Talk:Riding (division)

message: As far as I can tell, "riding" is only a colloquialism, and is not an official designation. Both the Canada Elections Act () and the Ontario Election Act () use only the term "electoral district", and do not use "riding". Of course, government agencies may use the colloquial term as do many Canadians, but it is not "official". Ground Zero 17:39, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, I want to point out that the article states that the term riding was in use in the 19th century. However in British Columbia, where I'm from, the term riding is used all the time to refer to electoral districts. It's safe to say that the term is in everyday use. --70.77.37.70 05:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada

message: The following statement was tagged as needing a citation:
:Although no longer having any administrative role the Ridings of Yorkshire still play a part as geographical and cultural entities - they are used for the names of many groups and organisations and many people in Yorkshire associate themselves with one Riding or another.
I'm not sure how best to achieve this, but besides the list at West Riding of Yorkshire#Current usage the renaming of North Wolds to East Yorkshire and Beverly to East Yorkshire District of Beverly during the Humberside days are also evidence of this.  I believe feeling is less strong in the North Riding where the almost seemless change to North Yorkshire was seen as relatively harmless, unlike the East and West Ridings that were broken up or merged.  Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 15:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "many" is problematic, though.  I don't really think a list of old organisations that have no reason to change their name provides any real evidence either way.  And the mere existence of a Yorkshire Ridings Society Thingy just proves there are some people: not how many (and neither should we take their word for it).  What would really be needed is an opinion survey.  These things may exist: I found one for Humberside (see Talk:Humberside).  Almost certainly the Banham Commission conducted similar surveys during their review of North Yorkshire and Humberside: I'm not sure about South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire.  Morwen - Talk 15:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: also, "geographical" should be deleted probably.  They don't appear on mass market maps.  Morwen - Talk 15:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No arguments there.  I've re-read the original statment and it isn't very encylopædic at all, is it?  My original attempt to rush in and provide a citation was because I identify with the statement: but that doesn't mean it belongs here.  Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 16:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest I think there's too much stuff in this section already: this sort of stuff can (and if it isn't should) be covered at Yorkshire.  Take a look at the Humberside link I pointed to - I can't remember whether it specifically asked about the Ridings though, it certainly asked people what they thought about Yorkshire.  Morwen - Talk 16:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a quick scan through the OCR version.  Residents of North Humberside certainly seemed to resent being clubbed together with northern Lincs and identified with Yorkshire or East Yorkshire.  After reading that I'm not sure where East Riding of Yorkshire came from as the new name.  East Yorkshire would have made more sense as it isn't the same as the East Riding, just like North Yorkshire and West Yorkshire aren't the same as the North and West Ridings -- it would have made our article split easier as well!  (I expect it was because a district of Humberside was already self-titled East Yorkshire, would that be it?)  Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 16:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

text: One more thing: unless they're talking about the council they always say "East Yorkshire" on Look North, never "the East Riding".  Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not quite sure why.  As I recall at one stage the plan was to have a non-metropolitan county with no county council and two districts, each of which was a unitary authority (corresponding to Hull and the current East Riding authority).  One of them was to be called East Yorkshire and the other to be East Riding of Yorkshire - I can't remember which way round (I think the smaller unit was to be East Yorkshire).  Hansard should have it.   Morwen - Talk 16:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and more recently, there were proposals to create a North Riding of Yorkshire unitary if a Yorkshire and the Humber regional authority had been created.  This was not included on the final referendum question (and the referendum never even happened), but there was survey work done.  Morwen - Talk 16:54, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: This page 1566 links.  Clearly the majority refer to Canadian electoral districts, and many more are governmental units in England and elsewhere.  However, there are clearly hundreds of links where the meaning  is horseriding (equestrianism).  It's in many biographies, such as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, and Diana, Princess of Wales.  A particularly egregious case is Modern pentathlon, which has this:.
I see this as a must move situation.  We need to make riding a disambiguation page, and let the disambiguation gnomes look at these links.  — Randall Bart (talk) 08:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move 

message: Looks like someone went really insane with the citation needed tags for the Yorkshire section, was it really necessary to request a citation for every other word?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.30.220 (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the tags as they are covered by the tag at the top of the section. Keith D (talk) 22:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yorkshire citations 

message: "The modern form riding was the result of initial th being absorbed in the final th or t of the words north, south, east and west, by which it was normally preceded."
One of those is not like the others.  OK, there was the book, but the word was already in its modern form by the time that were writ.  It's confusing at best and at worst just plain wrong.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2788:1008:2C3:E2CB:4EFF:FE88:1A2C (talk) 00:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading information about Dropping the initial th