Talk:Murray Aynsley Hill

Latest comment: 4 months ago by Alexeyevitch in topic Name again

Requested move

edit
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Murray AynsleyMurray Aynsley HillChristchurch City Libraries in their place names document, and Gordon Ogilvie in The Port Hills of Christchurch both refer to the area as 'Murray Aynsley Hill'. Rather than just moving the page, I thought I'd bring this up for discussion, as I myself have known the area by the simpler name 'Murray Aynsley'. --Relisted. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:56, 8 May 2014 (UTC) --Relisted. Andrewa (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC) Schwede66 19:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Comment I must have confused you, Andrewa; sorry for that. There's only been one vote, and that is from the nominator (me) to move the article. What I'm pointing out is that the two sources that are probably most authoritative refer to the area as Murray Aynsley Hill, rather than the shorter Murray Aynsley, which would indicate that the article should be moved. I'm slightly puzzled why you say that this is not related to WP:AT; maybe you could elaborate on this. The reason that I haven't simply moved the article, but put up a formal move request, is that I myself know the area by its shorter name. Hence I wanted to give others the chance to comment and clarify the situation, but there doesn't seem to be anyone else interested in this article. Given that my 'knowledge' is obviously not an authoritative source, the two sources referred to should take precedence, and the article should be moved (unless we subsequently have further comments here). Schwede66 21:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name again

edit

The name of the suburb is Murray-Aynsley, not Murray-Aynsley Hill so it should be changed back. The simplest and best references of common usage are local real estate magazines. The references calling it Murray-Aynsley Hill are either dated, copy a dated source, or refer to the hill itself. (Don't use that library source as a RSS - it is no better than a wiki article. If used, better to go direct to the sources it uses) This is no different from other Port Hills where the word Hill became dropped as a settlement developed more than the initial few older houses. Cashmere Hill is now rarely used as the suburb's name. Huntsbury Hill is sometimes used, but its development as a suburb was later. Another way the word Hill is used is to seperate the hill housing from the flat housing, but that has changed to where the flat part is secondary to the 'real' suburb which is the hill. Cashmere flat or Lower Cashmere is sometimes used to refer to Bowenvale Valley and streets in Thorrington but the hill houses are just Cashmere. The only flat part of Murray-Aynsley would be Aynsley Terrace (note the name), but even that isn't really flat anyway - the sectionns are raised from the street inwards away from the river. That street would not be called Murrey Aynsley anyway and certainly not Murray Aynsley flat/lower, more likely St Martins or Opawa. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:27, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

The name of the suburb is Murray Aynsley, no hyphen. Locals simply call it "The Murray's". Alexeyevitch(talk) 13:35, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I know it's called Murray Aynsley. I have never heard it ever called The Murray's and I doubt it ever is. The suburb is too small for a functioning community. Where is your source. You could begin a name change request if you want something to do. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
That is what some locals call it. It is a minor suburb of chc. Alexeyevitch(talk) 23:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply