Talk:New Bradwell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date of Bradwell Blitz[edit]

Does anybody have it? --Concrete Cowboy 20:22, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

the "Bradwell Blitz" consisted of two bombs on Sunday October 20th 1940. Frrostie 10:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cause of Bradwell Blitz[edit]

The text speculates that the Bradwell Blitz bombing might have been an attempt to hit Wolverton Railway Works. This I very much doubt as attacks on large industrial sites required multiple aircraft to be effective. More likely the railway line was seen and and attacked. Even with targeting flares involved, it is probable that some aircraft failed to find their primary target in the Midlands and chose the railway line as a secondary target on the way home. 82.9.70.201 (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it's a town?[edit]

Nothing at New towns in the United Kingdom about it, what evidence or reference do you have that this is a town? -- Francs2000 | Talk 19:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Define "town"? Here is a 1:10000 OS map [1]. Is your argument that it should be a village? I wouldn't start an edit war over it. It could well be regarded as a suburb of Wolverton, but traditionally it has been regarded as distinct.
It was built at around the same time as (new) Wolverton, on the other side of the tracks and canal, to house the less well paid workers on Wolverton railway works. Wolverton housed the craftsmen and Stony Stratford the managers.
There would be a reference in New towns in the United Kingdom if I put one there. Wolverton, Milton Keynes isn't there either, so it proves nothing. It is certainly new - the original Bradwell is a couple of miles to the south. ("New" is relative - it is about 100 years old, whereas Bradwell is a great deal older - must check Domesday). Does NTitUK imply "created under the New Towns Act"?
Define "town"?
In England it is any settlement that has received town charter to hold a market or fair, irrespective of size. This is an ancient law restricting trade (and putting money in the king's coffers of course). A common misconception is that the size of the settlement defines its town status however this is an American principle and has little to do with British law (see Towns of the United Kingdom). New Bradwell doesn't have a charter (I have just checked) and so it is definitely not a town.
Wolverton doesn't have a charter either (I have just checked) and so it would be just as misleading to list that as a town as New Bradwell. The village of Wolverton has existed for many years of course, it was just extended along with the construction of the railways.
Well no, not really. The inclosures pretty well completely cleared the place of everything but sheep. For all practical purposes, Wolverton was refounded with arrival of the canal and the railway. --Concrete Cowboy 23:40, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There would be a reference in New towns in the United Kingdom if I put one there.
Please don't, unless you can show a legal charter granting town status to either settlement. As I work in the same building as the Centre for Buckinghamshire Studies it is fairly easy for me to check these things and there is nothing in the CBS about either of these settlements receiving charters. -- Francs2000 | Talk 19:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
According to your logic, Stony Stratford is a town because it bought a market charter in the middle ages - despite being (a) until recently (a mere 100 years or so) split right down the middle along Watling Street into Wolverton Parish and Calverton Parish and (b) (until 1965) part of Wolverton Urban District and (c) much smaller than Wolverton. But still you tell me that Wolverton isn't a town??? Must we find the evil Prince John and give him his thirty silver marks? Are you seriously telling me that the market in Wolverton is illegal? Excuse me, but last time I looked, this was 2005, not 1505.
"In more modern times it is considered that a town becomes a city (or a village becomes a town) as soon as it reaches a certain population." - Towns of the United Kingdom - which then goes on feebly to say "The charter system is still the official way of recognising town status in the United Kingdom however [...] The population system of recognising towns has no official standing yet in the United Kingdom" I'm sorry, but to describe Wolverton as "not a town" is simply laughable. So Wolverton Town F.C. must become Wolverton Village F.C.? You are beginning to make the Traditional counties of England people seem almost sane! --Concrete Cowboy 23:40, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well call it what you will, I'm an easy going guy unlike the Traditional counties people who will return with their own brand of logic and keep coming back and wearing you down until you submit. Just be prepared for other people in the future who may give the same argument as me.
Modern trading licences have little to do with town status: if they did quite a lot of airfields up and down the country would be declared towns overnight. Not to mention fields where car boot sales are held every weekend, because their trading licences are the same. New town charters are given out and old ones revoked: Milton Keynes was given town status in the 1960s (ish), Brill had its status revoked at about the same time because the ancient right to hold a market wasn't being used.


Excuse me, but last time I looked, this was 2005, not 1505.
Welcome to the British legal system. Where else would it be legal to shoot Scotsmen wearing kilts with a bow and arrow? The legal position might be mentioned feebily in your opinion on the relevant article, but this is still the position and the law regarding town status still hasn't been repealed. But as I say if people in Wolverton believe it is a town (and I think calling your football team "Wolverton Town" is probably proof enough of where they stand) who am I to argue?
PS: Your edit comment: The Lord High Sheriff of Aylesbury says its only a village - I don't think there was any need for that. I'm only looking out for accuracy. If you don't like what I'm saying then don't listen to me, however it is worth bearing in mind that I did check my facts with the Centre for Buckinghamshire Studies. -- Francs2000 | Talk 02:42, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The "Sheriff of Aylesbury" was intended as an analogue of "Sheriff of Nottingham" (see Robin Hood), in the same vein as paying 30 silver marks to the Black Prince for permission to have a market. It was intended to be humourous, but ok, there was an edge to it. I accept that you are only the messenger decribing the law as it stands, but it's traditional to shoot the messenger! Well that's what it said in a Terry Pratchett book I read. <grin> --Concrete Cowboy 09:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What can I say? I had had a bad day and it was 3.45 am... -- Francs2000 | Talk 11:56, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Locally wolverton has always been known as a town and New Bradwell a village (I was born in New Bradwell and live here still) The simplilest definition of town is used, i.e. a village with a market is a town. Wolverton had and still does have a regular market, new bradwell doesn't and never had one. http://sb.thefreedictionary.com/town http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/town Those are the first two refferences I found, but it's the common British definition of the word town so it's usage in this context is fair and apropriate. Frrostie 13:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wolverton has a Town Council (though it used to be a UDC). New Bradwell has a Parish Council. 82.9.70.201 (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on New Bradwell. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:45, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New Bradwell. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Bradwell Blitz - a myth?[edit]

I can't find anything anywhere (ignoring copies of Wikipedia) that says that New Bradwell was ever bombed. Nor five people killed. The Living Archive only has a picture of a (small) crater in field near [old] Bradwell. Unless someone comes up with a reliable source, I will delete the section. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As nothing has turned up, I have deleted the section. But I'm leaving a copy of it here in case a wp:reliable source turns up, allowing it to be reinstated.

When the Second World War broke out in September 1939, blackout precautions were immediately put into effect, due to the dangers of night time bombing raids. Ironically, New Bradwell's new electric street lights, which had only been completed two weeks previously, were switched off and not used again for six years. Bradwell's Blitz consisted of two bombs on Sunday 20 October 1940. First, two flares were dropped at the end of Bridge Street, landing on the allotments, now the school playing fields. An unconfirmed theory surmises that the bombs may have been aimed at the Wolverton railway works, then engaged in war work. Then the two bombs were dropped on the western end of the high street, the first landing on the road outside "the Laurels", creating a 30 feet (9.1 m) crater, the second at the end of the high street, demolishing numbers 71, 73 & 75 and killing five people[citation needed]. The "Bradwell Blitz" was one of the more dramatic events in this part of North Buckinghamshire. (The activities at Bletchley Park a few miles south were top secret. Nevertheless, Old Bletchley was hit by four bombs – one of which hit the Park's main gate without exploding). The Bradwell Blitz was so-called because it happened during the Blitz, the fourth and last phase of the Battle of Britain.

There may be a book source somewhere that can be cited, provided that it was published before June 2007, which is when Frostie added it with this edit. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:16, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To suggest this is a myth is quite disgusting. This was a tragic event, resulting in the loss of five lives. Some of the family affected are still in the area and would not appreciate this attempt to erase their history. People who recall the crater site are still alive. Incomers casting doubt about this well known local event is pretty poor form. Bucks Country Council maintain the archives of the air raid warden reports for world war two bombing events within the county. The Bucks CC records are available online here and are very easy to find with any search engine. 81.99.178.220 (talk) 07:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for this very valuable response. The text above does not say that it is a myth: there is no evidence for that either. It asks the question in the hope that it will get someone to respond with the historical record, as you have done. Again, thank you. A fundamental principle of Wikipedia is that everything written must have be supported by a reliable source.
So where we are now is that the County Archive map shows a bomb strike but no detail. Someone (you?) needs to go to Aylesbury and find the precise report, its reference number, and a summary of what it says. If permitted, s photo of it would be great. Any volunteers? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:18, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Detail in the Bucks CC source is enough to support a record of the event: "St Giles Street and St James Street New Bradwell" and "3 houses demolished, 165 houses damaged, 5 killed, 3 seriously and 17 slightly injured. Occurred between 19th and 21st October.". In a rhetorical way, there is a suggestion implicit in that title that the event didn't happen. If this is a device to troll a response, well it worked but seems a pretty crass way to go about it. 81.99.178.220 (talk) 09:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The request for supporting evidence has gone unanswered for at least six years, possibly twelve. (See this old version. Trolling is trying deliberately to provoke a reaction for some kind of warped entertainment value, with no interest in the honest answer. You have no reason whatsoever to jump to that conclusion about my motives - in fact the reverse is true. I spent a great deal of time searching for the evidence before giving up. Even today, Google search responds with Your search - "Giles Street and St James Street New Bradwell" and "3 houses demolished, 165 houses ... - did not match any documents.. No, the section title is not a suggestion that it didn't happen, only that there is (or rather was) no evidence that it did. I also left a request for help at talk:Bletchley Park with no response.
I have now followed your link and found the source you cited. When I have access to a larger screen, I will move the text above back into the article, giving your link as the supporting citation. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_Bradwell&oldid=1200654835"