Jump to content

Talk:Abbeydale and Abbeymead

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move

[edit]

I propose we move this artile to Abbey, Gloucester and include information on both Abbeydale and Abbeymead plus the new developments across the M5 on the other side of the Lobley's Drive link road.

If no-one objects, I will do so and rewrite the article in a few days time. Alex McKee (talk) 14:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little later than a few days but I have moved the article. Since no-one has objected in coming up on 2 years I assume this will be OK. I'll immediately start altering and improving the article to refer to both Abbeydale and Abbeymead. Alex McKee (talk) 22:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've just seen the changes made to the Abbeymead page. Whilst I see where you're coming from I have to disagree with describing the districts of Gloucester purely in electoral ward terms. They are two very different things. People associate themselves with the locality in which they live: if it's an urban area then it's the suburb in which they live. Without any evidence I would say that most people refer to the suburb they live in rather than the name of the electoral ward or constituency in which they live. For example, would people of Bristol say they come from Clifton or 'Bristol West'? Do the people of Abingdon say they come from Abingdon or 'Oxford West and Abingdon'? I live in Abbeymead, not Abbey! Abbeymead is what I put on my address, not Abbey. If I put 'Abbey' I doubt anyone would know where that was. My point is that areas formed for electoral (or statistical) reasons are not accurate reflections of identity. Wards are artificial and convenient creations used for political, electoral and statistical purposes. What happens when the Boundary Commission play with the boundaries again? If the council ward of 'Abbey' disappears does that mean the area of Abbeymead disappears?! (Tastyfish)
I'm not disagreeing with listing electoral wards - I think this is extremely useful - I just don't think they are a substitute for describing where people live. Some may say that clearly identifying the boundary is difficult. But this is all part of the debate and discussion that people can have. With regard to Abbeymead, it's VERY obvious where Abbeymead starts and ends! So, I would suggest having two lists as they are two different things. I am happy to add articles to both and help with anything as I am quite passionate about Gloucester Tastyfish (talk) 11:08, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tastyfish, a very late reply for you: at the time there were a couple of us trying to improve the coverage of Gloucester but struggling as there was a relative lack of decent citable material and deletionists were removing articles as soon as they were created. So we aligned along the wards as these were at least broadly described on the Gloucester City Council website and each year there would be election results, etc, for references. However I do actually prefer having an article for individual places as local authority wards can, and do, change and in any case as you described above people identify with places rather than wards. So a belated thank you for your work on this article. Alex McKee (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I think really Abbeymead and Abbeydale are very different locales, with different personalities. It’s very clear where one ends and the other begins. Personally I'd rather see both listed separately. The electoral ward issue seems rather irrelevant as these obviously tend to ebb and flow with boundary changes and cannot always marry up with communities and their actual boundaries; they tend to matter most to those interested in politics, I’m not this is the same thing as describing where people live. User:kirc —Preceding undated comment added 01:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]
How is Abbeydale/Mead an "affluent area" exactly ?! It's no more affluent than other similar areas in Gloucester like Longlevens, Kingsway, Longford or Barnwood if you go by current house prices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gcity (talk • contribs) 18:26, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gcity, this article isn't comparing Abbeymead to other areas. If Longlevens and the rest want to be described as that then that's up to them. However, if you look at the indices measuring deprivation (latest figures based on 2007) on the neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk website you'll see that most parts of Abbeymead rank in the 29,000s (out of 32,482 areas nationally) in terms of being deprived (1 being most deprived). People of Longlevens and Barnwood should take a look - their areas compare favourably too! --Tastyfish (talk) 23:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abbeydale and Abbeymead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Abbeydale and Abbeymead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abbeydale and Abbeymead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Abbeydale_and_Abbeymead&oldid=1193452001"