Talk:Biddulph

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name

Made changes to the origin of the Biddulph name. Being a Biddulph myself, I feel I might know something about it.

Promotion

Can contributors please refrain from putting promotional material onto this page; it will be removed. This is an public encyclopaedia, not a place to promote yourself/your organisation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.8.239 (talk) 20:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name Change?

Can anyone shed any light on the apparent change in name of the town? Old maps from the 1800s show the town as named Bradley Green, within a larger district named Biddulph. But modern maps show the town itself named Biddulph and the only reference to Bradley Green seems to be a pub! Does anyone know what happened and why? Mark Beard (talk) 17:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

During the early part of the 1800's the population was grouped in 3 areas Bradley Green, Biddulph, and Knypersley, as the industrial revolution continued unabated and the need for new housing grew the central point was Biddulph and grew out from there with the high street becoming more defined as the central shopping area. It's really continued and the boundaries for Biddulph are now marked at Brindley Ford and Whitemore, so individual identifiers are being superceded as people forget where Bradley Green was once situated, or Marsh Green or several other local areas I suppose its all down to living memory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.172.178 (talk) 02:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose merging Brown Lees into Biddulph. The former is an unsourced stub with little potential which currently does nothing other than to advise looking at the Biddulph article for population stats. As Brown Lees falls within the Biddulph civil parish, any information about it can be put in this article. Jellyman (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As there have been no comments, I have gone ahead and performed the merge. Jellyman (talk) 11:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Biddulph. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207213707/http://www.woodhouse-middle.staffs.sch.uk/ to http://www.woodhouse-middle.staffs.sch.uk/

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) 19:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]