Talk:Bridgend

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Pines Outlet[edit]

Hey people - I think we need a concensus as to the wikipedia name of the Pines. I have created a stub page entitled McArthur Glen Designer Outlet Wales - I know that it's a bit long winded, but it's what it's official called by the company that runs it and I suppose it's what others from far away would refer to it aswell. I'll edit this page to change the name, and then we can have it as this name for other pages that refer to it like Maesteg--Luccent 18:49, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually - it was soo wordy - I just linked to it and kept the wording the same in this article :) --Luccent 18:52, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Politics[edit]

The politics of Bridgend has been fascinating recently. In the discussion on pedestrianisation of ridgend town centre, there was a reference to Jeff Jones being council leader. I hope you don'tmind, but I have removed this, as it is out of date. However, I added a brief paragraph at the end of the article, trying to explain the "Rainbow Coalition", so added the link to Jeff Jones at that point. pftaylor

Famous (or not) people[edit]

What is going on with this Paul Phillips silliness? No fewer than six separate addresses have inserted unsourced claims that he is a hockey player from Bridgend. One reputable cite, and we're fine. Until then, I'm just going to keep reverting it. --Telsa ((t)(c)) 21:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • My own mistaken comment deleted Crimsone 15:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC) **[reply]

A Socialist?[edit]

Was Jeff Jones a socialist? Being a member of the British Labour Party does not necessarily mean one is a socialist (in fact some would say it means the opposite). Or perhaps the author is making an ironic comment? Or using "socialist" in some derogatory sense? Also "outspoken" may be inadequate. "Offensive"? "Annoying"? (preceding unsigned comment added by User:212.219.235.198)

I have to say, I have wondered about the term too. I've removed it and a couple of other adjectives in that section. If anyone is bothered, they can restore them :) Telsa (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photo[edit]

This article could use a photo. Edward 23:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any kind of photo in mind? I was thinking of something along the lines of the high street in Bridgend town centre. (EMH88 19:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Citations[edit]

Okay I know about the wikipedia rules but whoever put all these in is plainly taking it too far. You can't possibly expect citations for every single comment made - it might be from a local newspaper or a book. I'm going to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.89.109 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, they need referencing. If they remain unreferenced they will be removed from the article. Claiming something to be "controversial" or making weasel claims like "some people say X" requires references. Who says it's controversial, who says X? If people can not provide evidence for such claims they will be deleted. This article is not being treated any differently than any other article. I am expecting citations for all the facts claimed in the article, just as they are expected for all articles. If the source of the claim is a local newspaper or book, cite the local newspaper or book. Joe D (t) 11:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schools[edit]

There should be pages made about the comprehensive schools. StuThomas 14:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second World War[edit]

The article currently says: 

"1945, seventy prisoners of war from Island Farm managed to escape through a tunnel "

It was probably much less. Probably around 47 prisoners (German officers). 

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.230.181.239 (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

More foolish vandalism[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bridgend&curid=353261&diff=159035915&oldid=159026998

Do few occasions like these prompt a request for semi-protection? I've noticed this sort of vadalism for some time now! (EMH88 21:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Suicides[edit]

Seems odd that something as strange as the spate of suicides amongst children has not been covered here. While it should be dealt with respect a section should be included.Twobells (talk) 08:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This matter needs very careful treatment and professional opinion appears to be that discussion on internet media is potentially harmful to young peoplr who might be at risk. The appearance of this 'cluster' is too recent, and has been targetted too irresponsibly by some of the tabloids for any sensible conclusions to be drawn just yet. I was tempted to delete the paragraph that has appeared here, but on reflection decided not to because I am definitely not an expert. However I hope that there will be further discussion and a wise consensus reached on how wikipedia should deal with this delicate matter. User:Locospotter 09:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The suicides took place in the surrounding areas of Bridgend County, not the town itself. It's a shame that shoddy journalism has crept into Wikipedia. 86.139.117.172 (talk) 14:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've come to know a lot of kids offed themselves at/around bridgend, shouldn't the word "suicide" at least be mentioned in the article? If other kids are gonna die because the subject is discussed in wikipedia, then a subsection would be too much, but we could just mention it, and if the next kid that kills himself visited the page in the last 3 weeks (we check his browser's history log) we censor it back.  :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.50.193.3 (talk) 04:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

There is a lot of repeated material between the following three sections:

I propose they are all combined into the Bridgend#Spate of youth suicides(Instead, Bridgend (county borough)#Young people suicides - see below) section (which IMO should be renamed, but that's a different issue), to keep everything together. There doesn't seem enough substantiated material for its own article, and as mentioned at Talk:Bridgend suicide incidents there are reservations about following the tabloid lead in grouping the incidents. LHMike (talk) 20:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I aprove this merger, and make the merged pages redirect to the section, but I think spate of youth suicides is a good enough name as we are ever going to get, for it illustrates the casual link (purely that there have been more suicides than usually, nothing more nothing less) that sections of the media have placed on the events, while not veering into "Bridgend suicide cult OMG!!!1" territory.--Kerotan-Have a nice day :) 20:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the section be removed from the Bridgend town article. There is no evidence I can find that these suicides occured within the town itself. The British media has just assumed that the mention of 'Bridgend' can only refer to the town. If the suicides occured in South Glamorgan, the article on Cardiff wouldn't have an entry on the matter unless the suicides were centralised in the city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.117.172 (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you mention, this is a very important point that needs to be clarified before the destination for the combined section is identified. This source suggests the suicides have occured within the town of Bridgend: "...returned from the town, where there have been almost 20 suicides...". On the other hand, here states explicitly that the deaths have occurred across the whole county. Again, this source states that they have happened 'around Bridgend'. As such, I second the second proposal, that the whole caboodle should go to Bridgend (county borough)#Young people suicides, and shall alter the templates accordingly. LHMike (talk) 20:51, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, this again. No, it should not be on three separate pages. If it must exist at all, one page is enough. I don't think it should exist at all, as you'll see from my comments in the first link. But if it must, then I don't think it should have a dedicated article, because by making a dedicated article Wikipedia is making an editorial decision that all of these events are linked. (See: WP:SYN for synthesis as a form of OR - the policy is a major pain, but it still applies.) I think it's pretty clear that it would have to go in the county one rather than Bridgend. As I write, there are about two sentences in Bridgend (county borough), noting that it came to prominence with the press articles, and that police and the coroner deny any link. Given the level of detail elsewhere in the article, that looks about right and in proportion to me. Telsa (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think LHMike was proposing a new article. Everything on the subject should be merged into Bridgend (county borough)#Young people suicides.86.139.117.172 (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Move it to the County page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.64.204 (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to propose to enhance the section, maybe considering a crosslink to a possible copycat suicide or Werther effect. The merge has my support, as the article by itself is a stub and will most likely not have enough background or source material to make it big enough for an own section. Sad, somehow, as it seems like they're forgotten a second time. But that's just me. --Madayar (talk) 21:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the merge, someone go on and do it! --█▄█▄█ █▄█▄█ █▄▄ 16:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a link back in to the article. I don't think it should be mentioned directly in the article, but I think a link is probably appropriate given WP:NOTCENSORED. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bridgend page move[edit]

Bridgend should not be moved as it is by far the most notable of the locations with this name. If it was moved it would not be to Bridgend (Wales) as this is not in following with present geography projects. FruitMonkey (talk) 18:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh[edit]

How much Welsh is spoken in Bridgend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.55.83 (talk) 16:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that about 10% or 20% of the town speaks Welsh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.55.83 (talk) 09:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bridgend. 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: 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) 11:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bridgend. 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) 04:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bridgend&oldid=1206431726"