Cheshire Template‑class High‑importance

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This template has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This template has a title of "Towns in Cheshire" and yet many of the places listed seem to be villages? Also, there seems to be a contradiction between places in historic Cheshire and places in post-1974 Cheshire. Warrington seems to make the list when it was formerly in Lancashre, whereas Warburton used to be in Cheshire but is now in Greater Manchester. Divy 10:29, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have created a new version. Before it covered towns, but now has links to the authorities and towns. Originally I was going to put villages in it also, but realised it would be too large so instead there is a link to the list of parishes. Let me know what you think - I will start creating similar templates for Greater Manchester and Derbyshire. You are right about Warburton - it was one of the 4 Bucklow parishes that became part of Trafford. The criteria for towns I used was they had to be either an urban district or municipal borough prior to 1974. I also added Frodsham and Poynton as they are big enough to be considered towns.Phil 12:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have removed places from the template that are still villages (eg Alderley Edge). The criterion for being a town is that (a) they historically used to satisfy certain criteria (see town, (b) their parish council has declared themselves to be a town, whereupon the parish council becomes known as a "town council", or (c) the borough in which they are placed routinely refers to them as a town. These criteria are quite definitive. I've checked all the entries now with all the criteria, and I'm confident the list is now complete and authoritative.  DDStretch  (talk) 01:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there any way we can get rid of the [[Image:|40px]] from the template header. It's supposed to be for a coat of arms but the only image we have appears to be fair use and therefore ineligable for use in a template. I came here thinking I could just remove it from the template but I see it's a sub-template of ((county)).  YDAM TALK 14:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have removed it now from the county template. This was a legacy from the a user removing all the images from the templates due to the no fair use images in templates rule. -- Phildav76 15:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since we now have a Cheshire portal, can we add ((portalpar|Cheshire)) or something similar to this page please, like that done on the Cornwall template? I would do it, but cannot figure out how!Pixie2000 21:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done!  DDStretch  (talk) 01:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since the official website for the district states that it is the name of the district is Chester City (even though it functions as a borough), I've changed the link as well as moved the page. This has meant creating a disambiguation page for the football team and so on. I hope no one objects.  DDStretch  (talk) 19:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This template lists "major settlements", but what does that actually mean? Some of the places that were listed (e.g. Malpas) may be historic but are only small. I think a sensible cut-off is needed, so I have arbitrarily chosen this to be population of 5000 and deleted Malpas, Saltney, Tarporley and Alderley Edge which all fall below this. Bazonka (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cuddington and Weaverham added. I'm still not sure if these are really "major", so perhaps the population limit ought to be raised to 10000? Bazonka (talk) 21:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm allowed to change my mind aren't I? I've increased the cut-off to 10,000, and therefore removed Bollington, Cuddington, Frodsham, Grappenhall, Handforth and Weaverham. Bazonka (talk) 21:06, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I champion the inclusion of both Frodsham and Bollington as both hold the status/distinction of being a town. A major settlement cannot solely be based on the size of the resident population. There are many sprawling estates, suburbs, areas and even villages that have no real identity of their own and no particular centre that have just be built upon en masse in the 20th Century with new housing estate overspills. If you look at the templates for other ceremonial counties, the major settlements section contains those places that are considered towns and cities, even when there are some villages that twice the size of the smaller market towns. Frodsham and Bollington may be smaller in population terms than Culceth but they are historically and nationally far more important than the latter in terms of their local function, resources, town centres, history and facilities and have historic town centres. Whiteseditor30 (talk) 13:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for discussing. You have a point but we need a consistent inclusion criteria otherwise the list could become messy. Perhaps we set this to be population>10k and/or town charter. I think this would also require Handforth to be added to the list. I would suggest that other county templates follow this same model - currently they're very inconsistent. Bazonka (talk) 08:35, 1 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revisiting this discussion after 5 years, I see that Lymm and Culcheth were sneakily removed with the comment that "they are villages". Maybe so, but they are very large and meet the 10k population criteria as discussed above. I've put them back into the list. Please discuss before removing again. Bazonka (talk) 18:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]