Talk:Barrow-in-Furness
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Barrow was founded on the iron and steel industry (plus its potential for a deep-water port and the coming of the railway to allow the export of that iron). Shipbuilding came later. I don't think the town is the administrative capital of Furness. Furness is not an administrative area.
Contents |
[edit] Wind turbines
What's this about wind turbines in Morecambe Bay? Are they there now or are they just planned?
Gas being used in the generation of electricity at Barrow: I took out a sentence about this, but then I remembered that Roosecote power station was re-built a few years ago, and I have a feeling it's now a gas-fired station and presumably does therefore take gas direct from the terminal. If that's so perhaps it could be explained - with ref. to Roosecote.
Another point about the gas terminal: When such a terminal was mooted local authorities across the NW were up in arms about the possibility of having it on their doorstep; Barrow wasn't even on the list. Then along came some faceless suit from Barrow and invited BG to apply to locate it in or near the town. BG couldn't believe their luck. From having to defend their proposals and maybe engage in protracted planning and legal battles to get their way, now some numbskull, on behalf of another town, was inviting them in - needless to say they didn't have to think long about the offer. How many people does the terminal employ? If your can write this in a NPOV style then why not put it in the article. I'm afraid I can't! Arcturus 19:19, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
The turbines aren't actually in Moreca,be Bay; they're beginning construction off the coast of Walney, in the Irish sea rather than Morecambe Bay. Currently a few ships out there doing whatever it is they have to do, and if you squint you can see the bottom of the turbines beginning to stick out of the water.
The power station at Roosecote is indeed gas fired, and the gas comes from the terminals via pipes under Walney Island. I think Roosecote is considered part of Barrow, rather than a seperate place. Robdurbar 09:19, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] County Issue
I think suggesting Barrow remains in some way part of the 'ceremonial county' of Lancashire is more POV and/or incorrect than to mention that many locals do in fact consider the area should still be considered Lancastrian. I have put in as neutral a statement in the intoductory paragraph as I thought fit. But with a reasonable geography section already mentioning the Lancastrian history - it might be sensible not to have County issues raised in the first sentance describing the town Nogwa 02:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- Though I agree that we shouldn't over emphasise the Lancashire issue - its a historical feature in the end, it is incorrect to suggest that the 'ceremonial counties' don't exist any longer - they do. It is, I agree, POV and probably original research to include the locals bit, without statistical support. Robdurbar 09:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- While they exist, Barrow is in the ceremonial county of Cumbria - not Lancashire as the article was saying. The current intro 'Barrow-in-Furness is a town in northwest of England. Since 1974 it has been part of Cumbria for ceremonial purposes' is also misleading as it's inclusion within Cumbria has more than a ceremonial role. In fact it was the inclusion in Lancaster that was more 'by name' as from the late 19th century while Barrow was included in Lancaster - this was as a county borough with much administrative autonomy. Nogwa 23:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- I, personally, am fine with the intro how it was, say, 24 hours ago. In the Geography section, the following text can be seen.
- The town is geographically and historically part of Lancashire, but has been part of the administrative county of Cumbria since 1974.
- I feel that is a fine sentence, and I suppose that could always be the one in the intro, if needs be. --Dreaded Walrus 23:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- I, personally, am fine with the intro how it was, say, 24 hours ago. In the Geography section, the following text can be seen.
- While they exist, Barrow is in the ceremonial county of Cumbria - not Lancashire as the article was saying. The current intro 'Barrow-in-Furness is a town in northwest of England. Since 1974 it has been part of Cumbria for ceremonial purposes' is also misleading as it's inclusion within Cumbria has more than a ceremonial role. In fact it was the inclusion in Lancaster that was more 'by name' as from the late 19th century while Barrow was included in Lancaster - this was as a county borough with much administrative autonomy. Nogwa 23:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I think the history within different counties and as a county borough would be best left to the geography section and doesn't need to be gone into in the introduction. But if it is - the introduction should at least be accurate. To say it is part of the ceremonial county of Lancashire - or that it is part of Cumbria for ceremonial purposes are both misleading. The sentence you quote is fine - except that one of the interesting things about Furness as part of Lancashire is exactly that it was geographically separate from the rest of the county except by crossing the sands! Nogwa 00:00, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Yes. I also found that fascinating. I am not particularly excellent at putting my point across at time, but what my main thought was, is that the version that the version inserted earlier, that started off this debate, was inaccurate, as "Cumbria" is more than just a ceremonial name. It appears below "Barrow-in-Furness" on all of my mail, for example. --Dreaded Walrus 00:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Cumbria is no longer a postal county and Lancashire is equally acceptable per the Royal Mail. Lancsalot 00:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- That is misleading. Cumbria and Lancashire are both former postal counties. Counties no longer form part of any address. Where a county is supplied, it will be ignored. Mrsteviec 11:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
On this issue, one of the reasons my own parents and grandparents offered was that since Barrow was part of Cumbria from 1974, most of the adult population were born as Lancastrians and consider the area they were born in as 'traditionally', Lancashire. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.67.92.200 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Cleanup
I've just re-read this article, having not done so for several months. It is appalling! The standard of writing is that of a primary school pupil. A great deal of work needs doing to bring this up to encyclopedia level. I've tagged it for cleanup and will make a start on a re-write in due course. Arcturus 22:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Barrow in Furness / Vickers / Vickers Armstrong
Some suggestions regarding the Vickers and Barrow in Furness entries.
First, the shipbuilding activities at Barrow were not limited to naval vessels and considerable numbers of passenger liners and cargo ships produced. Notable amongst the customers were P&O (SS Orsova, SS Orcades, Oriana and others. The Biritish Admiral built for BP was, I think, for a very short period the largest ship in the world. With regard to naval vessels HMS Ajax (WW2), HMS Dreadnought (first RN SSN), HMS Princess Royal(Jutland), HMS Hermes (Falklands) and the Japanese Kongo deserve a mention.
Second, the importance of armaments and heavy machinery needs emphasis. Vickers and later Vickers Armstrong constructed artillery for land service and indeed naval service aboard ships built elsewhere. Examples include guns for KGV class battleships and propulsion for HMS Lion.
Third, the merger of Armstrongs and Vickers was very much a result of the collapse in demand for warships as a result of the limitations on naval construction following WW1.
Fourth, the decline in shipbuilding in the 1960's was very much a reflection of the labour difficulties particularly demarkatîon disputes between rival unions and lack of modern practices.
A link to the Barrow museum photgraphic archive would add value.
John Walkley 8th November 2006
- John, there are several articles about the various incarnations of Vickers. One of these is Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd. The material you mention above would certainly improve that article, but I wonder if it should be renamed to something like "Vickers (Barrow)" or "Shipbuilding at Barrow", after all, the yard was only known as VSEL for a short time. What do you think? At the moment I'm re-writing parts of the Barrow article, including the removal of material not directly relevant to the town. However, in the spirit of Wikipedia, why don't you add the material above to whichever article you think appropriate. Increasingly at Wikipedia some editors are expecting discussion prior to editing, and often intimidate people who add or edit material unilaterally. I reject that idea entirely. If you want to add or edit something, just do it. Regards, Arcturus 17:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Indeed, WP:BE BOLD. A shipbuilding at Barrow-in-Furness article would be a great addition to Wikipedia. Robdurbar 09:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)