Template talk:Cheshire, Borough of Macclesfield
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Phildav76 in topic Poynton
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Poynton
editA link to Poynton doesn't appear on this template, neither under principal settlements (despite the P-w-W parish having a larger population than either Knutsford or Bollington) or under the parishes as it links to Poynton-with-Worth which can be best described as an archaic name. -- Phildav76 22:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- The "Principal Settlements" were restricted to those places with town status, which I don't think Poynton is, though the matter could be resolved either by making the title to that section "Towns/cities" or adding more "principal settlements" which might lead to disputes over the basis by which one classifies places into "principal ones" or not. As for the archaic name, I constructed the list using a number of sources, and the source I used for this (the official Macclesfield borough website) still has the parish down as "Poynton with Worth" (see here. So does the official site for getting population figures from the census: here. In the absence of anything else, even though it may appear to be archaic, it does seem that "Poynton-with-Worth" remains the official name. I'll sort something out about links, however. DDStretch (talk) 00:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ok. Thanks for pointing out the issue, by the way. What I've now done is to make the entry in the template go directly to the Poynton article, and I've created redirection pages for Poynton-with-Worth and Poynton with Worth that redirect to Poynton. That should sort that particular problem out, I hope. As for the "Principal Settlement" issue, I don't mind either way, but I am aware that if take the option of not changing the title to "Towns/Cities" we may get drawn into disputes about what counts as being "Principal" or not unless we can be clear about guidelines right from the start. So, we need to discuss this further. DDStretch (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I guess the argument boils down to whether there is an overlap in population size between large villages like Poynton (wasn't an urban district pre-1974) and small towns like Bollington (was an urban district).
- I wasn't disputing that the name of the parish is Poynton-with-Worth. It is just that it is coterminous with what is generally considered to be Poynton. The Poynton division that elects a member to Cheshire CC is the same as the parish for example. Alderley Edge was a UD but isn't listed as a prinicpal settlement Keep up the good work. -- Phildav76 09:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC)