Talk:Rainhill

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

UK geography Mid‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. England Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Merseyside This article is within the scope of WikiProject Merseyside, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Merseyside-related articles. In so doing it works and collaborates with its mother project WikiProject UK Geography. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.MerseysideWikipedia:WikiProject MerseysideTemplate:WikiProject MerseysideMerseyside articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I believe this page needs a cleanup. It does not cite resources, it contains advertising and I believe some of the facts are incorrect. Doyley 21:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed DoyleyTalk 16:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As this has caught my eye I have added information to the article that Rainhill also has the WA postcode as well as L postcode. Having worked for the NHS in St Helens I can vouch that I have come across "Rainhill, St Helens, Merseyside, WA".... many times. I was suprised because I thought Rainhill was L35 AND did not use St Helens in their address. Some do. I wasn't sure on the telephone dialing code if they use 01744 aswell as 0151 this may not be the case. Dmcm2008 (talk) 08:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that they arn't just putting Rainhill due to the location name, when in fact they may not live in Rainhill. I have a friend who lives off Portico Lane, and officially he's in whiston, but they put Eccleston Park as their address, and I'm sure some well off people in Gillars Green would put Eccleston as their address —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.178.25 (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed this. Please cite your sources in future. --Jza84 |  Talk  14:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The issue they will have had is the traditional Rainhill boundary, and that of St. Helens have been blurred somewhat. Thatto Heath, Eccleston, Sutton Manor. The main issue is around the Elton Head Road/Rainhill Road heading into Rainhill where I believe (based on my Grans postcode) it gets a bit muddled up. Quick google brings up a nice satellite view of a house right on the junction. No doubt he lists himself as Rainhill, and is logistically within the boundary - but has a St. Helens postcode.[1] (if you click on "nearby postcodes" you should find a pin in the car park, and another in the estate to the SW behind the pub on the T junction). To give you an idea of the confusion (boundary etc). Reeve Court is built on the old Rainhill Psychiatic Hospital grounds, and would be described as Rainhill by most (as would those in the estate behind it)[2].--Koncorde (talk) 00:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed some nonsense, again, from the lead section. If there's some "confusion" (as asserted in the material), then cite your sources. Furthermore, a single crime, and a recent one at that, doesn't constitute the need for a whole section on "Gang crime".

If there is any confusion remaining about sections, see WP:UKCITIES. --Jza84 |  Talk  20:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was initially pleased to see that someone had found a citation for moving the milestone marker back to the right side of the bridge, but on closer inspection, the reference given[3] is word-for-word the same as the entire paragraph on the Rainhill Wiki article, so was most likely sourced from Wikipedia in the first place. For that reason, I have removed it. Paypwip (talk) 07:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's my fault sorry, I just noticed the tag was from 2008 and remember reading "that" article. I've looked through the history and it seems the milestone switch was first put on page in 2006. Now I've lived in St. Helens and did a study on the Rainhill Railway - but I can't say I ever notice the marker being wrong or moved, but then I haven't looked at it since '98, nor am I even aware of the bridge being "widened" (to my knowledge it has never been widened, it's a listed building?) however the road was widened over it which is an entirely different thing (I don't believe the structure has ever been altered, although one side does have a metal barrier rather than sandstone). I'll try and get down there and see what I can find in the Railway Museum.--Koncorde (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - I grew up around there and can't remember a widening of either the bridge or the road. I'm trying to recall from memory which side I remember seeing it, but I'm not sure. I've had a look through the Rainhill Parish Council minutes for 2005, but haven't spotted anything. If there is a local newspaper, that might help, although the best clue would come from a local resident who remembers it (if it did happen in the first place), otherwise it needs to be deleted. Paypwip (talk) 13:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear that both the Bridge and the milestone are grade II listed buildings, as is the Railway Station. Paypwip (talk) 13:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a photo of the milestone here, from which it can be inferred that the correct side of the bridge is the south side (opposite to station side), however there is clearly a sandstone wall behind while the actual south side is steel (from the road side anyway), so it would appear that this photo was taken while the milestone was on the south side, but the question is: which side is on now? Paypwip (talk) 13:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Steel section is part of what has been widened, as that was added onto the structure at a later date. No idea when, but I'd suspect that at some point before it became a listed building it was added in to provide a footpath (As I don't think there were/are 2 footpaths on either side?). I remember the milestone being on the steel side of the bridge as that is the main footpath, which would mean that at some point it did point in the wrong direction (something I never noticed) though I have no idea as to when it was corrected - sometime after 1996-1998 though (as that's when I did my study). As for the road widening. I remember them digging up the road and junction off Rainhill Road/Warrington Road and basically "adjusting" where the path and road lay. That's in the last 10 years, it caused traffic tailbacks for weeks as they continued back down Rainhill Road.--Koncorde (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, according to my father, the current position is on the south side on the abutment to the east of the arch. He reckoned it had been switched 12-18 months ago, but given the fact the the switch was added to the article in 2006, I think his estimate is out. Paypwip (talk) 16:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went down to Rainhill the other day, the milestone is still on the same side of the road as I always remember it being, the only difference is it's about 12' to the left.--Koncorde (talk) 12:36, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The post town, address and websites such as Google Maps all classify Rainhill as "Rainhill, Prescot" but Rainhill is in the metropolitan borough of St Helens thus there appears to be some confusion about where Rainhill lies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worthelse (talk • contribs) 23:28, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, but that's the post town. On Wikipedia we use the administrative geography to identify places. For example Croxton Kerrial's post town is Grantham in Lincolnshire, whereas Croxton Kerrial is in the borough of Meltham and in Liecestershire. Post towns overlapping administrative geography is not uncommon. -- Jza84 |  Talk  23:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing this up. - Worthelse |  Talk  23:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Google Maps is frustrating for sure - it says Saddleworth is in Lancashire for a start! Wrong on so many levels! You may wish to take a look at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Merseyside??? Good luck otherwise. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently discovered on the www.visitliverpool.com website an address regarding a Premier Inn Hotel in Rainhill The address of the hotel is stated as; Premier Inn, 804 Warrington Road, Rainhill, Liverpool, Merseyside L35 6PE

http://fr.visitliverpool.com/site/premier-inn-liverpool-rainhill-p44059

Would this regard Rainhill as being a suburb of Liverpool? and it additionally adds confusion as to where Rainhill lies.  Talk  18:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the source doesn't explicitly state that Rainhill is a suburb of Liverpool, merely that the post town in the address for a hotel is Liverpool. I'd bare our policies WP:SYNTH and WP:OR in mind. What's really needed here is some kind of local history book or geographical gazetteer to resolve this issue IMHO. --Jza84 |  Talk  19:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would the address be used as evidence to suggest that Rainhill's post towns are Prescot and Liverpool? - Worthelse |  Talk  17:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. According to the Royal Mail's Address Management Guide (2004), the official post town for the L35 postcode district is PRESCOT. The hotel website is either using the city purposefully for prestige, or else has it listed in error. --Jza84 |  Talk  17:40, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing this up.  Talk  17:48, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used to work for Royal Mail incase you can't tell! :S --Jza84 |  Talk  18:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that the hotel in question[4] is in fact 'The Ship Inn' which has a Premier Inn attached. I have always found it strange to see the sign outside saying 'Premier Inn - Liverpool (Rainhill)'. I presume that Premier Inn choose to associate their hotels with the nearest city for the benefit of non-local businessmen. Paypwip (talk) 16:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like the same shennanigans you get with Johnny Vegas being described as "Manchester's favourite son" on the radio. The pub itself states Prescot btw.--Koncorde (talk) 12:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's some great source material to work from for this article at:

• british-history.ac.uk
• sthelens.gov.uk
• rainhill.merseyside.org

...for those interested in adding material. I have this article watchlisted, and given the sources above, there should be no reason to add unsourced commentary to this page. Furthermore, the village is in the St Helens borough. It is not in Knowsley, and I've referenced the district council website to prove this. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The word "large" has been added to the opening sentence, so it now reads "Rainhill is a large village and civil parish of the Metropolitan Borough of St Helens, in Merseyside, England". The problem with the world "large" is that it's relative; what may be large for a village in England may be normal for a village in another. What's meant by large anyway? Are we talking about a high population or the size of the houses? Or is it the area covered by the village? There are problems with "large" so I suggest removing it, but I'd prefer discussion to a low-level edit war. Nev1 (talk) 20:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The current text as a proposal for the origin or the term "Stoops" however no reference material to support it and so is not verifiable. Stoops is an alternative spelling of stoup i.e. a basin for holy water - which seems to be a more likely story !

Does anyone have any evidence either way on this subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adeade00 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think it's notable to suggest that Rainhill is "large" in terms of population-size. With nearly 12,000 residents, Rainhill has a higher population than nearby Prescot which is a town. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.15.199 (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is that the reference to the lead (which certainly verfies the term "village" as appropriate), appears to suggest it supports that Rainhill is a "large village", which it doesn't.

Wikipedia is built on the principle of verifiability; can a reliable, independent source be supplied to support Rainhill as a large village? (I happen to think it is a large village, but my opinion is pretty irrelevant here). --Jza84 |  Talk  13:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the interests of harmony, I will assume that there is a consensus to keep the adjective "large", but I would urge users to consider providing a source to support the claim so as to ensure it has longevity. --Jza84 |  Talk  13:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rainhill Stoops is named after the road that later became the Liverpool - Warrington Turnpike, which had posts known as "stoops" along it as guide markers. Stoops is an archaic term. For similar stuff, see this link: [5] The current story regarding stooping under the toll bar to avoid charges is a fanciful retcon (much like the many myths regarding the term "woollyback"). Koncorde (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 19:21, 9 March 2013‎ Liverpool2013 version of this article is translated into Chinese Wikipedia.--Wing (talk) 11:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]