Talk:Redhill, Surrey/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Untitled

I don't know who keeps calling Redhill 'Deadhill' but I have lived here all my life and never come across the expression. Please stop changing it back or at least provide some sources.

I've lived in Redhill for 20 years and am very familiar with the expression. 74.65.39.59 (talk) 22:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The name is mentioned on the OFFICAL Redhill website, that must be a good enough source [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.67.229.26 (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Deadhill

Haven't seen it documented anywhere properly, but have heard it mentioned around and about - if you google "Redhill Deadhill" 256 pages come up. Maybe they're not all related, but who's going to trawl through 256 pages about Redhill, particularly if they're as moribund and depressing as they usually are? It's not the best place on earth, but it's far from the worst. Milkybarnick 23:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)milkybarnick

This is nonsense, there are no plans at all to change the name of the town, if you think there are please post a link to the local council or a reputable news source. The pages that come up on a google search for this are all discussion forums, mostly ones talking about 'chavs'. These are a long way from being a reputable source.

If someone can think of a way to put this in as a nickname, then fair enough, although frankly I don't think it worthy of even that. But to keep changing the 'official name' label on the page is childish and stupid. --ThePaintedOne 13:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Redhill is flat out...and anyone who comes down kickin off always go home tail between their legs....! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.134.204 (talk) 21:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Royal Earlswood Hospital

Although today it is politically correct to refer to this as a place for people with learning disabilities, seeing as it is no longer in existence, I think it is acceptable to refer to it as it was known as at the time. Also, there is a difference between psychosis and learning disabilities, even if those terms are widely misused nowadays. Southeastern 23:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Notables

For some reason Redhill has a separate page for its list of celebrities. Most towns have such a list, but usually it's in the main article - I propose we do the same with Redhill and merge List of Redhill people in to make it consistent. Bagunceiro (talk) 10:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

It used to be part of this article, but a couple of years ago someone moved it to a seperate page, not sure why tbh--ThePaintedOne (talk) 16:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

"Today" (or yesterday?)

These two bits in the "Today" section needs a bit of bringing up to date by someone who knows the current situation:

Redhill played host to its own music festival in 2007 headlined by The Ordinary Boys, 'Redfest' will return in July 2009 headlined by The Maccabees^[1]

Redhill has hosted an annual air display at its aerodrome up to 2006 as well as a steam fair opposite, however neither were staged in 2008. Bagunceiro (talk) 19:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

References

^ Redhill Music Festival

Wikiproject Surrey quality regrading

Per a request at Wikiproject Surrey for regrading the article, I have carefully checked the article against the criteria for B - class.

How far the article meets the B class criteria

1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary:

Currently there are five sections that are unreferenced: Geography, Transport, Emergency Services, Sport & Recreation and Education. The History section also contains some statements that could easily be considered important material and have been challenged through the use of the citation needed template.

2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies:

Mostly done There were no obvious inaccuracies; however there were some notable omissions such as the lack of a government section and some important sections need significant expansion, especially the "economy" and "sport & recreation" sections.

3. The article has a defined structure:

Mostly done The content is organised well so this is mostly met; however the lack of a government section prevents me from saying that it meets the criteria completely.

4. The article is reasonably well-written:

I have no concerns about the quality of the writing for the B-Class criteria, but bulleted lists should be turned in to prose.

5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate:

Though some more relevant images would be nice. Commons has quite a few images.

6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way:

I had no problems understanding the content.

The article doesn't meet all six of the B class criteria, so I haven't changed the grading at this time. The biggest issue is the lack of referencing, especially the transport section because that is a very good quality section, but does need some evidence for the claims made. --Mrmatiko (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Mrmatiko, I have actioned your points.Adam37 (talk) 21:16, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I think that all my concerns have been met. Several sections still need to be expanded and the bulleted lists turned to prose, but I'm satisfied that the article now meets the B-class criteria. --Mrmatiko (talk) 17:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Redhill, Surrey. 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: 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) 03:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

[1] Redhill Music Festival

[1]