Jump to content

Talk:Belle Vale, Liverpool

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

Recent edits

[edit]

I refer to recent edits by user C3MC2 on the Belle Vale page. I do not class these as constructive edits.

If you have some point of view please make it known on this page. Babydoll9799 (talk) 19:02, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This issue of area identity was resolved by compromise back in May. A photo has recently been added showing Our Lady's Church. It is a nice addition but I would suggest that in order to support this area's identity as Belle Vale a local landmark with Belle Vale on it would have been preferable, such as a photo of Belle Vale Shopping Centre. Our Lady's is Our Lady Gateacre on their website and the contact address is: Parish Priest, Our Lady of the Assumption Presbytery, Hedgefield Rd, Gateacre, Liverpool L25 2RW. It raises again the overlap issue where Belle Vale and Gateacre are both used. I have added information to try to clarify the situation with Our Lady's role in both Belle Vale and Gateacre.C3MC2 (talk) 13:27, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The issue however on premises addresses is that they are pretty much mixed up. For example the petrol station opp the pub say it is Netherley and the post office on Belle Vale Road says it is Gateacre. It is in my opinion partly down to this that there is a confusion. This confusion is something you are also subscribing to. In my opinion Netherley is L27 so that rules out anything in L25. Same with Childwall that is L16. Gateacre i would believe is towards the railway line area & in to Gatacre Village. The need to "prove" should not be necessary but i agree that an image of landmarks would be useful. I too pictures a few years ago they are on Wikimedia. Babydoll9799 (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that I am subscribing or contributing to confusion. I am highlighting facts concerning the identity of the area. I don't like you censoring the word Gateacre from Our Lady in the article it is dishonest and shows an intention to hide facts. I won't change it back as I don't think it's worth arguing about and I have made my views clear here anyway. The church is Our Lady Gateacre not Our Lady Belle Vale.C3MC2 (talk) 15:19, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No my friend this is not about censoring. This is about you picking holes in the validity of the area perhaps you do not like Belle Vale as an area? I've agreed with your pov and gave you examples i have found. So what are you going to do list every business, premises, shop, organisation, that writes their address as anything other than Belle Vale? Perhaps you would like to go through every shop in the shopping centre? Perhaps then you would like to go through every other area in the city where this kind of confusion exists? Try Walton Road which is in Kirkdale but because it is WALTON Road many business/shops say they are Walton. Same with Wavertree Road.
Listen, there are examples from your point of view that is true. But you are adding to the confusion by doing what you are doing. The article always had that element of "confusion" about the area and was reworded by yourself to suit your point of view. What do you want to do now? Babydoll9799 (talk) 11:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I made a constructive suggestion to support the identity of the area as Belle Vale by saying that the addition of a photo of Belle Vale Shopping Centre rather than OLA church would have been better. There are a number of landmarks in the area that complicate matters so I would avoid them. For example: St Stephen's Church can be Gateacre or Belle Vale, Our Lady's identifies itself as Gateacre but is in Belle Vale, St Mark's CE is in Belle Vale but calls itself St Mark's Childwall Valley, Childwall Valley Primary School is in Belle Vale but like St Mark's has a Childwall link to it and Gateacre School is best avoided for the same reasons. We have to be honest here Belle Vale has grown out from Gateacre and Childwall it was never created as a separate entity in its own right. It has developed its own identity over time but it still sees itself as also Gateacre and/or Childwall. An example of this straight out of today's Liverpool Echo: Line Dancing at St Mark's being advertised under Gateacre in the community noticeboard section. The signage shows that the council view the area as divided into Gateacre and Childwall. The article needs to reflect that Belle Vale has a complex identity and editors should try to avoid deleting references to Gateacre or Childwall that they think undermine Belle Vale's status as a distinct area. I don't plan to make any further edits for the time being.C3MC2 (talk) 13:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Can't argue with most of your points. However again the businesses/organisations are all over the show in terms of the area to which they identify themselves with. Another example is Valley Medical Centre which identifies as Childwall, but as i said earlier Childwall is L16 not L25. Do people see an overlap? Probably a definite yes. The council signs accuracy should be taken with a pinch of salt. They did this around 2005 and made loads of mistakes Fairfield, and Vauxhall areas some of the most notable. (the Vauxhall area similar to Belle Vale was totally ignored and described as Everton even as far as Toys R Us on Great Howard Street which is absolutely not Everton, the signs appear to have gone). The only reason they do not want to change the sign is financial. I don't wish to shoot down your own opinion you have valid points. But you quite rightly say the area appears to have grown out of Gateacre and maybe Childwall (i'm not sure on the Childwall suggestion) BUT it does have its own identity now. References are important but the only thing about this is you can have references conflicting with each other.
To me the ward boundary (always subject to change so not strictly a true barometer) is adequate enough to identify what is Belle Vale & Netherley combinded (with Netherley signage correct and postcode being L27). Babydoll9799 (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The situation is fluid as regards names. Belle Vale as a ward could be renamed Childwall Valley, Lee Valley or Valley. The name Belle Vale has its origins in only one part of the area. It comes from Belle Vale Hall, Belle Vale Cottage and Belle Vale Farm, property located south and south east of the current location of Belle Vale Shopping Centre. 'Belle Vale Estate Gateacre' appears on the 1946 council map of the prefab estate on pages 102 and 103 of 'More Prefab Days'. The area around Hartsbourne was built at a later date and doesn't have the same historical connection to the 'Belle Vale' properties. It explains the area's identity as Hartsbourne or Childwall Valley rather than Belle Vale. I don't see these multiple identities as a problem. Don't try to define the area just stick to the facts. Allow apparently conflicting references in the article. They show the true picture.C3MC2 (talk) 00:20, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is information that should be on the history section. There are areas that grew from others the old Toxteth Park was huge and Dingle is within thisBabydoll9799 (talk) 11:42, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've added information with sources to the history section. In the book, "Gateacre & Belle Vale" by Beryl Plent & Mike Chitty, first published in 2009, the authors refer to Belle Vale as originally being a 'hamlet' and I agree with that term looking at old maps of the area. Gateacre appears to have taken over as the descriptive name for the general area at some point from Little Woolton. Little Woolton appears on the 1908 map but is not on 1920s maps of the area. Plans of the prefab estate shown on pages 102 & 103 in "More Prefab Days" (2008) have the following at the bottom:- CITY OF LIVERPOOL TEMPORARY HOUSING BELLE VALE ESTATE GATEACRE.C3MC2 (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a places of worship section as if we are to continue with a photo of OLA church at the top of the article all places of worship need to be covered in the article. I have listed all the places of worship in Belle Vale with the addresses they themselves give to identify themselves and sources.C3MC2 (talk) 10:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at Belle Vale Shopping Centre on Google Maps I can understand the difficulty in getting a good photo of the shopping centre. I noticed that Sue Adair who took the photo of OLA church also has a photo of Belle Vale Bus Station with the shopping centre in the background. I think this photo would have been better at the top of the article than the photo of OLA church. The other two photos could have been moved further down the article.C3MC2 (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've added more information about the Joseph Williams site. I've found some confusing articles online that suggest that the school was where the Joseph Williams Mews development was built. I felt the need to clarify that the site was elsewhere and currently vacant with plans for the site still at the planning application stage.C3MC2 (talk) 01:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is good what you have done although i personally disagree with you adding the full addresses on the places of worship they don't need to be listed, not sure if other districts have their full addresses of every place of worship i think it is a bit too much info - besides you have sourced them anyway. Again pushing through the confusion of the area. As stated just because some of them define their location as other than Belle Vale does not help with the article.Babydoll9799 (talk) 21:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
People need to know how to find the churches in the area. I think it is also important that those churches who identify themselves under other area names are listed here in the district of Belle Vale. I think we can both agree that those listed are in Belle Vale. The schools are more straight forward.C3MC2 (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What's your opinion of the Belle Vale boundary map on Google? I keep seeing that when I Google Belle Vale. It looks odd to me that the western and south eastern ends have been snipped off. Both ends are on the Belle Vale ward map. The ward even includes part of Chelwood across Childwall Valley Road. It is particularly odd that the south eastern border goes diagonally through the middle of Belle Vale school and cuts Lee Park in two. It looks to me like whoever did that wanted St Stephen's and certain other roads separated from Belle Vale. I don't like the snippings on that map. I can't see the logic of them but I can understand why some people would rather the boundary be as it is on that map.C3MC2 (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've just found what you queried. I agree. From the Belle Vale council ward is what I would say defines the area taking out Netherley and this would include the Naylorsfield estate which is L27 and therefore Netherley.
This boundary on Google is down to Google's army of local "map makers" (a bit like Wikipedia) who can define places like this which isn't always right. I've actually tried it but not too clever with it. Some areas are impossible to define. Also the information on Google Maps and others like Bing can be hugely inaccurate. For example on Google "Baltic Triangle" has suddenly appeared. This is utter nonsense as it is just a 'development area' but someone has now given it major prominence on Google Maps.
Belle Vale "boundary map" on Google is close in my opinion, and the top end does not include Chelwood Avenue only what is L25 on CVR, but for some reason has cut out the start of Hartsbourne Avenue and like you said cut Lee Park in two. As much as I have my own opinion I also bow down to the fact that St Stephens is a Gateacre landmark. But housing further down Belle Vale Road would still be definded as Belle Vale (up to the railway line). It is open to interpretation. Babydoll9799 (talk) 11:12, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When I first looked at the districts on wiki I was struck by the language used to 'sell' certain areas as being affluent etc. I can understand people have various reasons for calling their part of Belle Vale either Gateacre, Childwall, Childwall Valley, Hartsbourne, Lee Park etc but creating artificial boundaries to exclude themselves from Belle Vale is unacceptable to me.C3MC2 (talk) 15:15, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Addresses that are used in the area that may be confusing to some should not be questioned by quotation marks.C3MC2 (talk) 19:45, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belle Vale, Liverpool. 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) 13:34, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belle_Vale,_Liverpool&oldid=1205166389"