Jump to content

Talk:Salford/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Source

There's a partially avaliable source on Google Books. --Jza84 |  Talk  01:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

World's first free public library?

In the lead "world's first free public library" has had a citation tag for quite some time now. However, I just heard on the news that "the country's first free public library" was in Birkenhead. Can anybody enlighten us and rid the lead of these citation tags? --Jza84 |  Talk  13:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Found one from Salford.gov, the Birkenhead articles claims to have the "first public library in an unincorporated borough". Nev1 (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Then again, Peterborough (New Hampshire) claims to have "The Oldest Free Public Library in the World Supported by Taxation". I'll look for something a bit more impartial than Salford.gov making the claim. Nev1 (talk) 15:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok, two more sources [1] [2] supporting Salford's claim, but if it was established around 1849 it may be a question of what is meant by "free" and "public" (or if taxes are important), as the one in New Hampshire was open in 1833. Nev1 (talk) 15:12, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Vegetarian movement

In the lead, Salford is hailed as the "birthplace of the vegetarian movement", but we need a source. Is it something to do with the Vegetarian Society? If so, that page mentions Manchester, but not Salford. :S --Jza84 |  Talk  23:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently there's a blue plaque in Salford commemorating the founding of the Vegetarian Society [3]. I'll look for a more concrete source. Nev1 (talk) 16:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Just found out the charity's HQ is in Altrincham [4]. Any idea where this could go in that article? (Or is it worth a mention?) Nev1 (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I've removed the claim from the lead because I can't find anything (apart from the above link) to back it up. The VegSoc themselves don't consider Salford their birthplace, or even Manchester [5], although people from Salford were involved in the movement. Nev1 (talk) 16:28, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for this. It's probably why I couldn't find a reference! --Jza84 |  Talk  23:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Urban blight

Just so I don't forget, there are two sources about the urban decay of Salford's terraces at [6] and [7]. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  02:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

portmote - three records quoted

Hi mate

Found some quotes - can search for more stuff if needed - pasted one in for you to re-arrange

1601 Oct 03 A tusellment made ye 3rd of October betwixt Robert Tetlow and Mr Dainsford man and James Hilton and no blud shed. [Salford Portmote Court Leet Records. 1597-1669]

1603 Jun 25 A brawle made between Robert Tetlow and Thomas Greene and Tetlow drew blood upon Greene. [Salford Portmote Court Leet Records]


1628 Jan 01 Item the jurie present Richard Brooke, Roger Scotson and Henry Mason all of Manchester, for making an assault upon Thomas Tetlow, William Winfield and John Fletcher, and drawing bloud on them. [Salford Portmote Court Leet Records. 1597-1669]

--Chaosdruid (talk) 18:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Vegetarianism

from The Vegetarian Society own website:-

"In 1807, the Reverend William Cowherd, founder of the Bible Christian Church in Salford, famously advanced the principle of abstinence from the consumption of flesh. Two followers of Rev Cowherd, Rev William Metcalfe and Rev James Clark set sail for the United States with 39 other members of the Bible Christian Church in 1817 and it was from this that the American vegetarian movement grew."

Vegetarian Society

--Chaosdruid (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't say vegetarianism (or the society) it was founded in Salford, just that Cowherd advocated it. Nev1 (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Early history

"Angles settled in the region during the Early Middle Ages and gave the locality its name" What was the name they gave it - was it Sealhford? Richerman (talk) 15:16, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's the one! :) --Jza84 |  Talk  15:27, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Geography

"The land use in Salford is overwhelmingly urban, with few areas of green space or rural space; the largest open space is Peel Park, close to the University of Salford." This isn't referenced and I don't think it's right. At 32 Hectares Kersal Dale Country park is surely bigger and then there's a fair bit of land along the Irwell in Lower Kersal which is used for the flood defences and the sports centre. There's also a big piece of open land across the River from Peel Park called "The Meadow" which is bigger than the park, unless the David Lewis recreation ground is included in the park. Richerman (talk) 16:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this was my addition. I think you're right though - looks like a red herring. --Jza84 |  Talk  20:32, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Townships

I see there has been a difference of opinion over my addition of the old townships in the lead. My rationale for adding it was that the inception of the City of Salford in 1926 was already mentioned and saying what townships it was composed of would make it clear which area we're talking about. This would hopefully stop anyone adding information about the wider City of Salford that exists today. The only problem I have now is that Kersal isn't mentioned in Governance - although that's probably because it was part of Broughton-cum-Kersal. Should that be added to governance? Richerman (talk) 12:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I note that it's been removed. Wrongly IMO. Mayalld (talk) 12:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
It is unusual and inconsistent to have ancient townships mentioned in the opening paragraph about a settlement. The wording also introduced an anachronism - in 1926 the townships had already been abolished. If we really want these mentioned I'd be much more inclined to place them in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th paragraph, or else the Governance section. --Jza84 |  Talk  13:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm not too bothered about them staying in, providing there is a clear description in the lead of the area we're talking about. How about Salford is bounded by.......? Richerman (talk) 13:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Aagh! I understand know why they were put in. Well, how about:

The borough of Salford, which spanned Broughton, Pendleton and Kersal, was granted city status in 1926

This way we avoid "township", which was my main gripe! --Jza84 |  Talk  15:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Richerman (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Where are the town boundaries?

I just reverted my own additions as they were about Kersal and Charlestown which are in the City of Salford. Where are the actual boundaries of Salford itself? If someone could sort that out it would be helpful if it said in the lead which towns it's bounded by on the east and south, so we know exactly where we're talking about. Yours, Confused of Wikipedia - AKA Richerman (talk) 01:26, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

They're shown here, from the ONS website. If I'm reading it right, Kersal and Charlestown are both within the settlement of Salford - though I don't have a pre-1974 map to hand at the moment to make absolutely sure. Fingerpuppet (talk) 10:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
According to GMCRO, they're part of Salford proper (Kersal being in Broughton, Salford and Charslestown being in Pendleton, Salford). --Jza84 |  Talk  12:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I remembered last night that Kersal, Charlestown, Broughton and Pendleton were all part of Salford (county borough 1844-1974) when I was a kid. In fact I'm told there was a pub off Cheetham Hill Road the straddled the Manchester/Salford border and they had different closing times in each half. There was a brass strip down the middle of the bar to show where the border was and everyone moved across at the appropriate time. Richerman (talk) 12:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Charlestown is a part of Pendleton as Kersal is a part of Broughton so they are part of Salford the City proper. The boundries between the old townships of Pendleton and Broughton is where the River Irwell runs through the City, cutting across Littleton Road, Cromwell Road, Fredrick Road etc. There was also a public house on the boundary between Pendleton and Pendlebury on the now major roundabout Irlams o' th' Height that had different closing times in different areas of the pub. This pub was the Pack Horse. Until the pub's demolition in the 1970s there had been several versions the Pack Horse on the same site and it was during a period of nearly two hundred years (late 16th century to 1768) that the Pack Horse came under the stewardship of various members (10 in total) of one local family, the Irlam family. It is widely believed that the name of the immediate area 'the Height' eventually became known as Irlams o' th' Height due to the Irlam family's long association with the Height's Pack Horse pub. As such it comes as no surprise that people would refer to the Height as "Irlam's (Pack Horse) on the Height" or Irlam's on'th Height etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.41.79 (talk) 21:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Map

One thing this article lacks is a map of the modern boundary. If anyone can point me in the right direction, I can create one. It'll be at least a fortnight though as I'm busy with work. Parrot of Doom (talk) 17:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Information removed from the article

I've been unable to find a source for the following statement:

Instead of removing it completely, I've copied it here in case someone else knows of or can find a source. Nev1 (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


I've moved another sentece here because it seems pretty trivial to me. Probably needs to be discussed though. Nev1 (talk) 17:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Retitle

I want to make some bold but, I believe, effective changes to the Salford article in terms of its title and structure.

I would like Salford to become a disambiguation page, and this article moved to Salford, Greater Manchester. The dab page would look like:

Salford may mean:

Rationale being that Salford (proper) may not have primacy as the main interpretation of Salford - people may think of Salford as the wider city. What do we think? --Jza84 |  Talk  10:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

This sounds fair to me, I'd support the move. Hopefully GM can set an example others will try to emulate. Nev1 (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, I've been meaning to suggest this for ages now. I think GM can lead the way. I'll wait 24 hours then give WP:BOLD a try with this. If it happens, we might need someone with Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser to change the links from Salford to the new target. --Jza84 |  Talk  21:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
It seems like a sensible suggestion to me, maybe it will help clear up some of the confusion. Richerman (talk) 23:48, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Seems like a reasonable suggestion to me too. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Support. Parrot of Doom (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)`
Thanks folks. Agree too with Richerman. I'll make the move now, but we may have to fix some links to the new article title. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  21:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
There are about 900 ambiguous links to Salford right now, the most to any Wikipedia dab page by a large margin. Yes, please help fix them if you can. Dekimasuよ! 10:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I've made a request (here) to get this recified asap. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Are all the links really meant to go to the same target? Because if they are, the page "Salford" should redirect here, the disambiguation page should be moved to Salford (disambiguation), and there should be a message at the top of this page noting that there's a disambiguation page elsewhere. Dekimasuよ! 12:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, upon cursory investigation, I've noticed that a small portion (perhaps 1 in 10) should have been directed to City of Salford (precisely why there was confusion about the articles). Really I think I should try get AWB, or other members of WP:GM could, and use local knowledge to fix the links. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, User:Kbthompson looks like he's on to it, and using correct disambiguous links. :) Hopefully should be sorted soon as he has AWB. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  12:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
As long as they all end up in the right place :) Thanks. Dekimasuよ! 13:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Mr Stephen uses AWB so I've asked if he can help, but he's not around at the moment anyway. Nev1 (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
[Out] Hi. 230 down, seems at least 500+ to go. I've tried to apply common-sense about where to link - but please someone give the changes an eye-ball! 8^) HTH Kbthompson (talk) 14:50, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I have one query. I used to work in Salford Quays, my impression was that it was not in the settlement - but in the City of Salford. I've applied the same criteria to anything else that looks like an address - particularly where it's combined with another local area. Most 'born ins' I've sent here, as the likeliest candidate. My sincerest apologies in advance for any errors; if unsure I will {{dn}}. Hope that's OK with everybody. Kbthompson (talk) 14:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
It was part of the County Borough of Salford - that's usually used as the extent of Salford proper. I think the Quays were/are part of Ordsall, in which case they were definately part of Salford. But either link will probably suffice in the Quays case. --Jza84 |  Talk  15:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

(<-) I have applied the same to Carlisle. Users welcome to comment at Talk:Carlisle, Cumbria. --Jza84 |  Talk  21:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Salford Quays and Media City

The "regenerated inner-city areas like Salford Quays" are mentioned in the lead but there is nothing about Salford Quays in the Regeneration section. Also BBC's move to Salford is mentioned in the lead but, again, there is nothing about it in the main body of the text and no mention of Media City in the text, although there is a photo of it. Should there be something about Media City under either Regeneration or Culture? To be honest, I think the culture section is a bit thin anyway. How about something on Media City, another mention of The Lowry and maybe the University's Robert Powell Theatre in that section? Richerman (talk) 21:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:31, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
OK I'll have a look at that tomorrow. I've also taken a picture of Joule House, where Joule lived and carried out his experiments, which I'll add to the Notable People section. Richerman (talk) 23:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I've never particularly liked the image in the infobox - it isn't representative of Salford. Much better would be something like the Crescent, or perhaps the end of Chapel Street. I'm trying to think of a good vantage point to take a wider image of the city, I can only think from somewhere up in Kersal. When the sun is out next week I'll make sure I improve the pics. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
You're right. The highest point is ST Paul's Church or the hill on Kersal Moor but it's difficult to see much at this time of year because of the trees. Maybe there's a decent view from the the other side of Moor Lane somewhere or perhaps from The Cliff - I'll have a scout around tomorrow and let you know. One good vantage point would be from one of the upper floors of Salford University's Crescent House - which is where I work. You can get in there during the day but I don't think you can open the windows on the landings, unfortunately. I've also just realised there's no mention of Robert Powell or Albert Finney in the notable people section. Richerman (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
What about retaking File:SalfordSkyline.jpg, from Hartshead Pike? There's alot of great shots avaliable from there that we could nail? Or else somehow getting into the Beetham Tower and taking a shot from way up there? --Jza84 |  Talk  23:55, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Urgh, I wouldn't use that :) The Beetham Tower is ok, but not brilliant. See my shot here, you don't actually see much of Salford. Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

PoD I've scouted around Kersal and the Cliff and couldn't find any good views of Salford (too many trees and new developments), however, I found one vantage point at Clifton on the hills above Lumns Lane (entered through a gate at the junction of Rake Lane and Lumns Lane) and one on the Council estate at Rainsough - on a grassy knoll (no guns please!) on Chapel Road. I took some quick pics just to show what you can see - you can decide for yourself if you can take something better with your wide angle lens. The best place to get a clear view of Salford would be on the balcony of the tower at the fire station at Irlam o' th' Heights on the A666 if you could get permission to go up there. My suggestion for the pic for the infobox would be Bexley Square with the old Salford Town Hall. What do you think? Richerman (talk) 23:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Salford from Rainsough.jpg
Rainsough
File:Salford from Clifton.jpg
Clifton
File:Bexley Square.jpg
Bexley Square
Hmm, there isn't really anything useable from those vantage points then. I'll certainly take a pic of the town hall though. Leave it with me. Parrot of Doom (talk) 00:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Richerman, will you be adding these to Wikimedia Commons? Hope so - If you add them there I will delete them from here to avoid duplication. --Jza84 |  Talk  10:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
They were just quick snaps really to show what you could see from there. I'll put the Bexley Square and Rainsough ones on commons but I don't think the one from Clifton is much use for anything. Richerman (talk) 11:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, the weather wasn't great (overcast sky and not much sun = dark buildings and white sky) but I did manage to get a few 'ok' pics. Many of the larger more lovely buildings are obscured by lampposts and parked cars, and I only have an 18mm lens, so they'll have to wait until I have some pennies to spend on a lovely 16mm lens :) I also forgot to get a shot of Salford Lad's Club, I'll go back for that one.
Salford Town Hall
Salford Central Railway station
The River Irwell forms the border between Salford and Manchester
Salford Museum and Art Gallery
Peel Building
A map of Salford

Parrot of Doom (talk) 13:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Salford, Greater Manchester/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 11:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
This looks like another WP:GM WP:FAC in the offing, so I shall be 'harsh'; however the grammar looks OK.Pyrotec (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Inital comments

This is a WP:GA, but let's improve it a bit first.

For my convenience, I'm leaving the WP:lead until last.

  • History -
    • Toponymy -
  • "Sealhford, meaning a ford by the willow trees" - yes it is confirmed by Cooper (& Oxford Dictionary of Place Names), but your in-line citation No. 9 is broken; and Hampson (1972), p. 28, states that Roberts states Salford comes from the Anglo-Saxon "Soel" (the hall) and "ord" (the prince).
    • Early history -
  • Paragraph 2: I assume that reference 17 - *Bracegirdle, Cyril - is a simple typo?
  • Paragraph 4: Ref 22 does give those figures, but in respect of the "Manor of Salford at the Domesday Survey", not the "Hundred of Salford" - are they identical? Conversly Ref 23 states "town and wapentake of Salford" whereas article says "Royal Manor of Salford"!

....to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

    • Industrial Revolution - OK.
    • Post-industrial decline -
  • The first paragraph is a reasonable summary of what is stated in the three references. Cooper adds a few "green shoots" such as the Greengate and Irwell Rubber Co, but I suspect that both Manchester & Salford are without rubber companies now. Ditto brewing.
  • The first paragraph has an "accurate" summary of a statement made by Copper "By 1939 local coal mining had almost stopped", but I'm not sure that I agree with it. Certainly many old pits in the Manchester coal field had closed by that date; however more closed in the 1950s and I remember Agecroft still working, although it is gone now. Hayes, Geoffrey (n/d but possibly late 1986/early 1987), Collieries in the Manchester Coalfields, Eindhoven: De Archaeologische Pers, isbn 90-6585-033-4, has more details.  DonePyrotec (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The use of Reference 48 in the the second paragraph is perplexing. The sentence used is a description of the title of the book; I'm not sure why page 47 is being called up, I have the edition defined in the reference and there is nothing on page 47 that verifies the sentence.
  • I would agree with content of the second paragraph. Could a contrast be made between the high-rise flats around the "Precinct" where the old street pattern was (almost) obliterated and a new pedestrianised gridiron plan impossed and the high-rise flats at Kersal, some of which have now gone, were built in a more flexible/curvy layout? I seem to remember the Kersal ones were the first to be built in Salford.
    • Regeneration -
  • Governance -
      • Parliamentary representation -
  • What are those two {citation needed} flags doing in a WP:GAN.
  • Geography -
This looks quite reasonable, but I've done several WP:GANs in these parts (many as you know later made FA), so I've come to expect a very compacted weather summary for the GM Conurbation.
Also there is no geology. From elsewhere in the article, there are coal beds nearby but Salford appears to be Permo-triasic; there is also the (infamous) landslip on the loop of the Irwell at Broughton.
I'm sure I have an article on that landslip, let me have a look around. Parrot of Doom (talk) 14:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Here it is - [8] Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Nice one that. It has a lot of detail that I have read elsewhere, possibly in the 1970s, but that certainly looks a good book that is worth reading.Pyrotec (talk) 21:29, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Shame there's a few pages missing (curse you Google Books!) but I've added a few sentences explaining the importance of that bend of the river. The image of the tramlines is just next to the landslip - the slip is behind the photographer (me) but you can't really see much. Maybe from the opposite bank. Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Good shot. I suspect that I have one or two from the mid 1970s. At that time, near where Lower Broughton Road joined Bury New Road, several feet of track were just sticking out of the road surface into thin air. Its changed since then.Pyrotec (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Transport -
Some good history in this section, but the article seems to 'run out of steam' towards the end:
  • The first three and a half pargraphs are good from that perspective.
  • The second half of the fourth paragraph - Roads has lost its history. Going back to the early 1970s, for instance, the road network was the A-roads with the M61/2/3 feeding in from the north west and the north east. Going 'south' down the M6, would for instance mean using the East Lancs road or the A57. The M63 seems to have been renumbered to the M60, there is a new M62 and M56; and the more recent M602 brings everything into Regent Road. The current paragraph seems to be organised by 'importance': M602 and then the A roads.
  • If I'm correct, the tram shed on Frederick road servived until the 21st century as a bus depot, when I last passed it only the arch remained as a 'facade'.
  • The fifth paragraph is modern, GMPTE, but I remember SELNEC. Salford Central has been there since 1837 (a few changes of name along the way), but Salford Crescent only dates back to 1987 and wasn't that dependant on the Windsor Link as there was no link between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Victoria?
  • Education -
  • I think half the prose on Salford University was mine (perhaps I should not be reviewing this).
  • One of the consequences of the Robbins Report was that the CAT dropped non-university level courses, so that was separated out into a technical college on the Frederick Road/A6 corner (Salford tech). By (2000?) that seems to have become University College Salford (?) and subsequently merged with the University to become the Frederick road campsus. That seems to have created more colleges to fill the gap.
  • Sport -
  • A bit thin.
  • You have a nice reference for horse racing at Kersal Moor, but that was quite some time ago. It has been held more recently at Castle Irwell (Manchester Racecourse), moved and then came back to Castle Irwell; and I can provide page nos for the Gordon reference (when I find the book).
  • Rugby was the "Willows" - perhaps it moved elsewhere?
  • Salford had dogs (greyhound racing) at Seeford Road (but not anymore).
  • Culture -
  • First paragraph is OK if you choose to keep it as it is. To me the Salford Museum and Art Gallery was the "street" down stairs, which is still there and the Lowry's upstairs which (as the article states elsewhere) have moved to Salford Quays.
  • There was also a mining museum in Buile park, but that has gone.
    • Cultural references -
  • First paragraph - I agree with the 'content' but I'm not sure about the ordering. The two films, for instance, are not in date order or alphabetical order (or reverse date order). Then we have a TV drama (The Second Coming), a novel (Hanky Park), TV soaps, a novel and a film (Hobson's choice) and then a TV sitcom. Again, not date order, media order - perhaps it was the order that the various editor's added them!

....stopping at this point for the day.Pyrotec (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Public services -

  • I know where Salford Royal Hospital was, but unlike the current location, its former location is not given in the article; and no date of closure.

WP:lead

A good lead: mentions the difference between Salford and City of Salford; the historical importance of Salford over Manchester; etc, etc. So meets the dual function of Introduction and summary of the main points of the article.Pyrotec (talk) 21:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Replies.
  • A Taste of Honey (1961) was released on DVD (BFIVD513) by the British Film Institute with a 1998 Copyright Date. The inner sleave note (if that is the right word for a DVD) states that the exterior shots were made in and around Salford, whilst the outer one states Salford and Blackpool - the interior shots were Fulham Road, London. I've not yet found any written citations for Second Comming, but I would put the interior Shots as University of Salford's Adelphi Building (mentioned in the DVD?), the one next door and Salford Royal Hospital; and no prizes for naming the exterior shots.Pyrotec (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't know what your view is of Cultural references sections, but I hate them, as I said above. They're just trivia magnets. My view is that anything worthwhile can usually be said in the body of the article. I mean, does anyone really care that a couple of music videos were shot in Salford for instance? The Smiths and Salford Lads Club connection could also be made more comfortably in the Landmarks section IMO, the film Love on the Dole could be mentioned in the Economy section ... I'd be looking to include only the most significant "cultural references", and to put them in some kind of context whenever possible. I'm uncertain how others would feel about that though. --Malleus Fatuorum 19:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, I agree with you, especially the "trivia magnets". There is also a great element of personal choice - I enjoy watching Hobson's Choice, Love on the Dole and Second Comming because they show places that I have seen; whereas my mother would only watch Coronation Street. Famous People is even more of a trivia magnet, or it can be.Pyrotec (talk) 20:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Overview

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A Good Article, and it looks to me like another WP:GM future WP:FAC.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    You have some good sources.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

It was a pleasure to review this article: a good example of what a GA should be. You now formally have GA-status, I hope the FAC goes well.Pyrotec (talk) 21:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Boundary Changes - PLEASE READ!

The Salford page, and the pages relating to areas within Salford are grossly out-of-date following the new boundary changes. Pendleton does not exist, Weaste & Seedley are in the same area and Irwell Riverside now exists, however none of these are reflected within the pages. Although this is a political change, it now means that all the Wikipedia information is now incorrect for those searching for information regarding Irwell Riverside or Claremont. Please could you research and update this as necessary? 86.178.171.22 (talk) 13:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

What new boundary changes? It would help if you tell us where you're getting this information from. Parrot of Doom (talk) 14:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Why does it matter to this article anyway? Pendleton still exists, even a ward called Pendleton doesn't. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
How come Salford City Council doesn't know about these boundary changes?[9] --Malleus Fatuorum 14:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Isn't it odd that there are road signs directing you to Pendleton and Seedley when they no longer exist? Richerman (talk) 16:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Right.

This has probably been discussed in various forms and in various places, so I'll create a discussion here so everyone can see it.

  • Just dealing with the tags I think should be enough to get us through GAN, at least. Surely we can do that in pretty short order? I've made a start with a few of them already. --Malleus Fatuorum 12:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The article's using a mix of {{cite}} and {{citation}} templates right now. Which one shall we standardise on? I vote for {{citation}} but so long as we're consistent I'm not really bothered which we pick. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, {{citation}} get's my vote. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  13:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I just changed them all to cite x, but it only takes a minute to "replace all" and use Citation. Parrot of Doom (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Have we gone overboard with the horse racing?

I think we may be overdoing it with the detailed coverage of the history of the various horse race courses. Is everyone else happy with the coverage? --Malleus Fatuorum 17:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Far too much detail on just that aspect of sports - I'd bung it into the Kersal article. Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. --Jza84 |  Talk  20:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Ditto. Nev1 (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I've moved it. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

What do we think's left to do?

I think we're about there now, time for GAN? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

There are still a couple of citation needed tags and a couple of sentences needing clarification, but I think we're very close. Nev1 (talk) 22:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
The Religion section is a little thin.... something about historical faith in the area would be good (the Roman Catholics of Ordsall Hall perhaps?) --Jza84 |  Talk  22:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

INTERESTING...the religion section should be headed CHRISTIANITY......In Salford and the neighbouring parts of Manchester and Bury Metro, we have the SECOND largest Jewish community in the UK. NO MENTION? Are we invisible?! Think not as the community goes way way back..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.231.72 (talk) 18:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


Could do, but I think for GAC just merging it into the demography section would be enough. I'd want to see a bit more if the article was ever to go to FAC though. Nev1 (talk) 22:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
We're obviously not ready for FAC yet, but I think we're there or thereabouts for GAN. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:03, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
I hope we get a really strict GA reviewer :D... there's method to my madness... I'd just like lots of scrutinization and suggestions so we can make this a really strong piece...
On a more serious note, the article, just, well, seems to read quite unclear, and complicated to me; it's not smooth to me, smooth like our project's present GAs. There are a few thin sections, but I do agree with you (Malleus) that we're round and abouts there. Sure, I know there are worse GAs out there. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
We can smooth it out easy tomorrow once all the irritating tags have been dealt with. Trust me Jza84. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

:No mention of the Tram services (not the modern ones). I know there were about 34 million trams around Salford, so it deserves a few sentences. I'll sniff around tomorrow. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC) Done Parrot of Doom (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The Landmarks section needs a bit of work. I've removed a POV statement, but there is much more to the city than what is written in the article. Church of the Sacred Trinity is mentioned in Religion, but its a lovely building in a rather run-down area of the city. You've also got the impressive hospital on the corner of Adelphi St, on the corner of Great George St there's a beautiful stone tower thingy (I think its a church, its gorgeous though). Salford Central has been revamped and looks great, in fact I think it may have won awards. Large parts of the riverfront have been done up lately, including the Lowry Hotel area, the impact of the railway viaducts chopping Salford in half also deserves mention.
Also, the article badly needs a map - I don't have a clue where the settlement starts and stops, I don't imagine many other people will either. If someone can show me a map I can knock one up for Wikipedia in no time at all. I think that this is particularly important given the city's closeness to Manchester, and the confusion some people may suffer distinguishing between the larger City of Salford, and the settlement of Salford, Greater Manchester. Parrot of Doom (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The best I had was for something like this. Salford City Council website might have something about area divisions maybe... I'll have a look. --Jza84 |  Talk  12:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


I think now, other than a proper readthrough of the entire article, that Education needs expanding, Religion could probably use a Mosque or two (I haven't found any actually), and the Culture section needs a closer look - I'm not sure if mentions in various albums is at all notable. Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Library

I'm off to Peel Library later today. Any requests in particular? I'm actually looking for stuff on Worsley but I can make a detour. I think the religion section needs expanding. The weather right now is rubbish but I'll take the camera. Parrot of Doom (talk) 10:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

What about the building that was Salford Royal Hospital? Or St Philip's Church? --Malleus Fatuorum 12:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Tourism

Yes, tourism in Salford! [10] Parrot of Doom (talk) 15:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I like the site but greater manchester was recinded in 1986 after only 9 years,leaving the buses, police, and the fire brigade with the name.it only excists for fools. yours w.gregson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.249.38.89 (talk) 20:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Clark ref

There is a cite ref error for "Clark 1973 p. 14" - currently ref No. 47 - I was going to try to fix it but there is nothing listed in the Bibliography to tie it into. It was added in January 2009. I wonder if it might be this book but cannot get any access to it to check. Help? Please? Even pretty please? SagaciousPhil - Chat 09:28, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:28, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:30, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Salford, Greater Manchester. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:34, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

M3 is true and original Salford

Surely this page is only meant to cover Salford in its true and original form, i.e., the mostly Chapel Street area postcode M3. This is where Salford lay for centuries within the loop of the River Irwell just past the Crescent (A6 road). It is this area to which this article should be focused (M3). This is true 100% Salford. This was 'Salford' until the middle of the 19th century (1844) when Broughton and Pendleton were added to form the County Borough (city from 1926). This 'version' of Salford lasted until 1974 when the boundaries were expanded to include Eccles (MB), Swinton & Pendlebury (MB), Worsley (UD) and Irlam (UD). E.g. Pendleton nowadays forms part of the current City of Salford whereas before 1974 it came under the County Borough of Salford and before that as a separate township governed from Pendleton Town Hall just across the top of Broughton Road from Pendleton Parish Church (St Thomas's). In much the same way Broughton had a similar pathway into becoming part of what became Salford (1844-1974/since 1974). It too had its own town hall like Pendleton. Think of it like this. The celebrated Salford actor Albert Finney's place of birth should not be given under the title of 'Salford, Greater Manchester' but rather as 'Pendleton, Salford', (Lancashire). He was actually born in Charlestown which is part of Pendleton (M6) which is on the opposite side of the Irwell to Broughton (M7). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.159.128.106 (talk) 09:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree with you partly in that I am confused about what this article should cover. It begins by saying Salford is a town but there is no reference for that (does the town exist any more?) and it doesn't say where the boundaries are. However, I see no reason to exclude Broughton and Pendleton, we should just say when they became incorporated. The article later talks sbout Saford docks and Media City - are these in the original town of Salford or the larger City of Salford? However, I don't agree with your point about Albert Finney. We say he was born in Pendleton, Lancashire because that is what it was when he was born - long before the boundary changes of 1974 when Greater Manchester came into existence. I'd be interested to know what others think. Richerman (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC).

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. 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) 12:52, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. 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) 01:36, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Salford, Greater Manchester. 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) 20:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Pronunciation

OK, I came home today, flicked the telly on and watched the news of Hazel Blears resigning her position from her constituency of Salford. Fine you might think - it's just the news reader pronounced it S-A-lford, with an "A", whereas I believe most people, both locally and nationally, would pronounce it S-O-lford. (I find it annoying when some people pronounce "Worsley" as Wors-ley instead of the correct Wor-sley). Spot on there me old son! (Wor-sley).

Perhaps we need an IPA? --Jza84 |  Talk  14:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I guess so, I would have thought it was quite a straightforward pronunciation but there's no harm in covering the bases. Nev1 (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
It was the shock of hearing it called S-A-lford that prompted me to think about this. Although it seems obvious that it is pronounced S-O-lford, to a neophyte they might read it as S-Alford. --Jza84 |  Talk  17:37, 8 June 2009 (UTC) No reason whatsoever that it should not be said as 'Sol-ford'. After all when we say 'salt', 'malt' or 'halt' we correctly pronounce them as 'solt', 'molt' or 'holt' don't we?
(ec) There's a Salford near Milton Keynes that's pronounced Salford (with the "a" as in cat) FWIW. But the one in Greater Manchester is not. Mr Stephen (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Is Salford the proper pronounciation though or is it a bit of estuary English? A young lad from the south going to a football match once asked me the way to Bowen - it took me a bit to realise he meant Bolton. Richerman (talk) 13:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Good question. As I understand it, the older inhabitants call it that, so the pronunciation would pre-date the expansion of MK and the influx of outsiders to the area. I must be open and say that this information is second-hand. Mr Stephen (talk) 18:23, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
According to Jane on "Toast of London," it's pronounced Shulferd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:101:5A7B:7103:A621:80CD:C977 (talk) 05:38, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

To revisit pronunciation, the article at the moment has /ˈsɔːlfərd/. The /r/ in that probably comes from or follows the rules of whoever it is currently rampaging round Wikipedia making it look as if every bit of the English-speaking world is rhotic, which Salford to my knowledge is not. The vowel is more interesting because /ɔː/ strikes me as being how it would be pronounced somewhere further south. I would have thought it was more likely to be /ɒ/, and an eminent phoneticist with Lancashire roots seems to think that too. A source would be nice if anyone can get hold of the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary or similar. This question of how to pronounce the vowel that often appears when a word is spelt "[consonant]al" is relevant to words like Malvern and falcon as well, and seems to be complicated by generation and geographical divides. Any informed comment would be welcome. Old Man of Storr (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 12 August 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 19:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

– This Salford is by far the primary topic [[11]]. The settlement in Greater Manchester and its sub topics got 12,111 views [[12]] (there are more than just those) while the other topics got just 227 [[13]]. Per WP:DABCONCEPT when the primary meaning has multiple articles, the broadest topic is placed at the base name, which is the settlement. Readers wanting to find more specific information can then find the more specific articles from links in the article. It was pointed out at Talk:Sunderland (disambiguation)#Requested move 29 August 2017 that the boundaries are more vague than Sunderland however DABCONCEPT says "A disambiguation page should not be created just because it is difficult to write an article on a topic that is broad, vague, abstract, or highly conceptual". London isn't a DAB page just because it could refer to the City of London or Greater London, Liverpool isn't a DAB just because it frequently refers to the more specific topic Liverpool F.C.. Wikipedia isn't a DAB page because many people just think the English Wikipedia exists. Eye isn't a DAB page just because it would usually mean the Human eye.

In terms of population the settlement in GM has a population of 103,886 (the settlement) and 251,300 (the district) compared with Salford, Bedfordshire 133 (parish in 1931, no data for settlement) Salford, Ontario (unsure as its only a redirect) Salford, Oxfordshire 356 (parish, no data for settlement) and Salford, Pennsylvania unsure, it is a small place though.

The article on the MB could maybe at some time be given a better title (something than doesn't say "city") but this RM isn't really concerned with that. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:14, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pronunciation

In this article, why is the pronunciation of 'Salford' different than the pronunciation in the article City of Salford? Which is the correct one, or are both correct? VibeScepter (talk) (contributions) 21:57, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Salford City Debate

Hi, to inform editors and admin. There seems to be a split debate on the Salford city borough and Salford area. I would like to remind everyone that Salford is stated to be a city. While there might not be a main Salford city area other than neighbouring Swindon. The area as people refer to it, is a city. There is plenty of sources confirming this.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Now these sources point to the borough and Salford itself. There is also on OS Maps this: [6] and [7].

These references provided include an OS Map and book on 1700 prison reform of Lancashire. Salford is mentioned and this decades before it became a city. So Salford itself can be proved to have existed. Would Nthep and Crouch Swale please look into this for the debate. If one occurs thank you.

Signed: JoshuaIsTheFalco, 22:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

You appear to have missed the crucial sticking point. Several of your sources in actuality refer to the City of Salford (a separate article). This source you cited states, "The city of Salford covers 37 square miles and the five districts of Salford, Eccles, Worsley, Irlam and Cadishead, and Swinton and Pendlebury." That's to say, it is describing the local government district, the City of Salford. Noone disputes that the district has city status. I am sure, in common and historical (as you have demonstrated) usage, Salford and the local government district are conflated - understandably so. However your cited sources, as well as additional sources, clarify the contemporary City of Salford is not interchangeable in definition with Salford itself. A parallel would be Lancaster and the City of Lancaster. We've had some editors who are unable to accept that English local government is a mess and neat definitions are not always available; RailwayJG, who has been grasping for any other definition: first district, then town, now city. Unfortunately it's not that simple. I think it would be preferable to clearly articulate that Salford is one part of the wider local-government district. --Hazhk (talk) 13:21, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "About Salford".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  2. ^ "History of Salford".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  3. ^ "Interesting historical facts about Salford".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  4. ^ "Salford, Greater Manchester".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  5. ^ "Salford City Council".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  6. ^ "Old Map of , Salford, Greater Manchester Detailed Old Victorian Ordnance Survey 6 inch to 1 mile Old Map (1888-1913)".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  7. ^ "salford 1700".{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Salford status

Is Salford a city, district or town? Seems to have different meanings. RailwayJG (talk) 15:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Before 1926 Salford was a town after that it was a city, now it is a city and City of Salford, often shortened to Salford, is a metropolitan borough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.29.10 (talk) 19:21, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Salford/Archive_2&oldid=1255765334"