Talk:Chorlton-cum-Hardy

[Incomplete coverage]

I Really think its needs to cover the many different parts of chorlton. Like Nell Lane, and Mersey Bank.

Its not all Chorlton-Ville, We dont all Juggle and drink on chortlon green.

---

I should hope not. We Chorlton Green drinkers know how to spell and punctuate.

Although the "Estates" are technically part of Chorlton, they are classed as being part of "Barlow Moor", if you are interested. Anyway, what's to talk about two residential, largely council, estates anyway? Unless you want to talk about the crime stats of course.

---

See, Now that attitude the problem, You "Chorlton Greeners" act all stuck up like that, then you wonder why we steal your cars?

The Estates are the heart of chorlton, and manchester, without us there would be no "chorlton green"

Maybe you should into mersey bank or nell lane estates and express your views there? I doubt you would.

---

If you do steal cars it's because you are criminals. "The Estates" are residential add-ons and play little part in the culture or development of Chorlton. That's not a criticism, just a fact. Chorlton Green is hundreds of years old....[no, it isn't, it's just over a hundred86.12.129.12 (talk) 10:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)] can you say the same of the estates?

As for expressing my views in Nell lane or Merseybank? I wouldn't do that because a) there would be no point, and b) I don't want my head kicked in. This is common sense surely?

I don't live in Chorlton Green by the way, I drink there from time to time.

It is wrong to say that until the 1990's Chorlton was working class whatever that means. The development of the area was by those workers who could afford to live away from their work in Manchester. Many of these lived in rented properties in what is now referred to as Chorlton Green area and many followed with the building of the council and private estates between the wars. They kept the green pubs and local shops viable before the students and trendies took over the area.

Person A, you're an idiot and Person B, you're a snob. There are plenty of people living in the estates who can spell and punctuate and aren't criminals. Also, I know how to use wikipedia properly. 80.7.186.209 (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Val Stevens

The article for Val Stevens asserts no independent notability apart from representing the Chorlton ward. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abid Chohan. JASpencer 09:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Added Sheila Newman. JASpencer 18:24, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Added Angela Gallagher. Rhyddfrydol 01:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I strongly oppose any political merging with these people. They are elected officials, and have no bearing on the area of Chorlton other than that.

It is sensible to mention their involvement, but to go further and attempt to absorb their own entries is inappropriate and I WILL oppose it. --Hardylane 22:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I strongly oppose the merger of councillors with their wards - not only does this make it much harder to keep track of which councillors exist and that the information is correct, but it adds information that isn't really relevant to the Chorlton-cum-Hardy article. Val Stevens is notable - she is the Deputy Leader of Manchester City Council. Thegraham 09:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

These three councillors are only notable because they represent Chorlton-cum-Hardy on Manchester City Council. The individuals outwith their representation for Chorlton-cum-Hardy are not notable. I strongly support the merger. Rhyddfrydol 01:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the councillor entries should be removed altogether, since their existance in the Wikipedia only serve to publicise themselves. None of them have brought anything of merit or note to Chorlton. I continue to oppose having their name on the Chorlton page. Hardylane 19:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I would support the removal of all these councillor links: two years later and Angela Gallagher is in another party and another ward. Councillors are not in practice going to stay as representatives for the same wards indefinitely. The information about who is a councillor should just appear in the article for the council itself.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge. 5 years later, Sheila Newman's article still contains no information worthy of being on Wikipedia. Simply mentioning her name in the Chorlton article (as it currently exists) already covers everything of importance. - Frankie1969 (talk) 02:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree, but there's nothing to merge. Let's prod it and see what happens. Malleus Fatuorum 02:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Harry Goodwin

Harry Goodwin was mentioned in this article and then edited out as not notable. As his connection with Top of the Pops shows he does have the notability: however he should really have his own article first and then a link from Chorlton.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Matthew Williamson

Mention of him has been removed: it could be added again with a reliable citation.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

These "Söhne und Töchter der Stadt" (sons and daughters of the town):-* Joe Ridgway (* 1873; † unbekannt), Fußballspieler * Percy Courtman (1888–1917), Schwimmer * Edward Smouha (1909–1992), Sprinter * Anthony Powell (* 1935), Kostümbildner

• Matthew Williamson (* 1971), Modeschöpfer are listed in the German Wikipedia. They may also be listed here if citations to reliable sources are provided.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Powell now has an article.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Moving Manchester

The ISSN belonged to another work altogether (Manchester : BBDM Ltd, [2001]- a magazine). This one is both a volume in the L & C A S Transactions and an individual book apparently without an ISBN.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 11:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

etymology

“ The name Chorlton-cum-Hardy may be derived from the Old English Ceorlatun Latin cum Old English Ard-Ea, meaning "the settlement of ceorls by trees near the water". ”

Doesn't X-cum-Y normally mean two parishes, X and Y, were merged long after the period of naming? —Tamfang (talk) 05:18, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

This etymology comes from Cooper's recent book and is the least convincing of those given as both names were quite separate. In this case Hardy was originally just a farm and Chorlton an Anglo-Saxon "tun". The combination with "cum" (Latin with) is much later.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:19, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

The name is a competely invented form that first emerged in the late C19th.(Pawelmichal (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2011 (UTC))

" The boundary between the two is Chorlton Brook and Hardy is recorded at least as early as the 14th century.<ref>Lloyd (1972); p. 12-14</ref> John Lloyd's book includes part of a document in the Harleian Manuscripts in the British Library Harley 2112, fol. 172. How does the "incorrect source" apply? "completely invented" really needs a supporting citation.

The X-cum-Y names will not necessarily be parishes. Both Chorlton and Hardy are names from the Anglo-Saxon period long before the parish divisions which came in later centuries.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, most town names are early, but are there any early -cum- names? If not, then the combination must be late, and the two names Chorlton and Hardy cannot have an OE etymology as a single phrase. — Incidentally Ekwall says of Hardy, "Second element ĒG 'island'. The first is doubtful." —Tamfang (talk) 07:31, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I have rewritten this in parts. It is only Cooper who gives the version translating it into a single phrase.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Good point about the citation. The manuscript JM Lloyd refers to may be a transcription or other error, as niether with- or cum- Hardy are mentioned anywhere else I have looked, prior to the period of gentrification. I knew JM Lloyd toward the end of his life [he was the sub-postmaster at Upper Chorlton Road, as was his father before him]. He contributed an enormous ammount to his community, and to historical studies of the area. He did, however, tend to draw conclusions and fill lacunae, and his maps are in no wise reliable. For instance: in his supposed 'Tithe Map' of 1845 he places the 'Pop Cottage' on the entrance to Dark Lane Farm off the Trafford Road [where Railway Terrace now stands]. Many accounts speak of the occupiers being called on to help travellers to Hulme cross the Black Brook when in spate. The Black Brook was culverted by Samuel Brooks, and follows the course of modern Upper Chorlton Road and the Trafford boundary. Therefore the cottage would have been several hundred yards north of his purported location.Pawelmichal (talk) 13:18, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

There could be two John Lloyds confused here: the author of The Township of Chorlton-cum-Hardy (1972) was a retired schoolmaster resident in Chorlton who died in 1991.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

History

Withington doesn't warrant a mention in the Domesday Book either. I wish I could remember which late mediaeval or early modern writer described the whole arc south from Manchester to the Mersey as "an reedy, marshy place".

The Manchester Guide. Manchester: Joseph Aston, 1804 has this on the same theme: "On the south side of the town, although there is no coal, there is a good equivalent in the extensive peat bogs, which furnish fuel (provincially called "Turf"), which in the absence of coal would be deemed invaluable. Scarcely any other fuel is used in the neighbourhood of the bogs, but in the town, it is only used for the purpose of kindling the more favourite fuel, coal." (p. 8)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Jackson's Moss

I note your edit. You are of course correct that the area was not part of parochial Chorlton. However, prior to its' creation, the area of Whalley Range that was in the Manor of Withington, known as Jackson's Moss, would have been relevant to any overview of Chorlton, as it was a source of income and fuel, not merely a no-man's land. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.129.12 (talk) 10:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Chorlton and class

Felix Folio Secundus makes a valuable point about Chorlton's class composition. Although the area was not mired in rural poverty, it was essentially a backwater until the construction of Wilbraham Road. The Egerton Estate, which controlled the reversion of agricultural leases, at first intended all development to be 'upper class', at both the Chorlton and Fallowfield ends. However,, like the developer of Whalley Range, they found the pressure to move into the highly-profitable upper-middle range irrestisable. This trend accelerated after the coming of the railway. We associate terraced housing with the working-class, but the terraces built here were for the new industrial managerial class. No artisanal building on any scale [apart from near the Green for the laundry, and on the site of the Priory was allowed]. It was only in the inter-war period, with the Egerton Estate relinquishing control to Manchester Corporation of large sections of land, that any social or working-class housing was built. Because this land tended to be on the outskirts of the district, it led to the us-and-them feeling personified in the exchanges at the beginning of this discussion page. The tremendous rise in the value of the land has meant that no significant additions to the lower end of the housing stock have been made since the Nell Lane estate was built in the early '80's. Even the bed-sit land element of local housing has gradually been phased out. In the circs, then, a certain ammount of class tension is perhaps, inevitable. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Slow Train

Mentioning Slow Train here is unnecessary as it is covered more fully in the article Chorlton Metrolink station.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC

Duly removed. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Toponymy

Apparently some editors lack the sense of humour to appreciate the comic potential in the area's name. Shame. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The easiest issue to deal with here is that of sourcing. The reference was there to support the fact that Round the Horne mentioned Chorlton-cum-Hardy in an episode in 1967. Everything else, the Hansard debates, the Goon Show and the Wilson quote, should have been removed per our policy on verifiability. That much doesn't need discussion. Whether this should have been included in the first place may boil down to what you would expect to see in an encyclopedia. Would you expect Britannica to mention that "cum-Hardy" is a funny name? To this end Wikipedians used how the subject is treated in third party reliable sources. It may be true that Chorlton was mentioned on the Goon Show and Round the Horne, but unless reliable sources independent of either show considers it important then it probably shouldn't be included here. Perhaps a newspaper article discusses the name and how comedians have used it? Nev1 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Good points, well made. You can't compare WP to Britannica ? 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Stranger things have happened. Nev1 (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed you can't compare Britannica with WP, as Britannica doesn't even have an article on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. Malleus Fatuorum 17:12, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

It is a pity the form Chorlton with Hardy became obsolete: it was used in the 19th century as here (1830) and in the Victoria County History of the county of Lancaster (here (1911).--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

While depriving the writers of Round the Horne, it certainly has a ring to it, even if the seperate existence of Hardy is debatable. Not faux-historic and bucolic enough for the Victorian property developers though. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 10:28, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Another mention, this time as Hardy-cum-chorlton, in Beyond Our Ken from 1960. It seems that decade was the high-point [or nadir] for comic usage of the name. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 11:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Yet another mention, this time in Doctor in the House. I don't think it was the 'rude' bit of the name that script-writers found funny, just that it was used as a generic, comical Northern name. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

It's ironic that in giving the area a name they thought more bucolic and historic, the Victorians have triggered a century-and-a-half of public hilarity. i don't think it's so much the sexual innuendo, as the sheer incongruity that people find funny. 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:32, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The Victorians tended to replace names which they thought unsuitable for public use, like Cupid's Alley off Deansgate (became Atkinson Street) Bradshaw, L. D. Origins of Street Names in the City Centre of Manchester; 1985; p. 5. In "Chorlton-cum-Hardy" they are imitating parish names from centuries earlier when official records were written in Latin by clerks who had learned to read and write while the common man only used speech. When separate parish names were administered together it resulted in records naming them thus. An extreme example is John Betjeman's poem, "Kirkby cum Muckby cum Sparrowby cum Spinx, / Is down a long lane in the county of Lincs". Until the mid 19th century the parish of Manchester (within which were Manchester and many other townships) covered a very large area of south-east Lancashire.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:18, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Traditionally, placenames with "cum" (and there are many of them) are not hyphenated. I suppose that since it's commonly hyphenated these days, the name in this case has to be hyphenated in Wikipedia, but I assume (on the basis of evidence from old photos, documents etc.) that it is actually an error. Dadge (talk) 00:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Chorlton Conservative Club

Nice edits, FFS. Wasn't the Lloyds briefly a fire station of some sort ? Also, somewhere in an MEN article there's mention that Harry H Corbett of Steptoe & Son started his career in am-dram at the Con Club, but a quick search wasn't enough to locate it. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you; according to page 97 of Lloyd's 1972 book the Chorlton hand-pump and ladder for firefighting was acquired in 1888 and kept under the wall next to the Lloyd's. Page 21 of Cliff Hayes's 1999 book has what he thinks is a picture of the Lloyd's with the fire equipment outside. I have heard that Corbett information somewhere in the past but cannot remember where. It should be possible to verify it in this new book: Corbett, S. (2012). Harry H. Corbett - The Front Legs of the Cow. The History Press, Stroud, Glos. ISBN 978-0752476827 --Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sadly, life's too short to read a luvvie's autobiography - but someone, somewhere, will do it, sometime. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:15, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Lord Egerton, pere et fils

These two men were, more than any others, responsible for the development of modern Chorlton. Where would it be more appropriate and accessible to enlarge on this - in this article, or in their biographies ? 86.12.129.2 (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism on this page

Kudos to the excellent User:Mr Stephen and his anti-vandalism patrols.

The idea that Chorlton is full of wankers is merely unsourced opinion, until there's a valid study. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

(Personal attack removed) 194.70.181.1 (talk) 09:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

500th Anniversary

Good call, FFS. An anniversary by definition is one date only. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

What was Chorlton for ?

Given the dearth of materials, how can we be sure of anything prior to the foundation of the chapel ? And also, it's not on the way to anywhere, or at the confluence of any rivers, so is it possible that it was not a cohesive settlememt at all, but a series of isolated homesteads in a marsh ? 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:38, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

There does not seem to be a cohesive entity called Chorlton prior to the establishmentof the Chapel. Even then, the disparate parts, such as Martledge, continued to have an identity until the mass housing boom following the construction of Wilbraham Road and then the railway. Settlement in river valleys made use of the flooded areas for crop growth - risky, but worth it. The surrounding forests would have provide adequate game. The marshiness of the area may well have followed on from the deforestation by farmers. The dearth of early material does lead to speculative entries such as in this article, but the chapel would have been established in Chorlton to fulfil a need, so some population would have existed in a cohesive manner in the area. And don't worry about abuse from Fatuous Fistula. As his Cod Latin name implies, he's not the sharpest tool in the box. 86.12.129.2 (talk) 10:04, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Beech Road was known earlier as Market Place, which indicates that the area was a focal point for the scattered and sparsely-populated settlements. It's also a clue as to why the chapel was sited there, on what otherwise was a cul-de-sac on the edge of the floodplain. Some confusion is caused by the centre of the village moving during the Victorian era, due to the construction of the railway and Wilbraham Road. By happy accident it allowed the preservation of the historical Chorlton, even if much of what we see today is a Victorian fake. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 11:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Before the time when the chapel was established the population would have been small and scattered. The only churches for those people were at Manchester, Stretford and Didsbury: the chapel was provided for those people who could with great difficulty attend church. --Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 18:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Economy

It would be nice if a section about the local economy were included, such as large employers, employment types, etc. FreeFlow99 (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you research it and add it then - that's the Wiki bit in the name 86.12.129.2 (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Not many large employers here.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

John M. Lloyd, author of book on Chorlton

John Lloyd describes himself as "An Old Chorltonian" on the titlepage of the book being from the old village. When he died in 1991 the South Manchester Reporter reported his membership of many transport history societies and that his grandmother was a draper in Beech Road. An article in the Stretford & Urmston Journal (1978?) gives much more information about him: he was then 64 and his mother Edith was 92. The research for The Township of Chorlton-cum-Hardy took him 18 months and he says he decided to write it because of all the enquiries he got from children (he was a teacher at Chorlton Boys' Grammar School from 1947 until he resigned in 1973: comprehensive education was not to his liking). It is unlikely there is any connection with the two George Lloyds who owned land in Chorlton: the Lloyd's Hotel was an enterprise of James Platt and has a coat of arms of the Lloyd family on the front. George Lloyd resided at Stockton Hall in Yorkshire so Stockton was given to Stockton Road south of High Lane.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Beech Road Festival

There was no festival in 2012. Please update if a reliable citation can be found.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

"Essaylike" tag

Re: "This article is written like a personal reflection or essay rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style." Only parts of the article fall below an encyclopedic standard; large parts of it have been written from a neutral point of view with adequate citations.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 14:00, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more. The vigilance of editors like FFS or MrStephen ensure that very little unverified essay-like content passes. I would argue for the removal of the tag. 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Lead section

The problem with the present lead section should probably be referred to an editor willing to draft a new version which will avoid the need for any tags. This needs to be an editor familiar with the WikiProject UK Geography guidelines on writing about settlements or a member of WikiProject Greater Manchester with relevant experience. (I am not contributing much to WPGM these days.)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Etymology

In Lloyd (1972), appendix VI 12 variant spellings are given for Chorlton which were listed in either Booker or Ellwood; 15 for Martledge; and 2 for Hardy. In 1773 by the will of Margaret Usherwood a charity came into existence to provide for the education of "six poor children" under certain conditions which included attendance at Chorlton Chapel. (Lloyd (1972), pp. 61-62 & appendix V. In 1745 the Scots army of Prince Charles Edward was encamped in the district in the winter of 1745/46: in Martledge there is an area formerly known as "Scots Hill" because of this (Lloyd (1972), pp. 62-63). In the Protestation of 1641 54 men of "Chollerton"; 14 of "Mansleache"; and 16 of "Hardie" are recorded as having taken the oath. (Lloyd (1972), appendix III.)----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 04:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Annual events

Re: inaugural Chorlton Coffee Festival in June. Should this not wait until it has actually happened and been noticed by the press?--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 04:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

In general I'd agree, but the event is little more than a month away, and to be honest that's really the least of the problems with this article. Malleus Fatuorum 12:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It is rather trivial and promotional to mention this coffee festival already; the section should really only have established annual events which ran for many years or are expected to come round again. (Beech Road Festival is in a kind of limbo at the moment but some reliable source is needed before saying it only ran until 2011.)--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 13:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I somewhat agree, although knowing nothing at all about this particular festival. The reality is though, in my view at least, that this article would be greatly improved by having a lot of its material removed. Malleus Fatuorum 13:13, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Kudos to the editors

WP editors don't have the highest of reputations, but the South Manchester articles are both factual and easy-to-read. And it's entirely down to the scolarship and passion of editors like FFS, Malleus, Mr Stephen and others. Don't be offended if you're not mentioned - the list would be too long. As a general reader interested in the topics, I really admire the way this, and articles on neighbouring areas have been composed. So if WP is ever to lift itself up to the level it aspires to, literate expert knowledge and enthusiasm, as displayed here, is definitely the way ahead. 193.63.210.2 (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Add the much-missed pawelmichal, who was one of the first to start expanding these articles. 194.70.181.1 (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

An awful lot of the credit for encouraging me and others to work on Manchester articles is undoubtedly down to the much-missed Jza84 (talk · contribs). Malleus Fatuorum 19:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Although it must be pointed out that the use of sarcastic or intemperate language during edits tends to put off occasional editors, some of whom at least have something to offer. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

It must also be pointed out that "sarcastic or intemperate language" is sometimes the only way to deter those who have no interest in improving articles, only in shoving their favourite factoid or point of view down the throats of others. Malleus Fatuorum 13:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Fair point Malleus. The Internet as a whole, and not just WP, is the domain of the monomaniac, the obsessive, and the just plain dull. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Whatever happened to J3Mrs ? Her contribs always seemed worthwile. 194.70.181.1 (talk) 14:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

She's still here, for her sins but not it seems at Chorlton-cum-Hardy. J3Mrs (talk) 19:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Chorlton-on-Mersey

On July 11, 1913, the Manchester Evening News described a woman as being from 'Chorlton-on-Mersey'. Can anyone shed any light as to whether this form was used for any time, or if it's just a mistranscription from shorthand [presumably for Chorlton-on-Medlock]. It seems an elegant name, esp. given the proximity of Ashton-on-Mersey, so I wonder why it never caught on [assuming the former is true]. Although this would have deprived many comedy writers [and schoolboys], of much hilarity. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Nico Ditch

Are there any traces of this mysterious earthwork any where in Chorlton ? 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Charles Peace

Re: *Charles Peace, a notorious petty criminal who killed P. C. Nicholas Cock in 1876 (at the Old Trafford end of Manchester Road). On conviction he was hanged at Leeds.

Peace's shooting of P. C. Nicholas Cock happened in Chorlton, at its extreme northern end. Here the boundary between Manchester and Streetford (Old Trafford) runs along Upper Chorlton Road and then westwards separating Seymour Grove from Manchester Road. Two Chorlton men were convicted of the crime for which Peace had been responsible. John Lloyd and earlier writers on the history of Chorlton give an account of this notorious incident and P. C. Cock was buried in Chorlton's graveyard. See pp. 95-97 of John Lloyd's 1972 book and "Chorlton's major crime" (the last section of Lloyd's "Looking Back" 1985) --Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Bowling Green Hotel

Bowling Green Hotel (1908), St Clement's old churchyard in foreground

Bowling Green Hotel is illustrated here; not the hotel which existed until 1908 but the present one. Taken from the footpath which crosses the churchyard looking southwards.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 22:43, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Wholesale revisions by one editor

Can the editors of this page please have a look at what's happening? A user called Eric Corbett seems hell bent on rewriting this page to suit his own ends. I have reverted several times but no intention of maintaining an edit war with a VERY rude user. Felix, can you help? Hardylane (talk) 00:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• Hardy, it takes two to edit war. You should both stop the reverting. I hope Eric decides to discuss rather than continue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

  Discusss what? It's hardly contentious to correct "It is situated ..." to "It is ...". Eric Corbett 00:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

On the 9th of September a rude, self-important man called Eric came to this page and decided to make many edits, accompanied by smartarse comments. Had they been necessary, they would have been done by the users who regularly maintain this page. I don't know who "Eric Corbett" is, or who he thinks he is, but his attitude stinks. I will pursue this matter with some WP admins. No-ne likes a smartarse. Hardylane (talk) 01:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the "smartarse" would be you. I'd keep a lookout for boomerangs if I were you. Eric Corbett 01:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Is that a threat? Do you threaten people as well? You're a lovely person. Hardylane (talk) 01:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I am a lovely person as it happens, but where's the threat? Accusing me of making threats when I did no such thing is of course a violation of WP:CIVIL. Time for you to calm down I think. Eric Corbett 01:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

"I'd keep a lookout for boomerangs if I were you" sounds like some veiled threat to me. Hardylane (talk) 01:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

• No, it's a word of caution. Read WP:BOOMERANG (the reference Eric is making) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

My final words on this: I'm disappointed the page has been locked on Eric's butchered version, but it's for others to fix. I have a life. Hardylane (talk) 01:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Then you're likely to be even more disappointed after the protection expires, and I "butcher" this article into something with at least a passing resemblance to an encyclopedia entry. Eric Corbett 03:31, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

If you need any help you know I enjoy working on settlement articles. J3Mrs (talk) 10:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer of help. Once the protection expires I'm going to knock this bitch into shape, no matter who gets upset. Eric Corbett 13:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

There is no need to be quite so rude to J3Mrs. She was only offering to help. CanOffWorms (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

1964 blues concert

One of the paragraphs recently deleted (as "trivia") referred to the 1964 TV blues programme recorded at Chorlton-cum-Hardy. The paragraph was not especially well-written, and one of the ref links was dead, but I suggest that a reworded paragraph should be reinstated in the article, such as:

Chorlton-cum-Hardy railway station was long assumed to be the venue for a notable Granada TV concert in 1964 by a number of visiting American blues musicians including Muddy Waters, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Sonny Terry and Brownie McGhee. However, recent research has identified Alexandra Park railway station, at the end of Athol Road, as the actual location.

Other articles perhaps need to be expanded to cover this more fully, but its significance is confirmed by sources such as this, this, this, and this. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

The programme may or may not be significant, but what's clearly trivia is that it was once mistakenly thought to have been recorded at Chorlton-cum-Hardy railway station. And if it is significant, even though arguably it wasn't recorded in Chorlton at all, then its significance needs to be explained. Eric Corbett 13:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I understood that Wilbraham Road railway station, where it was recorded, was within Chorlton-cum-Hardy - is that wrong? I'm not necessarily against removing any mention of where it was previously thought to have taken place. Its significance certainly needs to be explained in more detail somewhere, but perhaps not in detail in this article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I suppose it might just be within the boundary of Chorlton to be fair. Eric Corbett 14:10, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth I've added a short paragraph at American Folk Blues Festival, and it's already mentioned at Wilbraham Road railway station. Should still be mentioned here as well, in my view. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Where would you put it, and what would you want to say? Eric Corbett 15:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

According to this map it's not in CcH. J3Mrs (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I didn't think it was in Chorlton. Eric Corbett 16:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't know... according to this - and the Wilbraham Road railway station article - it was in Chorlton, but I'll admit to not knowing the area. It was certainly reported as being in Chorlton, and called "Chorltonville" in the TV programme. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the map is a better indication of where Wilbraham Road station is located. Calling it "Chorltonville" doesn't mean it is in CcH. J3Mrs (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

But I would have expected the Manchester Evening News to know where it was. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:37, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

So would I but it's in Withington. J3Mrs (talk) 16:53, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) As a TV programme filmed here, it should presumably go under "Creative and performing arts". Something along the lines of:

On 7 May 1964, Granada Television broadcast Blues and Gospel Train, a programme directed by John Hamp featuring Muddy Waters, Sonny Terry and Brownie McGhee, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Rev. Gary Davis and others who formed part of the touring American Folk Blues Festival. For filming, the company transformed the disused Wilbraham Road railway station into "Chorltonville", giving it the supposed appearance of a southern U.S.-style station.

You might want to prune the sources back. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

What about the fact that the station isn't actually in Chorlton? Eric Corbett 16:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I was relying on this article, this article, and the fact that in the programme it was called "Chorltonville". Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:35, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Whilst I am generally inclined against endless lists of trivia in articles, this particular piece of information is valuable as a "mythbuster". The concert (in various forms of bastardisation; one of which I've heard tells of it including Bob Dylan during a visit to the Free Trade Hall) is somewhat of a local legend. To put right factually incorrect yet broadly believed historical accounts is, in my opinion, broadly a good thing. I certainly believed that it happened at Chorlton Railway Station before having come across it in this article. In this context the fact it didn't happen in Chorlton (albeit very close by) is irrelevant, the fact that people think it did, is.

In saying that, a succinct reference in Chorlton Metrolink station (which also covers Chorlton-cum-Hardy Railway Station) may be an alternative solution. -- Fursday 18:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Believe it or not this article is supposed to be about Chorlton, not a concert that happened nearby. People "think" lots of things but it doesn't mean it's relevant here. J3Mrs (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I told you this would be hard work. Anyway, I just got back from Chorlton Library (I drove I'm afraid), and I borrowed a book that will hopefully be helpful for when we can get to work. Eric Corbett 19:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I can think of others that were hard work. If Chorlton Library is anything like mine, the most interesting local reference books are not available for loan and some have to be extracted from somewhere called the "stack" at the main library. CcH is in my family tree, my mother's ancestors had a farm there 200 years ago. J3Mrs (talk) 21:25, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm simply affronted that this article is so bad, and people are trying to edit war to defend its badnesss. Chorlton Library is part of Manchester Libraries, whose main site in the city has been closed for I think two years for refurbishment, scheduled to reopen next year I think. But we don't need anything other than regular books and common sense to knock this into shape. Eric Corbett 21:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Part of the problem here is that the historic eastern boundary of Chorlton is in line with St Werburgh's Road. The adjacent area was historically in the township of Withington but has ended up in the M21 postal district & the ecclesiastical parish of St Werburgh, Chorlton-cum-Hardy so it is generally included in C-c-H. To the east and northeast are Alexandra Park and Whalley Range which acquired new names during the 19th century as the area of Jackson's Moss was developed by Samuel Brooks and a park was laid out in the township of Moss Side. For local government purposes the wards of Chorlton and Chorlton Park are used; each has three councillors. Perhaps it would be worthwhile contacting the Chorlton Civic Society through its website and see if anyone can help provide access to the books you need.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:47, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I think that if these are historic issues then, if they are to be included, they should be placed in the History section. Outside of this section, the article should describe CcH as it is now in its officially-registered boundaries (assuming these are clear). If we start to use our own judgement (which will be unsourced, and often be original research) then that way lies all sorts of problems with people claiming that they can then say that Warrington (for example) is still in Lancashire, because some people think it is, or that the Hundredal system of administration is still in existence, although dormant (there are people on wikipedia who do argue for such things). If the situation is unclear, then a succinct, objective statement of the issues may be required along with a sourced justification for any decisions that are made about the extent of CcH, and, ideally, decisions not made by us as editors. But first of all, we need a very clear and onbjective statement of all the arguments that place the boundaries in certain places. That should happen here, and, ideally, be accompanied by sketch maps if that can help.  DDStretch  (talk) 08:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

From my own experience with this article plenty of good sources are mentioned in the article itself, but as it stands only parts of them have been used so far. The two books by John M. Lloyd (1972) and (1985) include maps of C-c-H at different periods and many historic illustrations. Lloyd also goes into detail about boundaries and the title of his 1972 book "The Township of Chorlton-cum-Hardy" defines fairly well what he regards as belonging to C-c-H. As a township it was one of 40 within the ancient parish of Manchester; Stretford was another township so the border between them was fixed in the Middle Ages. Lloyd's 1985 book includes the tithe map of 1845 which shows all the landholdings of that time. The ward boundaries are much more recent since C-c-H has only been part of the City of Manchester since 1904. Sketch maps would help a lot if someone is willing to provide them.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 15:24, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing isn't the problem here, it's all the bloated trivia, which will be removed shortly. This article needs to be reconstructed, and it will be. Eric Corbett 15:56, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

My take on the recent problems on this page

This page needs Eric's less than gentle touch. To be quite honest, it was bloody awful and still has a long way to go. For instance, what is the purpose of a picture of a bus, surely a town without a bus would be more remarkable, similarly, I don't see the point of a tree shadow - it's horrible: the whole page looks as though its been attacked by the local Cub Scouts eager to display their entries for photography badges. The text needs a lot more work, and many of the short stubby sections need combining or extending. There's also an immense amount of dull trivia that either needs enlivening or pruning out. Eric really does need to be allowed a free hand here, existing editors should be grateful for his attentions. That's my view.  Giano  08:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

• Those images are... oh my. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:30, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Just had a look through the edits to see what the fuss was about and I fully support every one of them, with possible exception of the Muddy Walters/Rosetta Tharpe concert (see above) -- Fursday 19:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

You mean the concert that didn't take place in Chorlton? Eric Corbett 19:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Religion

I think this section has too much detail for a settlement article so I think some of it could be used in a St Clement's Church, Chorlton-cum-Hardy article. I could summarise here and copy the relevant detail to the new article and acknowledge its provenance. Thoughts? J3Mrs (talk) 18:23, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. Eric Corbett 18:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Hear, hear. The Parish is clearly old enough to warrant a seperate article. 91.235.65.1 (talk) 15:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

We don't need to talk about Eric

I think we should all be grateful to anyone who takes the time to enhance the WP experience, or adds new. related articles. Granted, some editors, like User: Eric Corbett, lack social skills. But part of that same problems that so cripple him in the real world, make him so effective in the strange parallel universe that is WP. The article is undoubtedly more readable for his efforts. As time and medication allows, let's hope he moves onto the neighbouring areas, whose WP articles are badly in need of attention. 91.235.65.1 (talk) 15:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Are you speaking officially on behalf of Manchester City Council? I suppose it's possible that you're sitting at a terminal in a Manchester library, but as you're unable to spell even common words such as separate correctly I doubt you've ever been near a library. Eric Corbett 15:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Care in the community, I expect they've escaped for a little whileJ3Mrs (talk) 16:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Mr Corbett has quite beautiful manners and social skills (quite akin to my own) and is an ornament to any table. Wikipedia should not allow him to be insulted by some leftie jack-in-an-office from Manchester City Council who should be attending to his duties and not fiddling about with Wikipedia. The citizens of Manchester do not pay their exorbitant council taxes in order for their employees to waste their time - he's obviously surplus to requirements in his office and any more from him and I shall contact the council and my MP and have him dismissed! The Lady Catherine de Burgh (talk) 17:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

  It's extraordinary how many enemies one can make when attempting to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. But I wonder why this employee of Manchester City Council has decided to target me rather than J3Mrs, who's been at least as ruthless as I've been in chopping stuff out. Eric Corbett 18:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I've enough enemies of my own without you inviting any more thank you Eric. J3Mrs (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, yes, sorry about that. Anyway, no matter what our friend thinks, I think the article is already greatly improved and is moving in the right direction. Eric Corbett 18:51, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

It has a way to go yet. The more you read the more you realise it's very repetitive. J3Mrs (talk) 19:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I agree. And not only that, stuff is in the wrong place, important stuff is missing, and there's still too much irrelevant trivia. Eric Corbett 20:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to thank Eric and J3Mrs for the work they have been doing so far on this article. I agree that it looks better already. I think praise is needed to counter the baiting and taunting that has come from an anonymous user, though I imagine that the baiting properly counts as less than zero in its effect to you. However, I will be watching that. I am having problems with access here in China (the government here is going through a spasm of fear about access to the Internet, and m any sites are often inaccessible from time to time, inclusing wikipedia) but if there is any missing info that you would like some others to find for you and put here, then let us know here, and I am sure we can try to find it for you (though there aren't many Local History books for the UK available in China!)  DDStretch  (talk) 06:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC

Funny that a man in his sixties should be so sensitive. Still, if Wikipedia is your last refuge from reality.. The one we all feel sorry for is of course poor Ruth. 91.235.65.1 (talk) 15:40, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I predict that you won't be here much longer Mr Troll. Eric Corbett 16:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

For one week. If repeated, longer.  DDStretch  (talk) 01:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

FreeBMD has a registration district named Chorlton

FreeBMD has a registration district named Chorlton (to 1924), is the registration district either Chorlton-cum-Hardy, or Chorlton-on-Medlock (noting they are only a couple of miles apart)? Best Regards

The Chorlton registration district contains both Chorlton-cum-Hardy and Chorlton-on-Medlock, along with surrounding areas including Stretford, Withington, Didsbury and many more.[1] Eric Corbett 13:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Would you know where the Chorlton registration district office was located? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

No idea, sorry, but I'd suspect there was more than one, perhaps one in each off the sub-districts. Eric Corbett 15:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

This may help in sorting out which Chorlton is which: Chorlton Poor Law Union.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 03:49, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

There's no doubt surrounding which Chorlton was which. Eric Corbett 10:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Singing the Blues

Since so many people seem to attach importance to the May 1964 concert, could I canvass opinion from more experienced editors ? Is it worth setting up a seperate article, or would WP's powers-that-be regard it as too trivial ? 212.121.210.45 (talk) 15:20, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

It's already mentioned in the American Folk Blues Festival article. What more is there to say about it? Eric Corbett 15:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for telling me about the other article. Perhaps a small mention, then, in the Whalley Range article, since it seems to attract some attention ? 212.121.210.45 (talk) 15:36, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

It's also mentioned at Wilbraham Road railway station and Chorltonville. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Seems a very unlike place for it. J3Mrs (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

That's one of the reasons why it's notable. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I meant Whalley Range. And I most definitely think articles shouldn't mention concerts that happened elsewhere. J3Mrs (talk) 16:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

The station used as a venue was in Whalley Range, so deserves a link at least. As for your other edits, might I suggest the purchase of a map ? You've come close to being barred for vandalism before - be warned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.235.65.1 (talk) 15:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Really? Barred for vandalism? J3Mrs (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I wonder who he's referring to? You or me? It's just more bullshit anyway. Eric Corbett 16:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Wow. Didn't mean to start a war. Sorry, User:J3Mrs, I've mentioned before how much I respect your work [see 'Kudos' above]. It seems you got caught in the war between those other two idiots.212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:21, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hough

According to this Hough was regarded as a separate manor and the manor house of Withington from the 13th century. It's not mentioned in the VCH article on CcH. J3Mrs (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to dump all mention of Hough End, as it doesn't seem to me to ever have been in Chorlton, and certainly isn't now. Eric Corbett 21:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Guidance on Chorlton's boundaries, please

If we use the old parochial boundary, then Stretford Stadium and Jackson's Boat are in, but Hough End Hall, Nell Lane estate and even Southern Cemetary are out. Experienced editor User: J3Mrs says postcodes are not a guide. As for wards, I've lived in the same house since 1968, in what everyone accepts is Chorlton [ with the postcode, phone no.], yet the ward boundaries have changed three times. Some help, please. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 14:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I have been using the old township boundary and I agree the hospital is in Trafford, the OS map shows the boundary. Southern Cemetery is on the border which is Barlow Moor Road, it was built on open land where the nearest houses were in Chorlton and came to have a Chorlton address. The Post Office draws lines that do not respect borders, post codes are for its own convenience, phone numbers likewise. What everyone accepts can only be accepted here if it is referenced. J3Mrs (talk) 15:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I've been wondering about the Stretford Memorial myself. It seems so evidently in Chorlton when you drive past it, but then why would it have been called the Stretford Memorial rather than the Chorlton Memorial? What swung me was seeing it included in Hayes (1999) Chorlton-cum-Hardy book. Eric Corbett 15:59, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. How far back can we go, then? Ward boundaries seem to move for the local authority's convenience, but Chorlton's parochial boundaries would have changed with the building of St. Werburgh's, as the township expanded in almost all directions. And I seem to remember a Boundary Commission in the 1980's fixing the Manchester/Trafford anomalies. Longford Stadium, and an area next the TA Depot on Upper Chorlton Road shifted allegiances, as did The Jackson's Boat and Loreto College further afield. Obviously I won't change anything until I can cite the source. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 15:41, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

User: J3Mrs: current OS map shows Longford Stadium and whole of park is in Trafford. The open area immediately to the east of the park is MMU playing fields. Will adjust article accordingly. Thank you. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:25, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Apparently the Manchester/Trafford boundaries followed the Cornbrook and Black Brook, long since culverted, and clearly archaic in view of heavy development. And User:Eric Corbett, so much for local authorities spending fortunes on boundary markers. The discerning mind looks on all such stuff as background noise. Good Wikipedians always look to a source ! 212.121.210.45 (talk) 16:40, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

• My source, a 2013 map, shows the authority boundary not the park boundary. I don't know why you feel the need to bait the editors improving this article, it says more about you. J3Mrs (talk) 16:53, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
• I don't care for your tone 212.121.210.45, and as Trafford only came into existence in 1974 I don't see the point you're trying to make either. Eric Corbett 16:57, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I apologise. In the specific case of Longford Park, then: The boundary passes along the eastern edge of the Park. The land to the east, while open, is a playing field belonging to MMU. The whole of the Park is therefore in Trafford. 212.121.210.45 (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Partial Protection

I've been looking at the behaviour of various anonymous IP editors, and many of them whno are active on here are baiting and making inapprpriate comments (mixed in with some reasonable points) on this talk page. They have also made dubious edits from time to time on the main article page. I've already imposed a block on one IP address to prevent a repetition of quite unacceptable baiting of Eric. I suspect the person behind this has simply shifted to another IP address, but I am not sure of that. However, unless the tone of interaction improves, there is the option of partially-protecting both the article and this talk page to require people to actually log in under a registered i.d. Those who have been less than above board in their baiting personal comments should take this as a warning and modify their interactions as appropriate.  DDStretch  (talk) 05:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Having now read all of the contributions by the anonymous editors, it clearly is the case that the block I awarded to one has been evaded by changing to another IP address administered by a council in Greater Manchester. There has also been at least one more personal attack from this new IP address. Consequently, I have prevented anonymous IP editors from editing this talk page and awarded the new IP address a block. If necessary, I will protect the article as well,though I do not want to do this too easily.  DDStretch  (talk) 06:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Youngs

As discussed here, the following in transcribed from Youngs, Frederic A, Jr. (1991). Guide to the Local Administrative Units of England, Vol.2: Northern England. London: Royal Historical Society. p. 157. ISBN 0861931270.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link). The original uses a lot of abbreviations (EP for ecclesiastical parish for instance) for space-saving purposes, but I have de-abbreviated them here.

CHORLTON CUM HARDY

Chapelry in Manchester Ancient Parish, separate Civil Parish 1866, separate Ecclesiastical Parish 1723,, ecclesiastically refounded 1839, ecclesiastically refounded 1854.

Local Government: Salford Hundred, Chorlton Poor Law Union, Withington Urban Sanitary District, Urban District (1894-1904), Manchester County Borough (1904-10). Civil boundary altered 1883 Abolished civilly 1910 entirely to South Manchester Civil Parish.

Parliament: Southern Division of Lancashire (1832-67), South-Eastern Division of Lancashire (1867-85), Stretford Division of Lancashire (1885-1918)

Ecclesiastical: Manchester Rural Deanery (1723-66), Chorlton & Hulme Rural Deanery (1766-1872), Hulme Rural Deanery (1872-1933), Stretford Rural Deanery (from 1933). Ecclesiastical boundary altered in 1882 (helped to create Didsbury Christ Church, Barlow Moor Road Ecclesiastical Parish), in 1898 (helped create Chorlton cum Hardy St Werburgh Ecclesiastical Parish), in 1930 and 1958.

CHORLTON CUM HARDY ST WERBURGH

Ecclesiastical Parish created 1898 from Chorlton cum Hardy Ecclesiastical Parish, Fallowfield Ecclesiastical Parish

Hulme Rural Deanery (1898-1933), Stretford Rural Deanery (1933 on). Boundary changes in 1902, in 1905 and in 1916 (helped create Withington St Crispin Ecclesiastical Parish).

Lozleader (talk) 17:12, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

That is very kind of you Lozleader and much as I thought. J3Mrs (talk) 17:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The references seem to have disappeared??? Lozleader (talk) 17:38, 20 September 2013 (UTC) And fixed! Lozleader (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. 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/20110718144448/http://www.gmcro.co.uk/Guides/Gazeteer/gazzc.htm to http://www.gmcro.co.uk/Guides/Gazeteer/gazzc.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130520075437/http://www.metrolink.co.uk/futuremetrolink/Pages/airport-line.aspx to http://www.metrolink.co.uk/futuremetrolink/Pages/airport-line.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120322114556/http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200073/parks_and_open_spaces/1474/beech_road_park/1 to http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/200073/parks_and_open_spaces/1474/beech_road_park/1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090705140124/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/areal/uk.html to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/areal/uk.html

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) 02:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

River Mersey

"The area now known as Chorlton-cum-Hardy comprises the ancient settlements of Chorlton to the north of the Mersey along with Hardy and Barlow to the south" This is wrong: Chorlton and Hardy are either side of the Chorlton Brook; Barlow is a little further south than Hardy. The River Mersey separates the City of Manchester from part of Trafford MB.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 11:43, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. 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/20091023092339/http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/1015/books_and_reading/3863/chorlton_book_festival/1 to http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/1015/books_and_reading/3863/chorlton_book_festival/1

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) 16:34, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chorlton-cum-Hardy. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.jacksonsboat.co.uk/history/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130821030942/http://www.merseyvalley.org.uk/site/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=49&Itemid=71 to http://www.merseyvalley.org.uk/site/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=49&Itemid=71
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130828022629/http://www.manchester.gov.uk/directory_record/67739/chorlton_water_park to http://www.manchester.gov.uk/directory_record/67739/chorlton_water_park
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611135224/http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/manchester/ to http://www.urbantransport-technology.com/projects/manchester/

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) 04:47, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Southern Cemetery

I question the technical correctness of the unsourced statement that the cemetery is currently 'the largest municipal cemetery in England'. Arguably it lost that distinction when Woking Borough Council in 2014 took over Brookwood Cemetery(hitherto privately owned), and run it through a subsidiary body. Brookwood Cemetery is the largest cemetery in the UK.Cloptonson (talk) 14:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Chorlton Arts Festival

Next year will be the 20th anniversary of Chorlton Arts Festival. It would be good to include its history within the Chorlton-cum-Hardy Wiki82.29.212.77 (talk) 16:38, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Graeme House

Graeme House, Nicolas Road

It is not notable enough to be mentioned in the article; it is an office block next to the closed shopping precinct but of no architectural interest. Why was it given that name I wonder. Johnsoniensis (talk) 12:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Possibly soon due for demolition, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

References