Talk:Pott Shrigley

Assessment Report

1. Article needs to be massively expanded using Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.
2. It should make use of sections, using Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.
3. Photos need to be added.
4. References and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.)

 DDStretch  (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

neighbours

"The nearest settlements are Bollington to the west,..." Not Adlington, by any chance?
--Jotel 12:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I think we may come down to arguing about what counts as a meaningful settlement. So, what I've done is altered the claim to "the nearest town", in which case Bollington can still stay, but it is actually to the south-west. What I'll do is add a compass-table to give surrounding civil parishes, which might help. If we get a simple map of the borough (which I have in hand) giving the boundaries of all the civil parishes within it, that may help even more.  DDStretch  (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so I'll tell my friends from Adlington that they do not necessarily live in "a meaningful settlement". I'm sure they'll be delighted :-))
--Jotel 12:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

(belated response) Of course, that wasn't the sense of what I meant, but it made me laugh! 8-)  DDStretch  (talk) 22:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

References

Two references per 8 sentences: that's about right, isn't it?? --Jotel (talk) 19:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It could be, but the nature of what is being written about should determine how many and when to reference material, and it could be less or more than that.  DDStretch  (talk) 22:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Shrigley Hall - new article??

Would it make sense to create a new Shrigley Hall article? just a though - I don't see myself doing this in the near future. --Jotel 18:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

My opnion is that it is probably better not to do this unless one can also immediately add some substantial material to it, as it will be at risk of speedy deletion. If you have some brief information about it, include it in a section in this article. Once it can be expanded substantially, a new article can be split off or spawned from this one. Does that make sense?  DDStretch  (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't have anything weighty to add just now, so I agree it's probably better not to create a stub of a stub of an article :-). If/when I have more time and material I may think again. And if somebody else beats me to writing a proper article, that's even better .... --Jotel 18:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

I invite any budding linguist or historian to suggest to us what the etymology is, for Pott Shrigley.

I've done the barest minimal research, but drawn a blank. Trafford09 (talk) 17:16, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

According to the Dictionary of British Place Names (ed. David Mills), Shrigley comes from the Old English scrīc and lēah, and means a woodland clearing where mistle thrushes are found, and Pott comes from the Middle English potte, meaning a deep hole.[1] (the link takes you to the entry for Pott Shrigley, though the info is found by scrolling down to the entry at Shrigley). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 18:23, 3 February 2019 (UTC)