Talk:Rossendale Valley

Lack of sources

This page really needs sources. Nothing is backed up in this article. Tong22 (talk) 14:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, could someone find a source to verify that Ramsbottom forms part of the Rossendale Valley? Rosssendale's tourist website and Bury MBC's information page on the town make no mention of the valley. Tong22 (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry you have removed Ramsbottom from its listing in the Rossendale Valley. I shall gather evidence in due course that proves it should be reinstated. However the Rossendale Valley has a river at its base - the River Irwell. Haslingden is situated on a hill and nowhere near the River Irwell. So why is it listed on this page ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Thompson02 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Given that lack of credible evidence that the Battle of Brunanburh took place in Rossendale, and the increasing evidence that it took place in the Wirral, I'd like to suggest that the reference to the Battle of Brunanburh be removed.Michaelhodgins (talk) 14:10, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Hold on a minute!

To the best of my knowledge the Rossendale Valley doesn't actually exist! The area in question is in fact the upper reaches of the Irwell Valley, does the River Rossendale even exist?? I'm surprised nobody has noticed this already. Forest of Rossendale, the Rossendale Hills, the Rossendale Fells, or just plain Rossendale would be acceptable.

Unless someone screams, I'm going to move this article to Forest of Rossendale and adjust it accordingly. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 20:19, 4 November 2011 (UTC) . I've since discovered Rossendale Forest, what a mess! --Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't know this area well, but, for what it's worth, Google finds about 240,000 hits for "Rossendale Valley", so the term is certainly used, even if technically incorrectly. However there are no credible hits for "River Rossendale". Maybe local inhabitants can cast more light on the usage. -- Dr Greg  talk  22:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I should have done that myself! Now that I check further, the name is more common than Irwell Valley, and is actually printed on OS maps. As penance I've spent the last few hours reading in an effort to sort this out. Unfortunately I haven't found a good source, but I'm getting a sense that the area extends from Ramsbottom at least as far as Bacup. It seems to include the valleys of the Irwell and its tributaries. It seems that if it is a valley and it is in Rossendale, they like to call it the Rossendale Valley, despite the obvious repetition in the name.

Although work obviously needs to be done to unify this article with the Irwell Valley and River Irwell ones, I don't yet have sufficient understanding to do it myself. I do however know a little about the Forest of Rossendale, so I'm going to move Rossendale Forest over the top of that and I’ll work on that instead.--Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Late reply but I have just sent a request for Rossendale Forest to be moved to this page, so hopefully this might solve the problem. Broman178 (talk) 17:41, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Merge from Rossendale Forest

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

A merger has been proposed, of the stub Rossendale Forest (actually a hilly, open area of moors), to this article. It should probably be a section there with some more info on this area. The discussion was opened on the merge-from page by accident, but I don't think anyone will care.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  17:25, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

The merge has now been completed and the discussion in the Rossendale Forest page (now redirect) has been archived and closed. Broman178 (talk) 10:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

January reverts

@Evrik: there seems to be some confusion here. Are you aware that in attempting to restore a not particularly relevant See also yesterday, you deleted about half the article including over 60% of the references? Today, while apparently trying to remove the Trivia section (judging from subsequent edits), you again deleted the same content as yesterday. Apologies for the snarky edit summary, it seemed that you felt that half of the article was trivial. FWIW I don't actually have a problem with removing the Trivia section.Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

dab conversion

I changed this to a dab as was intended at the move discussion MB 19:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)