Jump to content

Talk:Surrey/Archive 2

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

Morden is not part of Surrey

It has been under the administration of the London Borough of Merton since the creation of Greater London. Thus, I have removed all references to the Mosque there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kosher.telephone (talk • contribs) 16:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Merton was formally part of surrey. see London Borough of Merton Peaceworld111 (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
You are missing the point. Morden became part of Greater London in 1965. The Baitul Futuh was constructed in 2003, meaning it has absolutely no reason to be in an article about Surrey. If you wish to mention a Mosque, it would be far more appropriate to mention the Shah Jahan Mosque‎ in Woking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.117.85 (talk) 21:00, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Furthermore, the Shah Jahan Mosque is of historical importance. On it's website it is claimed to be the oldest Mosque in Northern Europe: http://www.shahjahanmosque.org.uk/01aboutus.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.117.85 (talk) 21:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Surrey, British Columbis

Should we disambiguate from Surrey, British Columbis, which also has an article? Vernon White 13:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

If you mean that Surrey should redirect to Surrey (disambiguation), then I would disagree because the English county is both the best-known and the original Surrey after which the other places are named. And the "For other places with the same name..." is fine for people that are looking for Surrey BC. Or do you mean something else? --A bit iffy 14:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Schools

I removed the following from schools listed because otherwise the list is just going to grow and grow. Possibly there's scope for an Education in Surrey article, but having this long list here is a bit pointless. The schools I left in are ones with articles. --A bit iffy 11:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there anything particularly 'notable' about the remaining schools other than they are all public schools and they all have articles?195.172.180.242 13:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
So, are those remaining ones all public schools then? I didn't know that! The only one I'd heard of is Charterhouse. I assure you I didn't pick and choose for any snobbish reasons. ;) Anyway, all of those remaining schools are notable because they have articles. If any aren't notable, then their articles should be deleted. And possibly some of the ones I've chopped are notable. If so, someone should do articles on them and reinstate them in the Surrey article. But then, if there end up being unreasonably many notable schools listed (20? 30? 40? when does it become unreasonable?), perhaps a separate Education in Surrey or even a List of schools in Surrey article would be prefereable to avoid an overly long Surrey article. Over to you, 195.172.180.242, or anyone, for your comments. Cheers, --A bit iffy 14:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC) ;)
What about King's College, Guildford? The article's not great at the moment, but I'm sure other people have points to add to it. It's notable for being the first state/privately owned school. It also does the IB. Should this be added to the list? Bioarchie1234 16:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

In their own right all these schools are interesting if you know the area, and the kids from the school like to look them up. Why don't you make a separate Education in Surrey section rather than delete it. Could you categorise it into junior & senior. I don't know how to do itSuzanneKn 22:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you like to have a go at creating an Education in Surrey article, Suzanne? (If I knew anything at all about the subject I'd do so myself, but I'm afraid I don't.) A bit iffy 00:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it needs an article as such but a list. As the surrey article stands at the moment the schools selected to remain there are based on no categorisation. They could be the top ten on a league table of some sort rather than just names we know. I'll think about it SuzanneKn 22:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Actually I've located a list and linked to it. All the schools are in there. Perhaps someone would like to put a few back in the surrey page but I think that there should be a logical choice for the one's listed SuzanneKn 23:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

AFD on manufacturer Alice Soundtech

There's an AFD on Alice Soundtech, a leading UK supplier of studio and transmission equipment for RSL radio stations, from mixing consoles to AM/FM transmitters, based in Surrey. People in the biz or in the know can chime in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Soundtech. -- 62.147.86.249 16:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Sutton & Croydon on towns' list

Sutton is not administratively in the county of Surrey; it does in fact have its own London Borough. Historically it was in Surrey, as were many parts of south London, but no longer and so should not be on the towns' list (hence deleted today) Southeastern 22:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Croydon is not in Surrey either - see reason above for Sutton Southeastern 21:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Other places of interested

I've removed these two items as they are not in Surrey now. I've put them here in case anyone really thinks they're necessary.

Extraterritorial

I wonder if it worth noting this is the second time county administration has been extraterritorial? 1889-1893 the Newington based administration would have been in the County of London. I assume this was the motivation for the move. MRSC • Talk 10:49, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Flag

Interesting that Surrey has the English flag, whilst neighbouring West Sussex has the Union Jack. Significant?Millbanks 07:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

County Council and "Capital"

As with West Sussex, there is no proper mention of the County Council, its structure, servies, etc. Incidentally, so-called "state" schools are part of the County Council Millbanks 07:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I think there needs to be more explanation of the queston of the "capital city" of Surrey, and of the anomaly that the "HQ" (as this article calls it) of the county remains in Kingston upon Thames, which is itself no longer in Surrey (as an administrative county) but in Greater London. Historically (and legally?) the "county town" of Surrey is apparently actually Guildford (see Wikepedia article on Guildford). The seat of the Surrey County Council remains in Kingston (outside of Surrey administrative county). Shulgi (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Foot and mouth

Have added a comment about the new discovery of foot and mouth. Not sure where to put so if anyone thinks there is a better place to locate it, feel free.

The links section contained several commercial links pointing to so-called "information portals" with no useful content whatsoever except advertising. An additional link pointed to the official web site of the University of Surrey, which is contaoined on the Univerisity's own Wikipedia article and thus does not need to be repeated here. I have removed all of the above. 90.10.132.49 (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Coat of arms

Why is the old coat of arms being used in the infobox rather than the new one? It is a section on the modern history of the county. Hiding T 09:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The image Image:BrooklandsPoster.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

5th and 6th Century History

It looks to me as if the history of Surrey 410-600 is in desperate need of some citations - it sounds far too certain for me, given the paucity of sources for the period. What is the source for the "local truce" in 500, with associated division of land? What is the source for westward expansion renewing in 550? What is the source for a ditch in 568 to mark the boundary with Kent? I would hazard a guess that most of these statements are speculative at best... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.75.150.131 (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Early Anglo-Saxon Surrey

Could do with modernising. I can't find a modern source which doesn't think that Surrey derives from "Suðre ge". Older ideas merit discussion because "south of what?" is a decent question to try and answer. I thought it might be best to start with the oldest sources and then have the discussion, so the first paragraph (or second if the first one says that pre-650-ish there are only archaeology, toponymy and the like available) might say something like:

The earliest references to Anglo-Saxon Surrey concern [[Eorcenwald]], [[bishop of London]] (died ''c''.693). [[Bede]]'s ''[[Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum]]'' refers to Eorcenwald's foundation of a [[monastery]] at [[Chertsey]] in ''Sudergeona regio'' and a charter of King [[Frithuwold of Surrey|Frithuwold]] survives which records a donation of land to Eorcenwald and Chertsey. Bede's [[Latin]] name for the district is believed to derive from the [[Old English language|Old English]] ''suðre ge'' or southern district.<ref>Bede, ''Historia ecclesiastica'', Book IV, Chapter 6; Frithuwold's charter is [http://www.anglo-saxons.net/hwaet/?do=seek&query=S+1165 S.1165]. Blair, Peter Hunter, ''Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England'', pp. 243–244; Yorke, Barbara, ''Kings and kingdoms of Early Anglo-Saxon England'', p. 47; Blair, John, "Frithuwold's kingdom", pp. 102–3.</ref>

And then? Angus McLellan (Talk) 14:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Surrey/Archive_2&oldid=417279511"