Talk:Blackrock, Dublin

POV

"The Blackrock Baths were the object of many happy memories, however they have fallen into dilapidation since their closure. There are now controversial plans by their owner, Treasury Holdings, to develop the site. As with most intrusive and large-scale developments, this is opposed by many local people, however the plan has not received much publicity and local history suggests that developers will eventually get what they want." Very POV. 85.134.131.190 16:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and neuter it then, fellow wikipedian!

Not the only POV in this article, sections of which seem to be very anti-development. As someone who grew up there my POV is that the area has GREATLY improved; before the by-pass (with its not unattractive buildings) the Main Street was traffic choked.

And the notion of a "Big Dig" to put the by-pass underground is so divorced from and commercial reality it boggles the mind!!

Pedestrian bridges can actually tackle rising ground! For the cost of burying the road you could build the Taj Mahal of pedestrian bridges!

Also, 'tis a VERY "Dunleary" attitude that EVERY building over three stories high is a developer-imposed monstrosity.

(Sarah777 02:42, 15 October 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Population

Someone has put in a population figure of 9,874 for Blackrock; claimed to be based on the 2002 census. I couldn't find that in the Census - any reference? (Sarah777 00:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The 2002 census shows a total population of 28,557 for the 10 electoral districts in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown containing the name 'Blackrock'. See here. 2006 figures are not included in Wikipedia as they are provisional. Electoral districts with populations are:

Blackrock-Booterstown 2,888
Blackrock-Carysfort 5,555
Blackrock-Central 3,648
Blackrock-Glenomena 1,839
Blackrock-Monkstown 3,146
Blackrock-Newpark 2,272
Blackrock-Seapoint 1,403
Blackrock-Stradbrook 2,383
Blackrock-Templehill 2,700
Blackrock-Williamstown 2,723
Curtains99 17:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that seems much closer; many years ago I heard that Blackrock had a population of 'about 30,000' (Sarah777 21:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Either Blackrock is one big area, or, as seems to be the case, some of the "subsidiaries" are considered to be distinct, in which case their parts of the above figures need to be separated out:

Booterstown
  Blackrock-Booterstown	2,888

  Blackrock-Williamstown	2,723

Monkstown
  Blackrock-Monkstown	        3,146

Seapoint
  Blackrock-Seapoint	        1,403

which leaves Blackrock town and immediate localities:

  Blackrock-Central	  3,648
   (town and surrounds)
   Blackrock-Carysfort	  5,555
   (just inland, centre)
   Blackrock-Templehill  2,700
   (inland, south)
   Blackrock-Stradbrook  2,383
   (inland, further south)
   Blackrock-Newpark	  2,272
   (inland, further south)
   Blackrock-Glenomena	  1,839

for a total for Blackrock excluding the other suburbs above of 18,597.

Feedback? 83.250.207.238 23:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd have thought Williamstown - home of Blackrock Collage and the Blackrock Clinic is definitely in Blackrock; Booterstown is iffy, and the bit between Seapoint Avenue and Monkstown Road west of Alma Road are also definitely in Blackrock. That would snag an additional 5k from the Monkstown and Booterstown - giving a population of about 25,000. To be more precise you need to separate the individual streets; where is Cross Avenue, for example? (Sarah777 00:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, a word from a onetime worker on Rock Road. The Williamstown bit is tricky, as it has historic links with little Booterstown, but you are right, it would be ridiculous to take the Clinic and School out, so I guess Booterstown has to be just that little piece. And I suspect Seapoint is also partly in another DED. From past dealings with the CHamber, I think you are probably on the mark with 24,000-25,000. The problem is really the use by the census people of the silly DED's in the first place. I don't know if you have ever read the definitions but instead of using clear old land areas, they have things like "the imaginary line from the rear of the garden of No. 2 Meadow Lane to the imaginary line from the intersection of the Big Stream and Mrs. Jones Public House". I had the same problem trying to do Northside suburb figures. Best of luck! Twilson r 08:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the population from the 2006 census:

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Booterstown   2975

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Williamstown  2454

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Central       3637

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Carysfort     5577

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Templehill    2675

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Glenomena     1877

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Newpark       2121

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Stradbrook    2360

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Seapoint      1332

   Greater Dublin Suburbs in Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Blackrock-Monkstown     3062

I used the numbers above, which totals 28,070, then I subtracted Booterstown (2,975) and Monkstown (3,062) as they have their own page on Wikipedia. I put those numbers in the respective pages. --DubhEire (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the principal, but as was done previously (see further above), I would also a least remove Seapoint, quite distinct, and if not holding its own page, certainly never thought of as part of Blackrock (the CSO is not interested in defining areas). Historically, Williamstown was also quite distinct, but I think could be considered to have been absorbed over time. SeoR (talk) 05:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough. So by taking away Seapoint, that makes 20,701. --DubhEire (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced information

I'm going to delete all the unsourced claims next week. Curtains99 16:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably no harm. The article is pretty poor for a place with 30,000 people. very little structure, apart from all the POV and dodgy 'facts'; look at the Rathfarnham article to see how this should be written. (Sarah777 21:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Origin of the name

It would probably be worth mentioning the origin of the name.
Locally I had heard that there was a black rock just off shore, though the rock is now hidden from view by the sand. Does anyone have a reliable source for this? Pma jones (talk) 03:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you brought that up. I was just reading about that yesterday on askaboutireland.ie. The link www.askaboutireland.ie/reading-room/digital-book-collection/digital-books-by-county/dublin-south/ will get you to a list of books. Check out "Joyce: The Neighbourhood of Dublin" (1921) p33 (p55 in pdf). I'm not sure it will make a credible source to it's location, but it shows a description of the black rock. You will find it an interesting read if you haven't read this book already. Anyway, that would be a good idea to add this information about the origin. DubhEire (talk) 20:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decided to do some re-org of the sections

Deleted nothing. Just brought more into the convention that has been adopted for the Castleknock and Blanchardstown pages which reads quite smoothly and consistently. IMHO. Laurel Lodged (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible additions

Pubs

I think it merits writing that the pubs past and present be mentioned in the article. They are significant to the area. does anyone remember the annual Music Festival where the streets were closed down for the weekend and the village became a big party? Part of the reason it no longer happens, but it sure was fun. --DubhEire (talk) 14:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would agree, but briefly. SeoR (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine Houses

I also think it is worth writing about the many fine houses that were built and still survive and those that did not. They are what help built the area up to be what it is today. --DubhEire (talk) 14:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see there is now a good section on this. SeoR (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Davis, ha ha?

I'm removing Blackrock is home to the Ian Davis School of learning set up in the late 1980’s to help under privileged youths with foreign language studies. In 2004, a plaque was dedicated to Ian Davis in the centre of the village. I have no idea who this is. I've done searches and I can't find anything. I have never seen a plaque, so this must just be a wee joke. It appears to have been added in 01 Dec 2007 and has lasted this long. Unless someone can tell me otherwise and prove it. It's out for now. --DubhEire (talk) 02:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin O'Higgins

I think the historic information of The Cross Avenue was the site of the assassination of Kevin O'Higgins, and was also where Eamon de Valera lived after his Presidential term ended., should be left to Booterstown. It is more related to that area than Blackrock. Any thoughts? --DubhEire (talk) 14:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC) Can you get geo co-ordinates for the assassination site? Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By many definitions Booterstown is part of Blackrock - I've no problem leaving it with both. For example, Sion Hill is accessed from Cross Avenue but is always described as being in Blackrock. Sarah777 (talk) 23:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An agreed delimitation of the Booterstown / Blackrock border is going to have to happen soon. These, "is it in / out / in both" discussions must terminate soon in an amicable agreement. The case of the Church of Ireland's church and primary school (Ss. Philip and James) can serve as the litmus test. IMHO, they fall into Booterstown but I'm open to expert opinion on the subject. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't respond to this sooner, but as you can see Kevin O'Higgins remains connected to Blackrock and more so because he once lived even closer to the village. --DubhEire (talk) 20:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling of "paid"

Is it a mis-spelling? Is it not the case that the word would have been written as "payed" in the 18th century? In which case, it should be left in it's original form with a [sic] tag. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. I think I rewrote the text with changes. Perhaps I can take a quote of the text in its original form. It is a very old text afterall so a quote is more than possible. --DubhEire (talk) 20:39, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put an original quote from Blacker in there and it would appear that payed / paid was a typo on my behalf. --DubhEire (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Importance Scale

I was just reading the blurb about the importance scale rating and I would consider the current rating of Blackrock as Low to be incorrect. Should it be at least Mid if not High? Has anyone any further thoughts? --DubhEire (talk) 20:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All localities in Dublin were started as Low, which already means "Notable" on a national level. High would not be appropriate (that really is for Tallaght, and maybe Swords, the city centre, etc.), but Medium is possible. SeoR (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Religious orders

Does it make sense to have a section on Religious orders and another on Churches? Caouldn't the two be usefully combined? Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think they serve two different functions. Religious orders discusses the history to present day of religion in Blackrock. The section on churches is just a list of current churches which are an amenity of the area along with schools. --DubhEire (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I'd totally go along with that. Churches just didn't appear you know - they have a history. At any rate, could the two sections not be brought closer together in the section ordering? Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having thought about this for awhile, I see your point a bit more clearly now. I think I am coming around to your way of thinking. I think it would be an idea to move that into the section Religious orders, but making a sub section of churches / places of worship still in use.

Also, I think Education and Commerce should be given a section each, thus getting rid of the Blackrock today section, or at least changing it around. Anything else could have a section for that. Should I dare say Other

DubhEire (talk) 13:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Other" is not a suitable section title. I have elsewhere given my opinion on "Area Today" headings, about which I am not convinced. On the two religion-related sections, I have modified one to show that it is historical. If combining, I would go the other way, and have Religion, with a history sub-section.

Boundary

As Laurel Lodged stated in late February under the discussion about Kevin O'Higgins, there needs to be a consensus agreement on the boundary of Blackrock. It is a difficult one to put the finger on, but an agreement should be reached and perhaps noted that it is approximate. I would like to mention the boundaries of Blackrock, even if it is a little blurry with the surrounding areas.

To make a start, Blackrock College is at odds to where it is because its name suggests that it is Blackrock, but it is built in the old Williamstown / Booterstown, this does confuse the border with Booterstown. I'm pretty sure everyone would agree that Williamstown is Blackrock, but it is the debate where Cross Avenue sits, and then drawing a line up to the Stillorgan Dual Carriageway.

The Stillorgan Dual Carriageway then suggests that it is the boundary between Blackrock and Mount Merrion and Stillorgan, pretty sure everyone would agree from Mount Merrion Avenue, but to where. For example, Obelisk Park is part of the old Stillorgan Park House, but as it is at the top of Carysfort Avenue, it could be said to be Blackrock. The Stillorgan Park Hotel (the old Stillorgan Park House), is that Blackrock? Perhaps the line runs behind this, but does it? Priory Park beside it is Blackrock? Then Is John of Gods Blackrock?

Then, up to the top of Newtownpark Avenue and perhaps a little beyond. Is it fair to say Blackrock borders Foxrock? Heading down Newtownpark Avenue trying to find the boundary with Deansgrange.

Then it gets a bit confusing as the boundary between Monkstown is hard to make as Stradbrook Road is out of the way and it looks to be more part of Deansgrange or Monkstown. I pretty sure everyone would agree that from the junction of Temple Hill and Monkstown Road, is Monkstown. So is there a line from here that could be drawn from there to the roundabout at Stradbrook Hill and taking the border West along the new Monkstown Ring Road to Newtown Park Avenue.

Then the border between Seapoint is somewhere on Seapoint Avenue, perhaps the start?

I think that is a nice confusing start to the issue. I will try to put a picture of a boundary overlaid on a map to help with the discussion and show clearly what I mean. It's all much of muchness if you are living in these outlaying areas as I'm sure each occupant would have their own opinion and they could be interesting conflicting.

I would also like to describe the areas within Blackrock, such as Blackrock Village, Stradbrook, Newtownpark, Carysfort, Mount Merrion Avenue and Williamstown. I have historic detail behind each of these areas.

Similarly, the same exercise is required for Monkstown, County Dublin, Deansgrange, Stillorgan, Mount Merrion, Booterstown and maybe Foxrock.

DubhEire (talk) 13:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a boundary map I have drawn on Google Map showing the first draft of a Blackrock boundary. I can add you as a collaborator in order to alter this if you want. Or you could just tell me where to tweak it.

DubhEire (talk) 13:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. But it is Original Research too, and not admissible here - Wikipedia is not the place to try the (near-impossible) tasks of defining Irish areas. We lack strict definitions for many areas of Ireland, and we simply have to work with that. SeoR (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are right it would constitute original research. I'll look to see if there is any official information about boundaries and revert if I ever find any or if someone could point in the right direction. --DubhEire (talk) 13:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I really like the recent work, on this and other articles. And boundaries are an old frustration for all. Some areas still fit well with old Civil Parish or other such lines, but Blackrock, a tiny village for most of history, with a large hinterland, and confusingly even-wider use by An Post, is an especially blurry case. SeoR (talk) 18:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Blackrock, Dublin. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060508235058/http://www.askaboutireland.ie:80/show_narrative_page.do?page_id=2413 to http://www.askaboutireland.ie/show_narrative_page.do?page_id=2413

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} 14:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Blackrock, Dublin. 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) 21:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Blackrock, Dublin. 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/20070928222824/http://www.ciarancuffe.com/PR/2006/PR061019.Blackrock.Baths.Meeting.htm to http://www.ciarancuffe.com/PR/2006/PR061019.Blackrock.Baths.Meeting.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://iloveblackrock.ie/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.schooldays.ie/primary-schools-in-ireland/primary-Dublin-south-county-dublin

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) 15:19, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]