Jump to content

Talk:Nantwich

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

Assessment Report

[edit]
  1. Article needs to be expanded using Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.
  2. Perhaps the placement of photos so that some are dispersed around the article would make things a bit more pleasant "on the eye".
  3. References and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.)

 DDStretch  (talk) 02:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of name

[edit]

Is it true that the 'Nant' part of the name comes from 'Natrium', which means Sodium, a major part of salt? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 09:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The origin of the word Nantwich is very clear. The word 'Nant' is a Welsh or Celtic word meaning water source or spring. It occurs widely throughout Europe for example Nantes and Nantua in France.The 'wich'part denotes a settlement or, according to some, a salt spring. Thus, if we accept the latter, Nantwich simply means a salt spring.

John Christopher Williams (johnw@kfupm.edu.sa)

Is it correct to include Norwich in the group of places associated with salt springs? As a former Dabber, I was told that only the Cheshire 'wiches', plus Droitwich, were 'proper' wiches. Does Norwich have any historical association with salt? (Also, most pronunciations of Norwich are more "Norridge" than "Norwitch")Paul W 09:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the nemeton page there is a cited reference to Nantwich being previously Nametwihc, which would make it a nemeton placename, actually like Nantes, which is also a nemeton placename, not a nant placename. I suggest this is added to the relevant section. Stevebritgimp (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC) In fact I mostly take back the thing on Nantes - any connection there would be obscured through the name of the local tribe the Nemnetes - so connection to nemeton is speculative. Anyways. Stevebritgimp (talk) 00:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As requested by Espresso Addict I've copied across the ref from nemeton - checking the edit history there the ref given definitely covers Nantwich, however I haven't seen this book by Eilert Ekwall with my own eyes, so cannot confirm it is correct. If it's ok there it should be ok here. From what little general internet clues I've read not all of Ekwall's ideas are accepted, but if a form Nametwihc is attested somewhere that would be the origin for sure, in Devon the form is Nymet and there are attestations back to Roman times there. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Doing some google digging I found very very little mention of Nantwich name origins outside of wikipedia and mirrors - Nametwilhc (sic) turns up in one hit on the British Geological Survey which discusses saltspring wiches and says namet comes from 'named' in English (which from my POV seems a bit like clutching at straws, although the place did have a guy's personal name attached at one point - or as in 'famous', but then citations say they were famous since Roman times), and at Domesday the name was merely the generic Wich. Nametwihc seems to be connected to Ekwall's citation. Salt workings and a nemeton would both be legitimate activities at a Roman site, and would fit nicely together. If we had the original source for that name we'd be away, one way or the other, although then we venture into OR. Of course different interpretations could be put in the article if cited. All this is exactly the sort of stuff that irritates me as a punter. Why can't scholars get things right, and present evidence to support their position. English scholars say it is 'named' but then I'd want other examples of that word being used to mean renowned, meanwhile anyone with Celtic knowledge can recognise 'nemed' (not 'nant') but then don't find any older citations than the 12th cent, and don't say exactly where and in what context they saw it. One, other or both of these feels like folk etymology, but I'm powerless to say which. Stevebritgimp (talk) 23:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

[edit]

There are currently too many pictures for the text to support - and the pictures need an explanation of why they are important, e.g. what is it about 46 High Street which warrants 4 pictures? Salinae 21:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

This link http://www.bbc.co.uk/england/roadsafety/index.shtml in the lead, seems to be broken. --Mcginnly | Natter 12:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


A Possible project (or sub-project) for Cheshire

[edit]

I think a project or a sub-project (within the UK geography project) dealing with the whole of Cheshire would be a good idea. I have taken as a precedent the project about Cornwall, which any project dealing with Cheshire could hope to aspire to, since this project has constructed Featured Articles about Cornwall-related things. So, I've listed a proposed project concerning Cheshire on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. I think it can easily co-exist with Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography. I would not want to diminish or withdraw from this other project. If you are interested in contributing to this proposed project, please add your name to list at the appropriate place. If you think it might be better placed as a sub-project of the existing UK Geography Project, please say so on that project's talk page, here, and let us discuss it. Many thanks.  DDStretch  (talk) 01:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

I propose selecting an image for the lead (in the infobox) and one to illustrate the geography section, linking more prominently to the extensive commons gallery of images, and deleting the images gallery, which is cluttering up the bottom of the article. More images can be added to illustrate the text as the article is expanded. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, a commons link has been added to the external links section. There's plenty of choice for a lead image, but I think the image of High Street is the best one, the town square would be good, but the trees are obscuring some detail. Nev1 (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the High St image is the most representative, although a little dark (I've tried taking a better photo of the Crown Inn there several times without much success, so perhaps dark is representative!). I'll make sure all the images are in the commons gallery before removing them. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've added it as the infobox image, all that remains to be done is making sure everything's on commons. Nev1 (talk) 17:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the town square picture into the body of the article (as it shows the church and war memorial), moved the remaining images to the Commons gallery and deleted the gallery here. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:04, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The notables of Nantwich

[edit]

It seems that one or two of us have been editing the notables from Nantwich today, and at the same time. This caused a "ëdit conflict" for me, which I've not come across before. My main task today was adding more notables, but I've also changed the time slots too. I'm less bothered about the time slots (and their names) than about potentially losing several hours work on finding quite a few more notables to add. I hope we can resolve this amicably. If re-posting my work has wiped out other (simultaneous) edits, I'm sorry about that.

ArbieP (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS I have tried to spot the edits made by others, which my re-posting has wiped out. I've spotted several by comparing versions and have reinstated them on my (later) version. I trust this is an acceptable and hopefully agreeable solution

ArbieP (talk) 18:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nantwich. 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) 12:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nantwich. 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) 21:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nantwich. 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) 09:03, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nantwich&oldid=1212146460"