Talk:Stockton-on-Tees

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.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

North East England Mid‑importance

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England 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.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

And county?

Why did it say "borough and county" of S-o-T? I don't understand when it was ever a county and its current status as a unitary authority is not as I understand it the same thing. I've taken it out for the moment but would be happy to discuss it. Nevilley 10:06, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ceremonially, the areas of Stockton north of the river Tees (i.e. the vast majority) is in Durham, while Yarm is in North Yorkshire

District Vs Town

"The combined size of the borough equates to approx 180,000 people and makes it larger than Middlesbrough in terms of population and square miles" The borough maybe bigger an more populous than Middlesbrough Borough (186,700 to M'bros 142,600). But boroughs arent towns, they are districts. For example Stockton-on-tees borough contains Billingham, Thornaby, Yarm etc. you cant exactly say theyre part of Stockton town can you. In terms of a town however Middlesbrough is larger as the Borough of Middlesbrough basically forms the whole town so with this stockton Town has 80,000 and mIddlesbrough still has around 142,000. Then theres whether you want to count Eston with its middlesbrough address, as being part of the wider urban area of Middlesbrough which, with this defintion, has a population of 180,000 (approx) within just under 29 square miles.

"For ceremonial purposes, the town of Stockton-on-Tees is split between County Durham and North Yorkshire" well this is wrong. Stockton Town is 100% in Durham ceremonially, the 'Borough' however is split between the two counties of North Yorkshire and Durham. Stockton, Billingham and Eaglescliffe are the main settlements in Durham whilst Yarm, Ingleby Barwick and Thornaby are in North Yorkshire.

"Major industries in Stockton have included ship-repairing, steel and chemicals, although most ship building was performed in nearby Hartlepool and most chemical plants are in nearby Middlesbrough" This is also erroneous. Stockton was major ship BUILDER, but as steel hulled ships got larger the river Tees just wasn't deep (or wide) enough, and the yards declined into repair work. I don't think Hartlepool was ever a major player in ship-bulding. The majority of chemical works were centred on Billingham and later expanded onto the Seal Sands site at Teesmouth. ICI Wilton was the only major chemical plant at Middlesbrough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenwilco (talk • contribs) 13:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's a late reply - but Wilton has never been a part of Middlesbrough. Francis Hannaway 20:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with Nowhere guide link

http://knowhere.co.uk/519.html

They are far more INTERESTING to read than the bland, couldn't-be-more-boring, tourist information brochure that is the article.

Maybe the link should have a content description - but I don't imagine most readers will be as square as you think they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.252.236.92 (talk) 20:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Teesnewportbridge.jpg

The image Image:Teesnewportbridge.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable People

Also Tony Scott (brother of Ridley Scott and director of Top Gun, Ridley, who was born in South Shields, also lived in Stockton-on-Tees where he studied at Grangefield School.

What with the unpaired parenthesis it is difficult to follow the sense of this statement. Stuffed cat (talk) 14:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More work needed

I intended to expand and improve this article. I have made a start by adding headings found in Featured articles about places. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 20:20, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add headings until there is content to fill it. Jenuk1985 | Talk 20:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You move quickly; I didn't have time to add content to headings before you removed them! I put them in first as it would enabled me to add content more easily. It wouldn't have been a problem of galactic proportions to wait a while would it?

Please assume good faith. You can always use my talkpage to express reservations before making edits. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 20:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Create the headings as you add the content then, there is no need to add section headings first. Jenuk1985 | Talk 20:47, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe using a work in progress banner would be useful here? Fraggle81 (talk) 00:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Passenger Railway

This page is incorrect. Passengers on the Stockton-Darlington railway were tagged along with the freight if there was room - freight took priority. There was no scheduled passenger services, timetables, etc. This cannot be called a passenger service. The line was also not fully motive all the way, as a small section was horse drawn.

The world's first railway dedicated primarily for passengers was the Liverpool-Manchester, 1830. A full inter-city passenger railway with proper passenger stations, timetable, ticketing, etc, as we know now.

As the first train left Liverpool, the first passenger station was the terminal Crown St. Crown St and Edge Hill stations were abandoned in 1836. Edge Hill station was about 400 yards from Crown St through a tunnel. Edge Hill station was moved 1/4 mile to the north at Edge Hill junction, 1936. The oldest passenger railway station still in use is Liverpool Broad Green, 1830, the second station from Crown St.

I hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.3.92 (talk) 01:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first regular passenger rail services were on the Swansea and Mumbles railway http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Swansea_and_Mumbles_Railway. The Stockton and Darlington's claim to fame (well one of many) was to be the first steam locomotive hauled public railway.

Cricketjeff (talk) 12:22, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge of Grangefield, Stockton-on-Tees

Grangefield, Stockton-on-Tees is a very short, unsourced article, with nothing to justify a separate existence. Should merge (not that there's anything to merge) or redirect here. Rodhull andemu 00:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.56.245 (talk) 22:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Please see File_talk:Stockton_Town_Hall.jpg regarding the composition of the Town Hall image. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 08:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Scott's birthplace

132.185.144.121 raises a query (italicized) in this sentence: Also Tony Scott (brother of Ridley Scott), director of Top Gun, was born in Stockton (his IMBD page says he was born in South Shields?). Any help please? I removed it from the article as I don't think we can do Talk page discussions in the body text, but it's a fair question. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:26, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To "the" or not to "the", that is the question

OK, so I am officially confused now. If I am walking along in Stockton and I meet a friend, do I say:

"See you later in Green Dragon Yard."

or

"See you later in the Green Dragon Yard."

Please enlighten me. I see both forms in use but surely one is more common and reads more easily to those in the know? Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 07:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a guess - but isn't it named after a pub, "The Green Dragon"? So, wouldn't that make it "The Green Dragon Yard", meaning the yard belonging to ... Francis Hannaway 21:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, yesno/dunno. I do take your point about "the"s in pub names; I am just not sure that they must always transfer. I'm thinking of usages like The Albion vs Albion Place. I'm very interested in your thought (indeed, in all your thoughts, Francis!) but not 100% convinced that you have identified a rule here that we can follow. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:56, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was the pub named for the yard or the yard named for the pub? Which came first may also be the question. Fraggle81 (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Fraggle - on your page it says that you support "English" English; so, why do you say "named for ..." and not "named after ..."?Francis Hannaway (talk) 20:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good point Francis,I always try to support British/Commonwealth English, however many years of growing up with Americanisms and the dubious spellings of Merriam-Webster I occasionally fail. As for the original question, I would still like to know which came first, the pub or the yard. Not sure if we'll ever find that one out. Fraggle81 (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you both disturb this question from its peaceful slumbers! You uncouth Northern types, it was hoping to snooze for the whole year. :) DBaK (talk) 07:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Born V Notable Residents - mish mash

There are several people in the 'notable residents' who were actually born in Stockton rather than just moving there there.

I propose to move those people born in Stockton to that section so the notable residents only includes those who moved / lived there later — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisInBalham (talk • contribs) 02:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Stockton-on-Tees. 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stockton-on-Tees. 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/20111004104603/http://www.smi-teesvalley.co.uk/ to http://www.smi-teesvalley.co.uk/

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) 19:04, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Stockton-on-Tees. 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) 09:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Stockton-on-Tees. 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) 23:47, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The Wiki article for Stoke on Trent gives a different etymology for Stoke. Thomas Peardew (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

I have reverted an undiscussed move, of this page, to Stockton-on-Tees, Co Durham. The existing title is a long-established title and, in my view, this is an unnecessary disambiguation. For the time being I have move-protected the page until there is a consensus on a new title, here. Just Chilling (talk) 00:47, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Intro line - for Tees Valley Settlements

Using this page but it’s about the other places in the unitary authorities of Middlesbrough, Hartlepool, Redcar & Cleveland, Stockton and Darlington. Describing the following as being simply ‘a market town in County Durham, England’ is almost misleading while being accurately correct. Since the abolishing of Cleveland as a ceremonial county the four former boroughs of Cleveland have continued to be closely aligned as Teesside or the Tees Valley. Failing to mention this seems a major oversight and seems to be a case of policy getting in the way of what feels right and what is perhaps more widely known. People in these areas largely don’t associate much with their ceremonial county. Middlesbrough is known as being on Teesside or within the Tees Valley, very few would say that it was a town in North Yorkshire. Considering the Tees Valley is it’s own City Region now too. I’d suggest the five main towns of Hartlepool, Stockton, Darlington, Middlesbrough and Redcar read as:

xxx is a town which forms part of the Tees Valley City region in the North East of England. The town‘s locals council is xxx, a unitary authority area in the ceremonial county of xxx.

Or simply

xxx is a town in the North East of England. The town‘s locals council is xxx a unitary authority area in the ceremonial county of xxx.

Smaller settlements should really read as:

xxx is a town/village in the borough of xxx within the North East of England. It forms part of the Tees Valley City region and is located in the ceremonial county of xxx.

Or

xxx is a town/village in the borough of xxx within the North East of England. It forms part of the ceremonial county of xxx.

Can I suggest a change in to the introductions on these pages? Teessider2019 (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Large" town

There is a discussion at talk:Milton Keynes#"Large" town that may be of interest to editors of this article (since it also uses the phrase "large town"). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We should change from "large town" to just "town" --Devokewater (talk) 10:56, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of Stockton, I suspect that "large" would be difficult to defend since the reliable source (the Centre for Cities) sets the threshold as 135,000. But I thought editors might want to contribute to the discussion. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see the reason to as there are two large towns which are market towns in County Durham. And that's Darlington then Stockton. Maybe like one of the largest towns in County Durham or the lead remains the same.

Stockton Parish Church/St Thomas's/Stockton parish

I altered the mention of Stockton Parish Church in the religion section to call it consistently by that name, rather than one use of "St Thomas" and one of "Stockton parish" [sic].

"Stockton Parish Church" is the name used for this church on its own website; the Church of England website; its English Heritage listing; the Charities Commission website; the Council website; in the local newspaper; by the local MP. As far as I can see it is overwhelmingly the WP:COMMONNAME in general usage. I can't actually find anywhere but here that calls it "St Thomas's" and it took me some time to work out that "St Thomas's" in this article was referring to the parish church - I used to work nearby and have never heard it called that, and Googling 'St Thomas Church Stockton' gives almost entirely results for an entirely different church.

Roxy the dog reverted this change, first requiring a reference; I added one (English Heritage}, and the same editor reverted me again (removing the reference) with "Let's call St. Thomas' by it's name rather than something else". I'm struggling to see any Wikipedia Policy argument by which a name no-one but us uses is "its name" - can anyone help? TSP (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]