Talk:Chatham, Kent

Chatham, Kent or Chatham, Medway

I have changed the name of the article to Chatham, Medway as Chatham has not been part of Kent for 10 years - it is now in the unitary authority of Medway. I feel it is still appropriate to reflect Chatham's historic place in Kent, and its associations with Kent, and we should do that within the text of the article, however it seems appropriate to get the location right in the name, and Chatham is these days in Medway. However, the matter is up for debate. SilkTork *^YES! 01:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I concur. It's clear enough from the infobox that Chatham is in the unitary authority of Medway and the ceremonial county of Kent. MarkyMarkD (talk) 09:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I have again moved the title from Chatham, Kent to Chatham, Medway per WP:UKPLACE: "For localities unambiguously located within a town/city settlement (according to reliable, external sources) placename, town/city is used." SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

With regards to the quoting of UKPLACE - that section is for locations unambiguously located within a town/city. Medway is a district, it is not a city or a town in its own right - its Chatham, Gillingham, Rochester that are the towns. It does make sense for locations such as Luton to be described as Luton, Chatham. That suggests Chatham, Kent is the appropriate disambiguation.

Incidentally, the 2nd sentence is poorly phrased as it reflects a POV not shown in the source. "Chatham was in Kent, but is ceremonially associated with it" has the apparent POV that county only means "administrative county", not any other type. "Chatham was administratively part of Kent, and is still ceremonially" is more neutral. Its also a closer match to the appropriate guidance.--Nilfanion (talk) 12:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Why is there no seperate article for Luton - which is a distinct seperate part of the medway towns/villages DavidAnstiss (talk) 17:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

After the Norman invasion the manor of Chatham, originally Saxon, was given by William the Conqueror to Earl Godwinson.

I added Citation needed because simply that internal link to King Harold II Godwinson clearly isn't accurate insofar William the Conqueror could, would never give a mere manor to the man he'd just killed in that battle near Hastings! What I do find intriguing, especially as my mother's mother's descended from the Norwood family which has arguably claimed descent from King Harold II Godwinson when apparently his wife went into Benedictine Prior Sanctuary in Minster, Sheppey with their then child son who's later been called Jordanus de Sheppey, I'm wondering, is there any possibility Jordanus de Sheppey in actual fact also became known as Earl Godwinson otherwise, what are the tantalising time mists, myths involved here, oft created by mixing oral histories like so called Chinese whispers? Matthew (talk) 21:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC) I then did a google search, noting, http://www.information-britain.co.uk/history/town/Chatham20/ "The Saxon manor at Chatham was handed to Earl Godwinson after the Norman Conquest ." Whereas, "Earl Leofwine was the younger brother of King Harold II and the fifth son of Earl Godwin. He was Earl of Kent, Essex, Middlesex, Hertford, Surrey and probably Buckinghamshire. He died on the 14th October, 1066 during the battle of Santlache Ridge together with his brothers Harold and Gyrth." http://www.cliffehistory.co.uk/domesday.html and "Bishop Odo of Bayeux Half brother to William I

Before the Conquest Lord in 1066:

Dunclent, Cresslow, Worcestershire Broch, Desborough, Buckinghamshire Clopton, Pathlow, Warwickshire Earlscourt, Ramsbury, Wiltshire After the Conquest Lord in 1086:

Salisbury, Alderbury, Wiltshire / Somerset [North] Tidworth, Amesbury, Wiltshire Crowle, Ash, Worcestershire Helpringham, Aswardhurn, Lincolnshire Bourne, Aveland, Lincolnshire Combpyne, Axmouth, Devon Swinstead, Beltisloe, Lincolnshire Carswall, Botloe, Gloucestershire Irby [-upon-Humber], Bradley, Lincolnshire Gillingham, Chatham, Kent Westwick", etc

Removal and subsequent revert of this info 30 Jan 2016

On 30th Jan 2016 I removed a sentence saying that Chatham was given to Earl Godwinson (page links to Harold Godwinson) after the Norman conquest, as obviously, as it says above, this is impossible due to Harold being killed at the battle of Hastings. ClemRutter reverted this change saying 'Can you supply a reference to your certainty that the manor of Chatham was not one of the 200 given to Godwinson'. ClemRutter can you clarify what you mean? As it seems to me this is obviously false. Even if 'Earl Godwinson' refers to another member of Harold's family, it seems unlikely that William would have given a manor to the family of the man he has just killed. In fact I believe Bishop Odo of Bayeux, half brother to William I, received Kent. Thermocycler (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chatham, Kent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120808095511/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/3950333.stm to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/3950333.stm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chatham, Kent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081225195848/http://www.walderslade.kevinarrowsmith.co.uk:80/localhistory.php to http://www.walderslade.kevinarrowsmith.co.uk/localhistory.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:08, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chatham, Kent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130725134220/http://medwayflyers.co.uk/flying-spots to http://medwayflyers.co.uk/flying-spots

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed name change to 'Chatham'

I suggest this article's name is changed to just "Chatham". This is in line with many other towns where there is no disambiguation needed. Even if there were another Chatham somewhere, this Chatham would be the default one, same as Gravesend or Dartford. I notice an earlier suggestion above about a name change, but that was for another reason and serves merely as a good example of the sort of confusion that has arisen about counties. I thought it best to post here first. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 04:09, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes. 17 months hasn't attracted any negative comment. --ClemRutter (talk) 11:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Notable people

Should Milo Yiannopoulos be added to the list of notable people? Cause the article about him, it says that he was born here. NintendoTTTEfan2005 (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)