Talk:Wigan Urban Area
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Which of the six 'areas' does the following places, all within the Wigan Urban Area, come under? ...
Pemberton, Winstanley, Shevington, Aspull, Billinge (HE) ?
Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council's 2001 census areas are far more accurate relating to Wigan. [[1]]
80.193.161.89 23:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.
- I assume that 'Wigan' is defined as being the area of the former County Borough of Wigan. You can see more about it HERE G-Man * 00:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- WIGAN is a town within it's 'town boundaries'. The area of the former County Borough of Wigan consisted of two 'towns', one being Wigan, the other being Pemberton. Whereas the 'county' borough of Wigan contained two towns, the Metropolitan Borough of the same name, now contains several towns, only one of them (the eighth largest) being Wigan. The name 'Wigan' may well be labelled to many a created area, for whatever purpose, but Wigan is a town on it's own. 80.193.161.89 11:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.
- And your source is?... Jhamez84 11:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- ......... Jhamez says (on another articles discussion page) "..... We live here - we see the town boundaries, we see the civil parish boundaries! ...."
So, Jhamez, I suppose I could say " .... We live here - we see the town boundaries....". However, I won't. I'll say this instead. You show Me a 'source' which shows that Wigan is NOT a town within it's 'town boundaries'. And I don't mean 'council wards', 'county boroughs', 'urban areas' or 'postcode lists' which we all know Wigan is 'part of', I mean the 'town called Wigan'. I could provide you with many sources referring to the Wigan Borough/Urban Area/Wards, which are all 'collections' of numerous places, including Wigan. This is where you will find the boundaries of 'Wigan' explained ...... http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=41380&strquery=wigan 80.193.161.89 17:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.
- I also showed around ten official contemporary sources in addition to referencing the town boundaries, so don't assert the contrary out of context. That source you have listed is from 1911 - and is absolutely redundant. Contemporary sources give the population of Wigan town to be around 81,000, and thus it must include the other localities. All places of significant size include other localities; Manchester is an example of this, which includes, Didsbury, Ringway, Wythenshawe, Ardwick, Bradford, Newton Heath, Castlefield, Fallofield, Moss Side, Hulme, Rushholme, Burnage, Chorlton, Ancoats, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc....
- The ONS and the OS's most recent publications prove you are in the wrong here. Unless you are Marty McFly James, I suggest you get with the time, and stop with this ridiculous (in its most true sense) campaign to undermine the status and size of Wigan. It is absolutely pathetic that this has continued for so many months, and it's hard to assume good faith that you are little more than an internet troll. Jhamez84 19:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- '.........That source you have listed is from 1911 - and is absolutely redundant......'
Try telling that to the 'Land Registry' and those who own the land it sits on. The 'council' may change, but, at the higher level, the boundaries remain the same. I haven't paid out thousands of pounds in legal costs without finding out the facts Jhamez! If you ever buy land, or try to develop, you will find out 'exactly' where the boundaries lie. Wigan is within it's 'historic boundaries'. Cross those 'historic boundaries' and you ain't in Wigan anymore (unless you are on the 'local council' level, that is).
80.193.161.89 21:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyH.
- '.........The 'council' may change, but, at the higher level, the boundaries remain the same.......Wigan is within it's 'historic boundaries........'
Nonsense! This demostrates a total lack of understanding of geography, and are the kind of laughable contentions put forwards by the Association of British Counties. Councils change, as do divisions of land, they are both dynamic as they are human contructs. By your logic on councils and historic boundaries, Wigan is still in Lancashire!... oh no... Mercia! No? Perhaps... The Roman Province of Britannia! No.... Pangaea! Oh no, that's right, this incredible (meaning it has no credibility) logic of magic historic boundaries that never change, place Wigan as a tiny unborn atom in the Pre-Cosmos - Wigan must not have changed using the knowledge from the Hanson Encyclopedia - It never witnessed the phenomina seen in every other human settlement known as urbanisation or urban sprawl (that means that the settlements expanded (grew) to encompass more territory) - it was all a lie by an evil pie-head expansionist council that has everything to gain from lying about a trivial amount of territory that they control. Wigan is just a tiny dot, and the Office for National Statistics, the Encyclopedia Brittanica, the NHS, the United Kingdom Census 2001 and the several users who've seen the material are all lying to you.
I jest of course.
Now let me try a different approach, as this issue about the status of Wigan is consistently slowing several user's abilities to contribute in a climate of intellect, academia, and calm; boundaries for territories and settlements are synthetic, they are not naturally defined. Place names are man-made, they are not naturally defined. They are not traditional, this is in the minds of regressive poorly read men and women. Wigan has grown, just like London or other expanded places, to encompass more and more territory as it has developed. The various proffessional agencies try to reflect this, and provide their results.
Now please cite a modern (this is the 21st century), published, reliable source that states that Wigan has a historic boundary that does not include a population of c.81,000. And explain why Poolstock (in Wigan South) is part of Wigan, but Pemberton is not? Unless you do this, we will continue to work from the only reliable sources avaliable.
If you want to include this in the article, it is your sole responsibility to provide the material, not us - we have the sources already. If you wish the Land Registry to confirm your POV, then go and get the material, come back and provide your source.
As for ...at the higher level, the boundaries remain the same..... Well if God is quoted in the Bible as saying Wigan has a historic boundary, then we at Wikipedia still require a published version of the Good Book. Now please stop trolling, mis-quoting editors, making unsubstatiated claims and censoring articles for the benefit of your minority, unverifiable POV pushing.
If you are unable to do this, I see no other option, given you've been blocked for this in the past, to tak you up on formal mediation.
Jhamez84 02:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC) JemmyB.
