Talk:Porlock

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

Potter around[edit]

re: Harry potter - not wanting to put the actual info into article as not verified - yet - but apparently, near the stone circle in porlock there is the ghost of a horse which accounts for the ponies there not going near the circle after dusk...

"The road goes right past the stones here, and they say you will rarely see hill ponies grazing around them after dusk. Horses being ridden refuse to go along the lane. The spectre that haunts the area is of a horse, and people tell of hooves clattering hollowly along the hard surface of the road when no horse is there.

Mentioned by S Toulson in her 'Moors of the Southwest, v1.' 1983. " - taken from the website: http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/2220 - again, unsure about this referencing, but if someone wants to add - might tie up the Harry potter 'porlock=guardian of horses' to such - either that or just adds to porlock stone circle...

Crescent 11:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This should be in the porlock section surely, not this section on the Colerdfige quote.

Proposed merger[edit]

I agree that it makes no sense to have the material scattered across two pages. However, since the 'person from Porlock' is almost certainly more famous (and arguably more important) than Porlock itself, I would favour the removal of the material about Coleridge to the Person from Porlock page, leaving the Porlock page to discuss the village in its own right. --Vneiomazza 18:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, go for it. —Keenan Pepper 01:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the proposal, but aren't the tags the wrong way around? They currently suggest that Person from Porlock be merged into this article, whereas you're saying the opposite. Ziggurat 23:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree, Porlock as a town is significant in it's own right yet has very little to do with Coleridge himself. The person from Porlock sould be seen as an independent figure more associated with Coleridge than a seaside town. . —xstackx 12:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Um, did you actually read what Vneiomazza wrote? It seems like you agree to me... —Keenan Pepper 20:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal seems confusing indeed, for it appears to be the opposite of what is explained here. My view: there should be two separate articles, as there are now; and the "Person" article should only deal with the Coleridge material, and not the actual town (as it does now). EuroSong talk 11:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.exmoor-nationalpark.gov.uk/index/learning_about/looking_after_landscape/geology/geological_features.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New photo[edit]

I uploaded a wonderful photo I found, would that perhaps be rather used in the article? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Porlock_Seaside.jpg

Theon144 (talk) 21:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Porlock Hill (Climb)[edit]

When I was younger, in the fifties of the previous century, Porlock Hill had a fearsome reputation among motorists as having one of the steepest A roads in the British Isles. Surely the challenges of the hill should be included in the section on cultural references? Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 20:21, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The hill I think you are referring to is covered in the article on the A39 road article (which is wikilinked as "Porlock Hill"). Are you suggesting that some this should be replicated in this article?— Rod talk 21:04, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Porlock. 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) 19:07, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Porlock. 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) 13:21, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Porlock. 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) 18:48, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Porlock&oldid=1209638122"