Talk:Ironbridge

message: I felt that the bridge itself needed a seperate article because it and the town of Ironbridge are completely seperate. Was the expand tag meant for expansion of information about the bridge or about the town? Oggy 15:35, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's try removing the expand tag & see what happens. There isn't a lot more one can say about the town... The Singing Badger 15:43, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split article 

message: It seems that at one point these were one article, and I have to say it's confusing to find them separated.  Ironbridge really doesn't contain any information beyond the bridge itself, and it's odd to see what looks like the same article listed twice in categories. –Ryan McDaniel 07:02, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - specifically, The Iron Bridge should be merged into Ironbridge, not vice versa (the merger label is unclear). The Singing Badger 22:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I would disagree. The Iron Bridge and the town Ironbridge are completely different. The town has a lot more to offer than just the bridge (although it seems many visit purely for the bridge). The amount of information contained in The Iron Bridge is far too much to include in an article about the town. It is however clear that the pages and categories need some slight tweaking, especially including more information about the town itself, but this is far less drastic than merging the two articles back together. Oggy 20:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's "a lot more to offer" about the town, can you add it?  As long as both articles are worth keeping in their own right, I agree there's no point in merging them.  As it stands, though, the town's article is pretty weak, and half of it refers back to the bridge anyway. –Ryan McDaniel 16:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't merge - one article is about the bridge, the other about the settlement. Two different things, although connected. David 19:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article about the bridge is certainly now established as an article (and is part of the History of Science WikiProject). The town's article has also improved over the past few days. Could we maybe remove the merge tags and perhaps add an expand tag to the articles? Oggy 08:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with The Iron Bridge 

message: The article states that the Merrythought factory closed in 2006.  Is this correct?  Or is the factory still operational?
Sak31122 21:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has now closed down. David 14:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To update, it was brought back into use by the company in 2010 and is a thriving if niche business today - see wiki article Merrythought.Cloptonson (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merrythought 

message: The introductory paragraph says:
 
"It (Ironbridge) lies in the parish of The Gorge, in what is now called the borough of Telford and Wrekin - a New Town, which began to be "built" 40 years ago."
Is the borough of Telford and Wrekin really a New Town? Citation needed. Thanks. --Lepton6 (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The borough of Telford and Wrekin ... is a New Town? 

message: The article states that Ironbridge is a town, but I am certain that it is not - I'm not enough of an expert to quote definitions, but I know from past experience (a friend and I once visited the 22 towns of Shropshire in a day (he provided the list), and Ironbridge certainly wasn't one of them). Hopefully someone with more knowledge can back me up?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chingwakabungya (talk • contribs) 13:08, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Town Status 

message: The first paragraph of the history section is  entirely unreferenced and reads as OR. Seems like the editor personally objects to the idea that the area was the birthplace of the industrial revolution. Fair enough. But since it is part of a World Heritage Site based on its contribution to the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution the idea that it’s not the birthplace may well be challenged and by Wikipedia policy it then needs reliable, 2nd Party sources to support the statements made. See WP:NOR for information. Dakinijones (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  History section reads as OR