Jump to content

Talk:Chelmsford

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Initial text

[edit]

There are three coats of arms on file for Chelmsford:

the modern district (which is named after and includes the town of C.):

the former urban district council (which was just the town of C.):

and the former rural district council:

I've only put the first two on the page. Does anyone have an opinion about whether we should use all three, or just the first, or the first two, or what? Marnanel 01:25, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Marconi Research Station

[edit]

The call-sign for Writtle was 2MT (two emma toc), 2LO being the call-sign for it's London-based sister-station which eventually became BBC London. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.53.137 (talk) 16:50, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

[edit]

The trivia section needs to be incorporated into the body of the text. This has already been done with some items around local government and reintroducing them simply creates repetition. This also needs to be done with the others to comply with WP:TRIVIA. Some things that are not encyclopaedic can be removed altogether. MRSC • Talk 19:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Education and other items relating to the wider borough

[edit]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements for guidance here. Lists of schools relating to a district get listed on that article. MRSC • Talk 19:32, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marconi Quotation

[edit]

The caption under Marconi's picture quotes him as saying, "If somethings hard to do then its not worth doing."

First of all, there's some punctuation missing, but more importatly, it makes no sense that Marconi would say that, as inventing the radio can't have been terribly easy, and I have not been able to find that quotation anywhere else, so I've removed it. Cadwaladr (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "dullest and most stupid spot on the face of the Earth".

[edit]

I think it's worth including this quote in the page, distasteful as it may be:

  • If any one were to ask me what in my opinion was the dullest and most stupid spot on the face of the Earth, I should decidedly say Chelmsford.
    • Charles Dickens, letter to Thomas Beard (January 11, 1835), in Madeline House, et al., The Letters of Charles Dickens (1965), p. 53.
This has probably been said about every town on earth. WillRefvem (talk) 06:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

People Born In Chelmsford

[edit]

Is it right to have Geoff Hurst included in this list as it clearly states to the right of his entry that he was born in Ashton-under-Lyne. Chilkoot (talk) 13:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A&N information unsourced

[edit]

I noticed that the Army and Navy section doesn't cite sources especially in criticism and I suspect there is a fair bit of opinion/original research. I've marked the section as such. ☭ cmn ☭ ( ❝❞ /✍ ) 16:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership New Street Site

[edit]

I'd be surprised if Selex Communications still own that site. --Salocin-yel (talk) 12:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joint ownership - Finnmecanica/Selex, BAE Systems and Royal Bank of Scotland, although I don't have a Web based source. (I asked in person, but WP:NOR.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.38.195 (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chelmsford gains City Status

[edit]

There will need to be edit work on this page to show that this County Town is now a City. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.59.13.157 (talk) 10:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't officially a city yet. –anemoneprojectors– 14:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It seems there's some disagreement over that. I've got to say that my first thought was that it wouldn't be immediate and your BBC source seems to agree but the Chelmsford Borough Council website seems to disagree here and imply that it had city status from yesterday morning. Dpmuk (talk) 14:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose the question is: Is the council website a reliable source? Or do we have to wait for a third-party source to acknowledge it? AP - what source has told you otherwise? — Smjg (talk) 16:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I only went by the BBC. I guess it's tricky to know how it works officially. Personally I'd be more inclined to go with the BBC as an independent secondary source. Then again, we know it will be a city if it's not yet and we may not officially know when it is. Really I only came here to see if it had been updated, I have no links to the place but was interested in the news, so I'm happy to leave it to others to decide. –anemoneprojectors– 13:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to see if Wikipedia had been updated on this development. The official word is that Chelmsford is not a city until the Queen issues the Royal Charter letters patent to the town- likely to happen around August. Until then, Chelmsford is still a town and I shall remove wording appropriately. ☭ cmn ☭ ( ❝❞ /✍ ) 14:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? "The official word is..." without a source doesn't count for much at wikipedia (see WP:RS). The only sources we have so far seem to disagree (see above). Dpmuk (talk) 19:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Her Majesty will formally confer the city titles by Letters Patent later this year. These are the same letters that are sent to individuals when they are invited to become life peers in the House of Lords." Source: The Queen Gives Chelmsford City Status | Essex Portal http://www.essexportal.co.uk/essex-news/the-queen-gives-chelmsford-city-status#ixzz1qhl9iXA6
In addition, legal status is a city is not inferred until the next Local Government Act introduces an amendment to that effect, as has happened with other authorities such as Swansea and many others. Until then, yes, it is informally a city, however, legally? It is still a town. As far as I'm aware the word of law trumps a news report. (The August date was a verbal council source and should be takem with a pinch of salt). The same applies to St Asaph and Perth. ☭ cmn ☭ ( ❝❞ /✍ ) 14:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I say above that's my understanding of how these things work. A 2nd source goes some way to suggesting this is the case but I still wouldn't say there's a strong case either way in terms of reliable sources. You say that "word of law trumps a news report", but how do we know that's what the word of law says, we just have your word for it. If there were a UK government or royal source confirming that was the case then I'd be happy. As I've just said I personally agree with you but if we wish to keep this page using "town" for the time being I think we need to make sure we have the evidence, in the form of good reliable sources, as I suspect there will be more sources calling it a city. Dpmuk (talk) 16:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? "The Queen formally confers the titles of city status and Lord Mayoralty by Letters Patent in due course." - Source [[1]] It's the closest thing to a government source I can find. With that said, popular opinion - and the DCMS - counts Chelmsford as a city so I'll concede on this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teh.cmn (talk • contribs) 23:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, that does it for me and I now feel happy keeping the article using "town" until such time as the Letters Patent are issued. Thanks for finding it. Sorry for taking a long time to reply, I must have missed this on my watchlist - it's grown too big and is in need of a purge. Dpmuk (talk) 05:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protected

[edit]

Seeing as it is protected due to differentiating edits (mainly about the population) I think it should stay at 169,500 because that is set by the council and most agreed upon. Iamred0 Talk to Iamred... 17:19, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 169,500 seems to be an out of date population for the entire borough [2] not the town so I used the smaller figure of 99,962 which is also the figure quoted in the reference about the population. The same source is used for most other articles on British settlements so I think it should stay as the area's population. Eopsid (talk) 14:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 21 March 2012

[edit]

Just to let you know> Chelmsford is now a city.

89.240.214.1 (talk) 16:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. The article already says this. It's not clear what you want to edit.

  • This template may only be used when followed by a specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it.
  • "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

Thank you. Begoon talk 22:48, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of 'Chelmsford'

[edit]

The pronunciation of Chelmsford given in this article is rhotic; that is, it indicates that the 'r' of 'Chelmsford' is pronounced. However, this is not the case both locally and for standard British English. Should I alter it? NearlyDrNash (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's quite likely that the rhotic IPA (since removed) was taken from one of the other Chelmsfords. Chelmsford, MA has /ˈtʃɛlmsfərd/ suggesting "Chelmsferd" with a pronounced R, which is correct for the local New England accent but the UK (Estuary) pronunciation is closer to "Chelmzfuhd" /ˈtʃɛlmzfʊd/. I'm no IPA expert so I'll let someone else verify it before putting it in.
In the "talk" section of the Massachusetts town I commented several years ago that there are many and varied pronunciations, some rhotic and some not. My favorite is Chems-fudd, which is both non-rhotic and non-...um, I need some help here. Non-lambdic? Yes, non-lambdic, according to some on-line discussion about how to pronounce "almond". Many New England towns have names echoing Old England, occasionally with identically confusing mismatches of spelling and pronunciation. Gloucester and Leicester come instantly to mind. "All the right names in all the wrong places. Cambridge next to Boston," says a friend from the UK now living in Massachusetts. Snezzy (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have memories of visiting relatives in East Anglia, UK in the 90s and people pronouncing it Choms-fuhd. No one either on the British or American sides of my family (I'm American) seems to have any memory of this pronunciation. It may be an instance of the Mandela effect. I share it here in case anyone else has heard it. WillRefvem (talk) 06:48, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chelmsford City Council?

[edit]

I reverted the edit that changed instances of Chelmsford Borough Council to Chelmsford City Council for three reasons, in order of importance:

  1. I see no evedience that the council has changed it's name - the website still says borough.
  2. It was done indiscriminately. This included changing references to old documents which, even if the council does change it's name, will still have been produced by the Borough Council
  3. It introduced at least one typo.

Dpmuk (talk) 22:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signs on buses can now be seen saying "Chelmsford City Council" and the website says Chelmsford City Council. Iamred0 Talk to Iamred... 00:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The website is a fair point - it didn't appear to have changed when I looked, although I was possibly looking at the wrong site and both the old and new were on the web at the same time. Clearly getting the old site to redirect to the new one is too sensible or something. Happy for it to be changed as long as it's done carefully as many of the documents used as sources are likely to have been produced by the Borough Council before the name change and so I think should stay as Borough. Dpmuk (talk) 04:08, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

/* Chelmsford City Council? */ the website clearly states 'chelmsford city council' so an edit of the article where relevant is now essential.[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.132.224 (talk) 06:02, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.chelmsford.gov.uk/

Orphaned references in Chelmsford

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Chelmsford's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "history":

  • From InterContinental Hotels Group: "Intercontinental Hotels History". Ihgplc.com. 1 March 2011. Retrieved 18 April 2011.
  • From Reckitt Benckiser: "Reckitt Benckiser History". Reckitt Benckiser. Retrieved 2012-06-18.
  • From Hawker Siddeley: US Centiennal of Flight Commission – Hawker Siddeley
  • From Britvic: Britvic History
  • From A.G. Barr: "History". A.G. Barr.
  • From Swanley: "Swanley 11-12 Edit:MAIN GUIDE TEMPLATE" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-11-08.
  • From Berkhamsted: History of Berkhamsted by Percy Birchnell
  • From Strood: Henry Smetham, History of Strood, 1899.
  • From Kent: "Victoria County History of Kent". KentArchaeology.org.uk. 2006. Retrieved 20 April 2007. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  • From Whitbread: "Whitbread Key Dates". Whitbread PLC. Retrieved 31 August 2010.
  • From Arriva: Arriva History and growth Arriva

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 05:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chelmsford. 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:

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

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:50, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Chelmsford. 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:

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chelmsford. 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:

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) 02:11, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hoffmann Ball Bearings

[edit]
[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.hoffmannbearings.co.uk/history-of-hoffmann-bearings.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Jake Brockman (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC) Substantial parts of the section of this company are direct copies or close paraphrasing of an external website and have therefore been removed until a newly and independently worded version can be found. Some of the claims that remain from previous editors may also require external sources. Can someone close to the topic maybe help with this effort? Many thanks. Jake Brockman (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Can you confirm that the website preceded WP? It is very common for the WP text to be recycled this way. Eddaido (talk) 06:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It can be deduced. Before deleting I looked through past revisions of the WP article going back to 2008. Between 2008 and 2010 the section was expanded to a version close to what we see today, but it never has the detail seen on the external site. It remains a partial text of that. As the syntax seems consistent on the external site, I do not think that that one was cobbled together from various sources. Regardless of the copyright questions, the text is problematic is it does not state any external sources for claims such as being the first ball bearing factory in the UK, having worldwide fame or even the heritage of parts being used in transatlantic flight. Indeed if we believe the external website may have been copied from WP, we have to discount that as source obviously. As the copyvio is concerned, the approach should be prudent. If in doubt, delete it... So a number of concerns that require this section to be looked at with fresh sources and new wording. Jake Brockman (talk) 07:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see, it can. I don't mind very much but I was just counselling caution. So much old stuff has no inline citations at all so I don't think that means anything the least significant. My interest was in the ball bearing industry in Newark. Somehow I now find myself knocking together something about Pollard. Chelmsford I leave to you to mend as best you are able. I'll watch and help if I can. OK?
PS have you thought of looking up who wrote it? Eddaido (talk) 07:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chelmsford. 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:

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) 01:39, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chelmsford. 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:

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) 17:52, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Nearest Places' tab needs information adding to it

[edit]

In my opinion, information on nearest places should be included in the 'Nearest Places' tab (I suggest in bullet point form) as it is currently empty and in my opinion it is pointless to have an empty tab in the article. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 12:15, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

[edit]

There has been an active independent Jewish community in Chelmsford since the early 1970s. 2A00:23C7:632A:B801:ACB2:A1E6:EFF9:D211 (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Population citation incorrect

[edit]

The population is noted as being from the 2021 census, however the citation is from the 2011 census. Can the population figure be verified and new citations added to support? Magpie069 (talk) 16:42, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notable people

[edit]

add james maynard 2A00:23C4:49C4:D900:21E0:2CC:F8EB:809D (talk) 11:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chelmsford&oldid=1248234567"