Talk:Haslemere

Please go to

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if this paragraph would be better under the culture section? Also, should the museum have its own article as it has a long history and is a significant museum?Tony Holkham (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done Tony Holkham (talk) 11:53, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...embraced the European project..." seems an unusual form of words. Should it simply state the facts, or should there be a ref to substantiate?Tony Holkham (talk) 01:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Haslemere. 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://archive.is/20130131174328/http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/shottermillhaslemerefc/location/ to http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/shottermillhaslemerefc/location/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• 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) 01:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mertbiol - very impressed with your comprehensive work on this article - is it ready for a Good Article review, do you think? It's certainly headed that way. Best wishes, Tony. Tony Holkham (Talk) 22:52, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tony Holkham: Thanks for your message. I am working my way towards a GA nomination, but I still have a little more work to do on the History section. I would also like to add a paragraph on the Methodist Church, as it is a relatively prominent building on Wey Hill. I hope to be able to finish this work this week and would very much value your feedback.

Would you be interested in reviewing a nomination? I submitted the

WP:SURREY

.

Thanks and best wishes, Mertbiol (talk) 17:16, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I wouldn't be able to review, as I am not very active on WP at this time, for various reasons including moving house. I just wanted to raise the possibility of GA but you have already considered it. Cheers, Tony. Tony Holkham (Talk) 17:33, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Tony Holkham: All the best for your house move - hope everything goes smoothly. Mertbiol (talk) 17:50, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi All!
I've been working on the Haslemere article over the past month or so and would like to nominate it for a

1. Is it appropriate for the village of Grayswood to be included in this article? The Grayswood article was changed to redirect here in November 2012, with no apparent discussion or consultation. The justification was that Grayswood is in the Haslemere Civil Parish and that a standalone article would "not... have the potential to make a GA/Featured Article". While I have tried to include as much material in this article as I can, there are relatively few reliable sources to call on for Grayswood, so it is perhaps under-represented. One argument in favour of resplitting would be that there is clear 'green space' between Haslemere town and Grayswood village. One argument against would be that the village is included with the east of the town in one of the Census reporting areas. What do you think? If the informal consultation here were to be in favour of resplitting, then I would be happy to initiate a more formal proposal.
2. Similarly, is it appropriate for Shottermill to be included in this article? The Shottermill article was changed to redirect here in November 2012, with no apparent discussion or consultation. Again, the reason given was that Shottermill is in the Haslemere Civil Parish and that a standalone article would "not... have the potential to make a GA/Featured Article". In contrast to Grayswood, Shottermill and Haslemere are contiguous and there is no obvious break between them. Having visited the area in past few weeks, the name "Shottermill" is not very visible and a casual visitor would be unaware of its separate identity. (On the approach from Hindhead on the A287, motorists are welcomed to Haslemere, with no mention of Shottermill.) An argument has been advanced to say that since Shottermill was a Civil Parish in its own right between 1894 and 1933, it should have its own article. However, from 1933 to the present, it has been part of Haslemere (as an Urban District from 1933 to 1974 and as a Civil Parish thereafter). Is a split warranted - what do you think?
3. Finally, there is the obvious potential for confusion between Haslemere town and the larger Haslemere Civil Parish (which includes Hindhead and Beacon Hill). Have I been successful in keeping this article 'on track' and is it clear when I am referring to the civil parish and when I am referring to the town? Do you have any suggestions as to how this aspect could be improved for our readers? I suspect that there may not be a perfect solution here. (Criterion 3b of the
   Good Article Criteria
   is particularly pertinent.)

Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks and best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

1. Overall impression is I'm afraid a negative one to start with - that the article (and the contents list) is on the heavy side, so some trimming or combining some subsections would probably make it more easily navigable. If you agree Mertbiol I will try to precis, though not for a week or two. As for Shottermill, I always thought it certainly warrants its own article, though not sure about Grayswood. While maybe heavy, though, the article is very thorough. More anon, when time. Tony Holkham (Talk) 22:21, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2. I've just read the article through again, and found it most interesting, and learned many new things, even though I know the area rather well. Congratulations, Mertbiol; I can't see any major difficulty in getting to GA, so am looking forward to the review. Perhaps Tim riley may have time..? Tony Holkham (Talk) 23:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Tony Holkham: I appreciate this is a busy time for you. Good luck with your house move - I hope everything goes smoothly! Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 08:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A few random comments. The lead image is of the Swan Inn which is not mentioned in the article. When one clicks on the map in the info-box to see it enlarged the locating red dot disappears. This is a wikipedia wide problem. Given the talk of Shottermill and Grayswood a map showing their areas would be helpful. I may have an out of copyright OS seventh series map I could scan and upload if none already available. Although plentifully illustrated the images add something. If more photos were needed I might be able to take photos when visiting the area. There is little mention of the Second World War, eg anti-tank barriers between Haslemere and Grayswood on the A286.SovalValtos (talk) 06:09, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See HMS Mercury (shore establishment). SovalValtos (talk) 06:19, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @SovalValtos: Your suggestion for a map is a good one and I will add one to the Geography section.

I was struggling with the lead image - a picture of the High Street would probably be best, but the ones that I found on Commons looked pretty gloomy (or full of people/traffic). The current one with the Swan Inn seemed to be the best of the bunch that I came across, but please do feel free to suggest another, if you can find something better. I was thinking that a photo taken from the first floor of the Town Hall looking northwards might work well in showing the shape of the High Street, but getting access to the building to take photos (especially in Covid times) might be tricky. What do you think?

You are right that there is not much on WW2, but I could not find much in the sources about that period. George Rolston's book has very little on the 20th century and Greta Turner's stops with 1900. But if you are able to point me to some sources, that would be very useful. Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 08:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mertbiol I have a fine copy of Swanton 1914 which I could photo images if wanted. The new maps do not yet show the area boundaries. Agreed the High Street best for lead image. I have had access to the first floor of the Town Hall but without a camera. Well worth doing just to see the old table. Although a view from the South could be worthwhile I would like it to be taken from near the half-timbered Bank rather than the Town Hall window so that the town hall was on one side of the foreground. However I would prefer a view looking south from somewhere near Scope (viewable on Google earth) so that the Town Hall beyond the war memorial triangle was the focal point and the more interesting west side of the street was shown. High resolution with good equipment needed so that it could be blown-up for detail. An early start to minimise people and traffic would also give favourable lighting. Some fluffy clouds or flurries of snow would ice the cake!SovalValtos (talk) 11:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @SovalValtos: It's great you have your own copy of the Swanton book - I had to make do with a battered library copy, which I wasn't able to borrow. I think it is still in copyright - Ernest Swanton died in 1958, so under the 70-year rule, it won't become available to reproduce until 2028.

I will bow to your superior local knowledge of where to take photos. One of the difficulties at this time of year in south-facing pictures, is the sun, which is very low. If you are in the area and are able to take some additional photos, that would be great. Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to visit again until the New Year.

Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mertbiol Tony Holkham the obvious source for WW2 are the local papers but the current (post war) owners of the Herald group have not made digital copies available to my knowledge, though there might be hard copies in the Woking history centre or elsewhere.SovalValtos (talk) 21:37, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SovalValtos: Unfortunately, according to this list, the archives of the Haslemere Herald are not kept at the Surrey History Centre in Woking. Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Haslemere Herald or coverage of Haslemere Mertbiol may be found by searching via the Farnham Herald. Continuing resource available in Farnham Library and Surrey History Centre [1].SovalValtos (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As an info box image I think there is very little wrong with this

by User:Charlesdrakew. The point of view is near ideal and the early Spring greenery adds interest without obscuring the town hall. Higher resolution would be desireable, it could be cropped tighter bottom and right and some might like less people or cars; they do not bother me. I will try it now and await revert or an improvement.SovalValtos (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It took a long time to get a shot with that few cars in it.Charles (talk) 21:29, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Minor comments

Just had a read through and apart from adding a couple of wikilinks and a minor copy edit to eliminate some parentheses, It seems to be well covered. I will dig out my milling references and just see if there is anything to add to the industry section, there's a bit about Sickle Mill as I recall. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Murgatroyd49: I know that the mills are your area of expertise. To be honest I have found some of the sources a little confusing and contradictory - and there's the usual problem of roads, buildings and firms changing their names. In the case of Sickle Mill, I understand that there were two mills side-by-side - see picture. Am I right in thinking that the white wooden building on the left was the newer paper manufacturing mill and the brick building on the left was the original flour mill? Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I want to check. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 15:02, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To date not come up with a positive ID of the brick building but the wooden structure is the paper mill. I'll keep looking. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 18:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving forward

I have just added some information on the world wars to the article. The only source I could find was Rolston, which covers the two wars in very little detail. I have been unable to locate anything relevant in the Farnham Herald. I have also added a few sentences on Stoatley Rough School. I am intending to proofread the article one final time towards the end of the coming week. I will aim to submit a

Reading through again I was struck by the similar ground covered by the Governance, Parliamentary borough and National and local government sections. Should they be amalgamated or are the distinctions beneficial? User:Tony Holkham suggested precis above.SovalValtos (talk) 16:14, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SovalValtos: To my mind, the three topics you have identified are very distinct. I feel it would be very easy for a reader to confuse them, which is why I think it is beneficial to keep them in separate (sub)sections. So for example, the Borough is not really significant for the day-to-day running of the town in the post-Tudor period, it was simply about electing two MPs to Parliament. The current position of Haslemere in the South West Surrey constituency has no real connection back to the Borough, which it is why it is in the "Democracy today" section and not part of the "History" section. (I would not want anyone to think that the South West Surrey constituency was a rotten or pocket borough!) Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 16:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough and thanks. I was just raising the question.SovalValtos (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My original research indicates Midhurst has the nearest police station, not Guildford, albeit a different force https://www.hampshire.police.uk/contact/find-a-police-station/ SovalValtos (talk) 16:33, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @SovalValtos: I have reworded the relevant sentence to make it clear that the police station at Guildford is the nearest run by Surrey Police. Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Haslemere/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this after Boxing Day. ♦ jaguar 18:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I couldn't help but note the lead neglects to mention Grayswood. Is there anything to mention about it? Otherwise it summarises the article perfectly
• "85 ha (210 acres) of which is classified as Ancient Woodland" - I'm not sure if ancient woodland is capitalised, though I might be wrong
• "To the east of Haslemere town and Graywsood" - town is redundant here
• "a group of workmen was drinking in the Kings Arms pub" - were
• "In 2021, the GP surgery serving the town is at Haslemere Health Centre, in Church Lane" - how about As of 2021?
• "In 2021, the hospital functions as a community hospital" - this will be redundant as time goes on. Try Presently, the hospital...
• It's best to write out First/Second World War fully in the 'War memorials' subsection (as opposed to WWI/WWII)

After reading through the article I can't find anything to hold it back, so an outright pass is bestowed. It is comprehensive, reads well, and the sources are all in good order. I enjoyed reading it - I had no idea Hindhead was in Haslemere parish. I congratulate you on all the good work you've done with these Surrey towns - a FAC could be a possibility... ♦ jaguar 20:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome!! Thanks @Jaguar: for your very thorough review. I wish you the very best for your new job and hope you'll be able to find time to contribute to Wikipedia when you are off duty! Thanks also to @SovalValtos:, @Murgatroyd49: and @Tony Holkham: for their support and feedback. Happy New Year to All!!! Mertbiol (talk) 21:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]