Talk:Piercebridge

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the name Piercebridge is old but not old enough. It should be considered that thee’sbridge Or triasbridge should be considered.

"The Catraeth kingdom" will probably be as mysterious and unidentifiable to most readers as it is to me.[edit]

"The Catraeth kingdom" will probably be as mysterious and unidentifiable to most readers as it is to me.--Wetman (talk) 22:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have (reluctantly) now linked "Catraeth" to Battle of Catraeth, not because it's a battle but because the Wiki article goes some way to explaining what the Catraeth kingdom probably was. It is already referred to in the citation.--Storye book (talk) 09:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Possibility[edit]

It is possible that the first element of the name Piercebridge is a contraction of the tribal name 'Brigantes'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.252.186 (talk) 13:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that; a good idea. We need an online citation for this before adding it to the article: do you happen to know if there is one? Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 22:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know of one and that is why I didn't edit the article. I (an amateur toponymy sleuth) placed this idea in the talk page for the sake of introducing what I hoped to be an interesting speculation, which might in turn induce an academic to take the idea seriously. Who knows? That might lead to a possible citation one day. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.149.139 (talk) 23:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And I'd just like to add for the record that, in my opinion, 'Pierce' is almost certainly a contraction/mutation of 'Brigantes'. Cheers again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.149.139 (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you'll get any academic to take you seriously without (a) your own grounds for your assertion; (b) that citation; (c) your registration at Wikipedia so you can record this conversation for future reference and any academic genius who reads your idea in five years' time can message you with the results of his/her research and give you the credit.--Storye book (talk) 14:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(a) 'pierce' and 'Brigantes' are alliterative (it takes a genius to spot it and, yes, I am an academic) (b) what citation? (c) I don't need to register at Wikipedia - the idea is now on the record. I am not looking for personal credit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.193.42 (talk) 23:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the possibility of triasbridge is a possible. 95.151.6.71 (talk) 02:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A citation is a reference, to a book, a paper, a web site, which supports the claim, like the ones already in the article. There are many reasons for registering, one important one in your case is to give you a single account: your contributions on this page are all with different IP addresses, so if an editor wanted to contact you they would not know which to use. Even if they sent a message to all three IP talk pages, the next time you log on with a different IP address again you would miss the messages. It also gives you full access to Wikipedia - some things cannot be done without registering, such as editing protected pages, creating new pages.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:33, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Piercebridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Piercebridge. 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) 22:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

confusion[edit]

Why are trouts important for preservation?

Why is "transport" only about previous river crossings - shouldn't that be part of "history"?

And why was the former bridge upstream, when the roman bridge was most downstream and the modern bridge is the most upstream one of at least 4 bridges that have been here?

And why is here more about the bridges than in Piercebridge_Roman_Bridge where is only a few sentences and a crude theory? 47.71.41.26 (talk) 08:25, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Piercebridge&oldid=1208369111"