Talk:Long Ditton

UK geography Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Surrey Mid‑importance

	Surrey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Surrey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Surrey 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.SurreyWikipedia:WikiProject SurreyTemplate:WikiProject SurreySurrey-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does Long Ditton exist in any meaningful sense?[edit]

Does Long Ditton exist in any meaningful sense?

There is no Long Ditton council. 'It is represented on the council of Elmbridge Borough, its neighbour.'*In political terms, it's just an area of Surbiton. Socially Long Ditton is a mixed area. It includes areas of smallish houses around Angel Road, Rectory Lane and Fleece Road and some huge Victorian/Edwardian houses particularly in St Mary's Road and the slopes of Ditton Hill. A large proportion of people travel up to London on a daily basis and its proximity to Surbiton station is surely its most important defining feature. As a village it has no obvious centre, little village life and very few amenities. There is a refurbished pub (The Ditton), which replaced the Plough and Harrow which was a bit grim and not heavily frequented. Long Ditton uses the facilities of Surbiton which include 3 supermarkets, a dozen pubs and over 30 restaurants and cafes. Indeed in recent years the centre has become "cappuccinoed out". Some of the older, crustier residents fight to save the character of Long Ditton but most people ask themselves the question: why? Instinctively it is part of Surbiton and it is only a perverse snobbery which fights to make it something else.
In postal terms, it shares the KT6 postcode with Surbiton and the KT7 postcode with Thames Ditton.
The Church of England recognises the parish of Long Ditton. There is a quaint old church "St Mary's and a new church hall which is well used. The parish has a female vicar replacing the previous female vicar

There is one outstanding feature in Long Ditton and it is St James Park. I would even say that it is accepted now as the heart of Long Ditton and beats with a vibrancy and community that is very welcome. It now features, with its thirty foot tall chrome sculpture and water feature on the cover of the Long Ditton annual magazine.

My conclusion is that Long Ditton is largely a romantic or nostaglic notion. Thegn 19:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ordnance Survey have it as "real place" in Surrey, rather than Greater London. Royal Mail consider it to include part of the 4, 5 and 6 sectors of the KT6 district of the SURBITON post town. As it is a bit of a postal anomaly, it probably has a confused identity. MRSC • Talk 14:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a settlement in Surrey county council listing of population http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/591f7dda55aad72a80256c670041a50d/1c602ea59c869c9180256e600054b26c/$FILE/Town%20populations.pdf SuzanneKn 22:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The opinion that more logically Long Ditton forms a part of urban Surbiton is countered by the opinion of residents who refer to the ward as a village.

The description of the Residents' Association has been expanded to show their core statement as shown on the LDRA website. For clarification, this meant that a separate Residents' Association section was created.

As the description of the "worst record in approving planning permissions" could be viewed as positive, it is presented in more neutral fashion whilst maintaining the facts in the original article. Pnights (talk) 19:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well apart from the fact that it is listed in the Domesday book wheras Surbiton isn't probably not !!

Population of Long Ditton[edit]

It might help the ordinary reader if the 2001 census population had been quoted in the paragraph: "Long Ditton ward's population at the 2011 census was 6,343 living in 2,504 households. The total area was unchanged from ten years before at 214 hectares (530 acres) and density had increased to 27.2 to 29.6 persons per hectare." --Oldontarian (talk) 12:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Long Ditton. 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/20071030192829/http://www.gwp.enta.net/surrnames.htm to http://www.gwp.enta.net/surrnames.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 15:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Long Ditton. 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/20080515102500/http://www.longditton.org/index.asp to http://www.longditton.org/index.asp

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 02:26, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]