Talk:Toponymy of England

message: The Toponymy articles should not be lists of place names and meanings.  They should explain the way that toponymy works in that country/region, with profuse examples.  The meanings of non-illustrative place names shiould go into the  articles for the approprite places.  For example there are 20 Madison Countys in the USA, all named after president Madison (apparently) while of the twelve Polk countys only 10 are named after a president.  Either would be tedious to list. Townships even more so.  Or so I think. Rich Farmbrough 22:19, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Lists of names and their origins are etymologies.  See for example this page.  I agree with you that toponymy should be about the wider context.  This article in part is beginning to do this, I'll be interested in seing where this goes. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 00:02, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thought required! 

message: I've reworked this article a bit and feel it's now good enough to stand as an article in its own right.  Having looked at some of the others I have a proposal with regard to what to do with all these British placename articles.
Articles that are good enough on their own include:
*British toponymy
*List of generic forms in British place names
*Etymological list of counties of the United Kingdom
*List of civil parishes in England (work ongoing)
Articles to be merged:
*Place name origins into List of generic forms in British place names
*List of British place names and their meanings into List of places in the United Kingdom
Articles to be created:
*List of places in the United Kingdom
The latter article doesn't need to be massive, it can be divided into a list of lists.  List of places in Buckinghamshire is good enough as a stand alone article that separates off the place names from the county article (that was why it was originally created) and if one of those is created for every county in the country they can be listed on the new parent page being suggested and it could also a way of determining where wikipedia's weaknesses are with regard to UK place name coverage.  See here for a list of the list names.
Let's sort the UK out first of all, then we can worry about what the rest of the world are doing with their toponymy/etymology coverage. -- Graham  ☺ | Talk 17:18, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal 

message: I'm told that many backformed river names, like Arun (from Arundel), are the work of one antiquarian named Harrison (fl. 1577).  Some info about him might be appropriate here.  —Tamfang (talk) 07:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be William Harrison (clergyman), if we can find some sourced info that would be great. GameKeeper (talk) 12:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  What I have is Eilert Ekwall's Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-names which mentions that "Arun", for example, first appeared in Harrison's book.  —Tamfang (talk) 01:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  the great backformer 

message: : The language spoken by these [Stone Age] people may have been a non indo-european language (roughly equivalent to Basque) . . . .
Does 'equivalent' mean their language is thought (if non-IE) to be related to Basque? or that, on some ranking of languages, the unknown language stands near Basque? or merely that Britain, like Spain, has a substratum of names from an unrelated language?  In any case, this ought to be made more explicit. —Tamfang (talk) 23:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Much better. I'd got a little tangled up in the details there, and just taking a step back and making the sentence more vague definitely works (especially since there's nothing definite to say). MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 06:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  equivalent languages 

message: Is there an argument for moving this article to Toponymy in Britain? I feel like that is a more precise title, more encyclopedic, and is perhaps the way all these articles should go. MinisterForBadTimes (talk) 22:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My only comment is that it should read Toponymy in Great Britain, as that is the more correct name for the island.  But I should wait awhile for any other comments before making a move.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move?

message: : However, extension of the Norman system into the lowlands of Scotland resulted in the development of Scots as the spoken language, a hybrid based on Anglo-Saxon.
A hybrid with what?  I had understood it to be a distinct branch of Anglo-Saxon. – I didn't know "the Norman system" reached so far. —Tamfang (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scots 

message: Where does the ending "Ley" which occurs frequently in place names in the English Midlands originate? -- PBS (talk) 05:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See the first link under 'See also': List of generic forms in place names in the United Kingdom and Ireland. —Tamfang (talk) 05:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ley 

message: In the section "Celtic", the following claim is made:
:and similarly in the Fens a lesser-known non-English language was recorded as late as the twelfth century.
I've never heard of that, there is no source, and worst of all, The Fens#The Dark Ages and Middle Ages indicates that this claim has indeed been proposed, but also debunked, effectively. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fens 

message: I understand why you went and broke it. There are notes above that this has been 10 years coming. That said,  and . Directly, not in a "see also" at then end of a 25k textwall of general linguistic history. 
This is a lovely little treatise on toponymy, but people looking for "~ history" aren't looking for historiography and people looking for "~ placenames" aren't looking for this.
The current hatnote (essentially, to see the content you're looking for, look elsewhere) is probably a little too forceful. That said, "List of generic forms in place names in the United Kingdom and Ireland" is not at all helpfully phrased and needs to be very clearly dabbed at the top of the page somehow, given that it's the (otherwise difficult to guess) namespace where you've shunted the discussion of actual English placename elements. (Some of this probably needs to be addressed by turning incoming "English ~" redirects into dab pages linking variously to 
* English language and 
* English kingdom pages
and dabbing discussion of
* toponymy (placename theory) and
* actual content related to placenames.
I know you've been attempting to do that, but this is just a note that the pendulum swung too far one way. — LlywelynII 20:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Hatnote

message: Similarly, not to say that placename is right (although it is), but you need to pick one form and use it consistently through the article. — LlywelynII 20:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Placename, place name, place-name, pla-cenam e...

message: Completely erroneous example of "Norman French" influencing place names with the example of Chester le Street as recently as the 19th Century it was Chester On Street the 'le' obviously being a Victorian affectation. As usual people trying to make out that the Normans had more influence than they did on anything that the Englishman used in his everyday life (such as the building blocks of our language and place names which try as they might the Norman rulers couldn't influence).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.232.10 (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Norman French at All 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Toponymy of England. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141021043214/http://viking.no:80/e/england/e-viking_words_2.htm to http://www.viking.no/e/england/e-viking_words_2.htm#H
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110605075022/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=11347. to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=11347.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131112113100/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=6919 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=6919
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141228222736/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=3218 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=3218
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121005151531/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=3208 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=3208
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121005151536/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=5305 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=5305
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140224001906/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=4485 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=4485
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141021043214/http://viking.no:80/e/england/e-viking_words_2.htm to http://www.viking.no/e/england/e-viking_words_2.htm#H
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Toponymy of England. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110605074609/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=6919 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=6919
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110605073606/http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=4485 to http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/english/ins/kepn/detailpop.php?placeno=4485
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:10, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Toponymy of England. 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://web.archive.org/web/20130114221821/http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/freefun/didyouknow/placenames/scan.html to http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/freefun/didyouknow/placenames/scan.html
*Added  tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6734/is_/ai_n28530597
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I know this doesn't just involve these two articles but still, this is where I noticed it. I noticed in the articles London and England, Etymology of London and Toponymy of England, the terms used are, Toponomy for England and Etymology for London, is there a reason why these are different, why is the same term not used. I am mainly curious as I am writing an article on a small place in London, and wondered whether I should use the word Etymology or Toponomy for the section on the origin of that place name, I looked at these articles to see what the bigger better articles use, now I'm just confused as some use one and others the other one. I skip read the articles on Etymology and Toponomy and as I thought the first is origin of words, any words I presume, and the second is the origin of place names, so either could be said to be right, but which one should one prefer?  Carlwev  20:34, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Toponomy or Etymology?