Talk:Edge Hill, Warwickshire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page. |
| Stub | This page has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This page has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
[edit] Parliamentarian Army links
The Roundhead link gives no relevant information. The Parliament of England link is not perfect but it does give an idea of what that party represented: its thinking and its background.
[edit] Wrong name/place
According to the Ordnance Survey gazateer, Edge Hill, Warwickshire is just south of Tamworth at the other end of the county to the place being described here; and the coordinates and topography listed here seem to relate to the place it calls Edgehill, Warwickshire.
Do we have any other sources to counter this, or should we think of moving this article (with explanatory text, of course)?. -- Chris j wood 16:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- The Bartholomew Gazetteer of Britain. 1st edn. (1977) ISBN 0-85152-771X has the Edge Hill near Radway as two words. There is another one in Merseyside but that too is a two-word name.
- The Tamworth one is not listed in that book. It does appear (as two words) on the OS 1" 7th Series sheet 131 (1953), at grid ref SP240986. (RJP 21:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Ghosts - dubious
Accepting that some people believe this stuff, it still needs a credible citation. Otherwise it is just someone making it up for a laugh. Good lcuk with the credible citation! --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
