Talk:Tide Mills

It may be that this article and Bishopstone, East Sussex should be combined. However one refers to a ste that is a living village and the other to a derelict archeological site.Fiddle Faddle 20:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Alternative histories of the Tide Mill

Both are casually verifiable. One has "Newcastle" building the mill, the other has Catt building it. Obviously these cannot both be correct and nor can Catt's different dates of birth. A local historian would be most useful here, with access to the formal documents, to take thsi article and flesh it out with authority. I've asked Newhaven Museum to come and set it to rights. I hope they come. Fiddle Faddle 21:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Sussex Archaeological service are starting a longterm project this month to record the entire East Beach site- Mills, Railway Station, Nurses Home, Hospital, RNAS Station and the later holiday homes and the Marconi Radio station (1904). Apart from the dig, it will evolve into a huge collection of film, video, recollections and photographs logging the decline of the area. The mill stopped around 1900, the village was condemned as unfit for habitation in 1936 and the last residents forcibly removed in 1939 . The area was in part cleared to give fields of fire and also used for street fighting training. A couple of myths destroyed - William Catt did not develop the Williams pear and the site was not used for target practice by Fort Artillery" (source - email correspondence with Newhaven Museum). Accordingly I am editing article to reflects this Fiddle Faddle 10:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect to tide mill

I disagree. The capitalisation means it needs to go to Tide Mills, East Sussex, because it is about the place, not the class of machinery. I know it is a narrow distinction. Fiddle Faddle 17:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]