of little and distinct forges for works performed by a single hand, surprised me; I had conceived that machinery was carried much further in this fabric; they have some tools of beautiful invention, but which, to an inquisitive and reflecting mind, excites some degree of wonder that so many operations yet remain performed by the reiterated strokes of hand, given by a man in executing works that might apparently be abridged with the same case as others, seemingly more complex. I saw no machines comparable to a cotton mill or a stocking engine. The capital improvement wrought since I was here before is the canal to Oxford, Coventry, Wolverhampton, &.; the port, as it may be called. or double canal head in the town crouded with coal barges is a noble spectacle, with that prodigious animation, which the immense trade of this place could alone give. I looked around me with amazement at the change effected in twelve years; so great that this place may now probably be reckoned, with justice, the first manufacturing town in the world. From this port and these quays you may now go by water to Hull, Liverpool, Bristol, Oxford (130 miles), and London."

Leaving aside, for now, WP:UNDUE, do we interpret "first" as "earliest" or "foremost"? But I repeat, there are lots of references that Manchester was the first (earliest) industrial town. The difficulty I have always had is finding a suitably succinct, unambiguous, and accessible reference. For now, Hartwell (see the bibliography in the article) p13 should lay the general matter to rest with "SE Lancashire and Manchester became the first industrial econoomy and society in the world, but the precise reason " Mr Stephen 18:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

'Often credited as' sounds ok. G-Man T 21:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Religion

May I suggest that the information in that section be placed into a table and that more information be added in terms of areas with high populations of Hindus, Buddhists, Jews etc. etc. - Erebus555 16:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It think it might be a good reference tool for the BNP, but I can't really see it being of any great value to anyone else. The 2001 Census has been online years so anyone can look up for themselves. The information Manchester City Council is tabulated by ward and despite notions that Manchester has ghettos with the exception of Newton Heath 85% Christian and Rusholme 45% Muslim, the distribution is very healthy. Mike33 05:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that adds more weight to adding such infomation. It's also a requirement of WP:UKCITIES that religious composition is reported upon. Cheetham Hill and other such areas are cosmopolitan districts of Manchester which, should suitable citation be found, would surely dispell myths of Manchester's Ghettoism. Jza84 22:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Categories: