Talk:Silsden

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Yorkshire Mid‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Silsden is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Village vs Town[edit]

I have reverted the anonymous edit from village to town back to village. As far as I know Silsden does not have & never had a regular market or fair so is a village. If, on the other hand, someone can present a good case, for Silsden being a town, I'll change it properly. :-) MGSpiller 22:11, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Silsden is home to some 9,000 people and has an elected mayor - it should be classified as a town.

I suspect that Silsden has never been granted a Town Charter. Instead it seems to be a Civil parish, under recent legislation Parishes can declare themselves towns. The current consensus on Wikipedia is that Civil Parishes should be categorised as such whether or not they declare themselves as towns. There are villages bigger than 9,000 e.g. Kidlington and towns smaller e.g. Cleobury Mortimer. The clinching piece of evidence would be a town charter or a market charter on the one hand or a resolution by the Parish council on the other. Another key piece of evidence would be a regular market or fair. MGSpiller 19:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"A Pictorial History of "Old Cobbydale" by renowned local historian Willaim Neil Cathey mentions half yearly Sheep and Cattle fairs on the Punch Bowl Hill, in the Spring and Autumn. Sheep and cattle pens filled Punch Bowl Hill, both sides of Kirgate and Bolton road. The fairs ended in 1914.

Quality of the Article[edit]

I don't know much about Silsden, but I recognize bad writing when I see it. I labelled it "unencyclopedic". If anyone thinks I am wrong, here is the place to discuss it. Eran of Arcadia 16:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found out when it was vandalised and reverted. Eran of Arcadia 16:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Silsden/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

.

~~Requires infobox~~ Done
Requires photographs
Requires additional references adding using one of the {{Cite}} templates
Requires existing references converting to use one of the {{Cite}} templates
Requires copy-edit for WP:MOS

Keith D (talk) 14:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 18:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 06:11, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Silsden. 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) 07:12, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]