|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Mar 18, 2017 20:21:14 GMT
I'd argue that the whole point of 'Mid' seats is that there's no one defining town nor any coherent identity. It's the seat you have left when everything else makes sense and deserves to be identified as such. If I had my way, it'd be put on a statutory footing, so that least change considerations no longer applied to any seat beginning with 'Mid' when redistributing boundaries.
Incidentally, St Ives in Cambridgeshire does lack anything resembling a local identity - there's a shitty-looking pub on the main route north out of town called the Seven Wives, because once you leave aside the inevitable pub named after Cromwell you've got no local names left, so you have to nick traditions from the Cornwall St Ives. Neither is really significant in any meaningful sense, though.
|
|
islington
Non-Aligned
Posts: 3,995
Member is Online
|
Post by islington on Mar 19, 2017 12:11:09 GMT
I've kept out of this on the grounds that boundaries are more important than names; I'd rather have good boundaries and rotten names than vice versa.
But fwiw, for me names should have - uniqueness (obviously) - brevity (ideally, only a single component; two if a single component would not be suitable; no more than two) - transparency (the name should be something that is understood as widely as possible) - and a respect for long-standing tradition does no harm at all
So it follows that I don't like the kind of 'gazetteer' names you get in Scotland, where they list every settlement they can think of. I'd prefer to pick one, usually the biggest but it might be the one with the greatest history or familiarity attached to it; add another if you feel you must; and leave it at that.
I don't mind compass-point names at all, and I rather like the practice of putting the compass-point at the end of town names and the front of county names. Apart from anything else, it creates an obvious verbal cue distinguishing seats that might otherwise get confused like, say, Leicester South and South Leicestershire.
I see no problem with 'Mid' names, provided the label is otherwise apt; I'd try to standardize practice as 'Mid' for counties (preceding the county name) and 'Central' for towns (following the town name).
Where a town is divided, I prefer compass-points to the names of districts, suburbs, &c; but I'll go along with the latter style in cases where the configuration of the seats means that compass-points aren't practical (Birmingham, Manchester) or where it represents a long-established tradition (Sheffield, Southampton). But the two styles should not be mixed within the same city (although a 'Central' seat is acceptable in a city that otherwise uses district names).
The point about brevity applies to compass-points too: simple 'North', 'East', &c, are preferable to 'North East', &c, except where the numbers or configuration of the seats make the latter style essential (e.g. the existing seats of Bristol NW and Coventry NE could perfectly well be Bristol N and Coventry E, as they lie wholly on the northern and eastern sides of their respective cities; this applies to counties too so the current SW Herts should be simply W Herts).
Where an existing name is well established, it should be continued in use if possible even if it may not be the name one might have chosen if drawing the seat from scratch. So I'd still call it St Ives, and more generally I'd try to respect the fact that some towns have a very long history of being used in constituency names even though they may be relatively small places not necessarily centrally located - Brigg is an example that springs to mind but there must be many others. In this spirit, I'd go along with existing illogicalities like E Devon and NE Derbyshire, but I'd avoid creating any new ones.
Obscure names should be avoided - any names that would make most people think "where the blazes is that?", "never heard of it", &c. Thus, in my plan, Knutsford not Tatton, W Cheshire not Eddisbury, and so on. Meaningless, absurd, obscure, or jejune LA names should likewise not be used, e.g. Castle Point, Hertsmere, Three Rivers, Wyre Forest, and so forth. Nor should the names of ancient hundreds be dredged out of antiquity (unless, of course, the name is still widely known in general non-political use). (One such name I allowed to survive was Bassetlaw, on the grounds that it is very well-established as a seat name in this area, but I admit that in my secret heart I'd have preferred Retford or N Notts.) Where the LA name, although obscure, is not entirely meaningless in that it is an actual town or village in the area, even if the place is not at all large or well-known, I might reluctantly accept it if there's no obvious alternative - e.g. Broxbourne, Gedling.
For reasons that aren't entirely clear, even to me, I appear to have a visceral dislike of names based on rivers (although I've accepted Southampton Test and Itchen).
I stress that all these rules are simply my preference, I'm not asserting that they're necessarily better than other posters' preferences. And I reiterate that it's the boundaries that really matter.
Edited to add: Oh yes, I forgot to say that when a name has two components, it should be borne in mind that in everyday usage it is likely that the second component will be commonly omitted, e.g. the MP for Halesowen and Rowley Regis (to take a random example) might often be described as simply the MP for Halesowen. So if we have a two-component name, we should try to ensure that the first component makes sense by itself.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,547
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 19, 2017 23:03:30 GMT
Off what carlton43 did, here's the same exercise for Hampshire, single word place-name constituencies in Hampshire: Aldershot Hook Basingstoke Whitchurch Romsey Winchester Eastleigh Fareham Gosport Petersfield Ringwood Hythe Bitterne Shirley Southsea Hilsea All are near the geographical centre bar Hythe (though it is in the centre of the most populated area) and Romsey (which is, outside Southampton, the only town in the constituency).
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 19, 2017 23:06:25 GMT
Off what carlton43 did, here's the same exercise for Hampshire, single word place-name constituencies in Hampshire: Hook Whitchurch Hythe Shirley Four out of sixteen names that would fail the ambiguity criterion. Not a great hit rate. The other twevle are great suggestions if you have to be as strict as Carlton would like.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,547
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 19, 2017 23:12:12 GMT
Off what carlton43 did, here's the same exercise for Hampshire, single word place-name constituencies in Hampshire: Hook Whitchurch Hythe Shirley Four out of sixteen names that would fail the ambiguity criterion. Not a great hit rate. The other twevle are great suggestions if you have to be as strict as Carlton would like. That's your criteria, not mine. I don't support single word place name constituencies, I was just getting into the spirit of his constriction. The name of a constituency should have a name identifiable to the people who live there not for the convenience of anyone else.
|
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Long may it rain
Posts: 5,535
|
Post by Foggy on Mar 19, 2017 23:19:50 GMT
Four out of sixteen names that would fail the ambiguity criterion. Not a great hit rate. The other twevle are great suggestions if you have to be as strict as Carlton would like. That's your criteria, not mine. I don't support single word place name constituencies, I was just getting into the spirit of his constriction. The name of a constituency should have a name identifiable to the people who live there not for the convenience of anyone else. Oh, I wasn't claiming it was anything but one of mine! Yes, a couple of your proposals would be slightly harsh on a second town in the seat that could also stand to be mentioned. I slightly disagree here and do think it should be fairly clear to people watching election night/the morning after election day (that aren't all anoraks like we are) what part of the country a constituency is located in. A lot of viewers would look at the four names I cited and think of Surrey, Shropshire, Kent and Warwickshire respectively.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,874
|
Post by jamie on Mar 19, 2017 23:41:42 GMT
Also using carlton43 idea, and quite possibly proving why it's not always usable (and why the boundaries are crap), here's the North East based on proposed constituencies: Single word - Proposed - My own suggestion Berwick - Berwick-Upon-Tweed and Ashington - Ashington and Berwick Blyth - Blyth Valley - Blyth and Cramlington Hexham - Hexham and Morpeth - Hexham and Morpeth Tynemouth - Tynemouth - Tynemouth Wallsend - Tyneside North - Wallsend and Benton Jesmond - Newcastle Upon Tyne East - Newcastle Upon Tyne Central Kenton - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West Blaydon - Blaydon - Newcastle Upon Tyne South West and Whickham Gateshead - Gateshead - Gateshead Jarrow - Jarrow - Jarrow and Sunderland North West Boldon - South Shields - South Shields Sunderland - Sunderland Central - Sunderland Central Washington - Sunderland West - Sunderland West and Washington Beamish - Durham North and Chester-Le-Street - Chester-Le-Street and Stanley Seaham - Easington and Houghton - Peterlee and Houghton Durham - Durham, City of - Durham Consett - Durham West and Teesdale - Consett, Teesdale and Winlaton Sedgefield - Durham East - Durham East Auckland - Bishop Auckland - Bishop Auckland and Spennymoor Darlington - Darlington - Darlington Hartlepool - Hartlepool and Billingham - Hartlepool and Billingham East Stockton - Stockton West - Stockton Thornaby - Middlesbrough West and Stockton East - Middlesbrough West and Thornaby Saltburn - Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland - Middlesbrough South East and Saltburn Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 19, 2017 23:55:40 GMT
Also using carlton43 idea, and quite possibly proving why it's not always usable (and why the boundaries are crap), here's the North East based on proposed constituencies: Single word - Proposed - My own suggestion Berwick - Berwick-Upon-Tweed and Ashington - Ashington and Berwick Blyth - Blyth Valley - Blyth and Cramlington Hexham - Hexham and Morpeth - Hexham and Morpeth Tynemouth - Tynemouth - Tynemouth Wallsend - Tyneside North - Wallsend and Benton Jesmond - Newcastle Upon Tyne East - Newcastle Upon Tyne Central Kenton - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West Blaydon - Blaydon - Newcastle Upon Tyne South West and Whickham Gateshead - Gateshead - Gateshead Jarrow - Jarrow - Jarrow and Sunderland North West Boldon - South Shields - South Shields Sunderland - Sunderland Central - Sunderland Central Washington - Sunderland West - Sunderland West and Washington Beamish - Durham North and Chester-Le-Street - Chester-Le-Street and Stanley Seaham - Easington and Houghton - Peterlee and Houghton Durham - Durham, City of - Durham Consett - Durham West and Teesdale - Consett, Teesdale and Winlaton Sedgefield - Durham East - Durham East Auckland - Bishop Auckland - Bishop Auckland and Spennymoor Darlington - Darlington - Darlington Hartlepool - Hartlepool and Billingham - Hartlepool and Billingham East Stockton - Stockton West - Stockton Thornaby - Middlesbrough West and Stockton East - Middlesbrough West and Thornaby Saltburn - Middlesbroufh South and East Cleveland - Middlesbrough South East and Saltburn Redcar - Middlesbroufh North East and Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar I like that approach. I agree the entire left hand single name list with just these exceptions South Shields NOT Boldon Chester-Le-Street NOT Beamish Bishop Auckland NOT Auckland
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 20, 2017 0:04:21 GMT
I've kept out of this on the grounds that boundaries are more important than names; I'd rather have good boundaries and rotten names than vice versa. But fwiw, for me names should have - uniqueness (obviously) - brevity (ideally, only a single component; two if a single component would not be suitable; no more than two) - transparency (the name should be something that is understood as widely as possible) - and a respect for long-standing tradition does no harm at all So it follows that I don't like the kind of 'gazetteer' names you get in Scotland, where they list every settlement they can think of. I'd prefer to pick one, usually the biggest but it might be the one with the greatest history or familiarity attached to it; add another if you feel you must; and leave it at that. I don't mind compass-point names at all, and I rather like the practice of putting the compass-point at the end of town names and the front of county names. Apart from anything else, it creates an obvious verbal cue distinguishing seats that might otherwise get confused like, say, Leicester South and South Leicestershire. I see no problem with 'Mid' names, provided the label is otherwise apt; I'd try to standardize practice as 'Mid' for counties (preceding the county name) and 'Central' for towns (following the town name). Where a town is divided, I prefer compass-points to the names of districts, suburbs, &c; but I'll go along with the latter style in cases where the configuration of the seats means that compass-points aren't practical (Birmingham, Manchester) or where it represents a long-established tradition (Sheffield, Southampton). But the two styles should not be mixed within the same city (although a 'Central' seat is acceptable in a city that otherwise uses district names). The point about brevity applies to compass-points too: simple 'North', 'East', &c, are preferable to 'North East', &c, except where the numbers or configuration of the seats make the latter style essential (e.g. the existing seats of Bristol NW and Coventry NE could perfectly well be Bristol N and Coventry E, as they lie wholly on the northern and eastern sides of their respective cities; this applies to counties too so the current SW Herts should be simply W Herts). Where an existing name is well established, it should be continued in use if possible even if it may not be the name one might have chosen if drawing the seat from scratch. So I'd still call it St Ives, and more generally I'd try to respect the fact that some towns have a very long history of being used in constituency names even though they may be relatively small places not necessarily centrally located - Brigg is an example that springs to mind but there must be many others. In this spirit, I'd go along with existing illogicalities like E Devon and NE Derbyshire, but I'd avoid creating any new ones. Obscure names should be avoided - any names that would make most people think "where the blazes is that?", "never heard of it", &c. Thus, in my plan, Knutsford not Tatton, W Cheshire not Eddisbury, and so on. Meaningless, absurd, obscure, or jejune LA names should likewise not be used, e.g. Castle Point, Hertsmere, Three Rivers, Wyre Forest, and so forth. Nor should the names of ancient hundreds be dredged out of antiquity (unless, of course, the name is still widely known in general non-political use). (One such name I allowed to survive was Bassetlaw, on the grounds that it is very well-established as a seat name in this area, but I admit that in my secret heart I'd have preferred Retford or N Notts.) Where the LA name, although obscure, is not entirely meaningless in that it is an actual town or village in the area, even if the place is not at all large or well-known, I might reluctantly accept it if there's no obvious alternative - e.g. Broxbourne, Gedling. For reasons that aren't entirely clear, even to me, I appear to have a visceral dislike of names based on rivers (although I've accepted Southampton Test and Itchen). I stress that all these rules are simply my preference, I'm not asserting that they're necessarily better than other posters' preferences. And I reiterate that it's the boundaries that really matter. Edited to add: Oh yes, I forgot to say that when a name has two components, it should be borne in mind that in everyday usage it is likely that the second component will be commonly omitted, e.g. the MP for Halesowen and Rowley Regis (to take a random example) might often be described as simply the MP for Halesowen. So if we have a two-component name, we should try to ensure that the first component makes sense by itself. Go along with a lot of that, but Bassetlaw is just better than North Notts for reasons of history and acceptance, and enormously better than Retford which would ensure local warfare. Worksop is larger, older and far more historic that Retford a mere child of A1 and ECML! Retford also considers itself a cut above and tend to Conservative. Worksop is far more Labour as befits a solid Labour seat.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,874
|
Post by jamie on Mar 20, 2017 0:07:12 GMT
Also using carlton43 idea, and quite possibly proving why it's not always usable (and why the boundaries are crap), here's the North East based on proposed constituencies: Single word - Proposed - My own suggestion Berwick - Berwick-Upon-Tweed and Ashington - Ashington and Berwick Blyth - Blyth Valley - Blyth and Cramlington Hexham - Hexham and Morpeth - Hexham and Morpeth Tynemouth - Tynemouth - Tynemouth Wallsend - Tyneside North - Wallsend and Benton Jesmond - Newcastle Upon Tyne East - Newcastle Upon Tyne Central Kenton - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West Blaydon - Blaydon - Newcastle Upon Tyne South West and Whickham Gateshead - Gateshead - Gateshead Jarrow - Jarrow - Jarrow and Sunderland North West Boldon - South Shields - South Shields Sunderland - Sunderland Central - Sunderland Central Washington - Sunderland West - Sunderland West and Washington Beamish - Durham North and Chester-Le-Street - Chester-Le-Street and Stanley Seaham - Easington and Houghton - Peterlee and Houghton Durham - Durham, City of - Durham Consett - Durham West and Teesdale - Consett, Teesdale and Winlaton Sedgefield - Durham East - Durham East Auckland - Bishop Auckland - Bishop Auckland and Spennymoor Darlington - Darlington - Darlington Hartlepool - Hartlepool and Billingham - Hartlepool and Billingham East Stockton - Stockton West - Stockton Thornaby - Middlesbrough West and Stockton East - Middlesbrough West and Thornaby Saltburn - Middlesbroufh South and East Cleveland - Middlesbrough South East and Saltburn Redcar - Middlesbroufh North East and Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar I like that approach. I agree the entire left hand single name list with just these exceptions South Shields NOT Boldon Chester-Le-Street NOT Beamish Bishop Auckland NOT Auckland I'm actually ok with the last 2. Beamish is more central and still well known (at least locally) and Auckland refers to basically the same area as Bishop Auckland. The single word names I find unacceptable are Boldon, Kenton, Hexham and Berwick. Otherwise, it's mostly a decent approach.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 20, 2017 0:21:45 GMT
Off what carlton43 did, here's the same exercise for Hampshire, single word place-name constituencies in Hampshire: Aldershot Hook Basingstoke Whitchurch Romsey Winchester Eastleigh Fareham Gosport Petersfield Ringwood Hythe Bitterne Shirley Southsea Hilsea All are near the geographical centre bar Hythe (though it is in the centre of the most populated area) and Romsey (which is, outside Southampton, the only town in the constituency). Endorse the concept and know all the places myself but wonder if some distinctive enough? Whitchurch Not really well known and there is the better known one in Shropshire. Or it is to me and to Google? Ringwood Just a bit minor and insignificant? Hythe Known because of oil but Kent far better known and more famous (carnival/army/brewery/cinque port/railway) and use with Folkestone? Shirley The West Midlands better known and bigger? Bitterne You sure? Hilsea You sure?
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 20, 2017 0:25:12 GMT
Four out of sixteen names that would fail the ambiguity criterion. Not a great hit rate. The other twevle are great suggestions if you have to be as strict as Carlton would like. That's your criteria, not mine. I don't support single word place name constituencies, I was just getting into the spirit of his constriction. The name of a constituency should have a name identifiable to the people who live there not for the convenience of anyone else. Disagree completely. Names are always for the use of others. You know who you are and they know where they live............The identifier is for others outside the area and must have recognition value.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 0:41:02 GMT
Also using carlton43 idea, and quite possibly proving why it's not always usable (and why the boundaries are crap), here's the North East based on proposed constituencies: Single word - Proposed - My own suggestion Berwick - Berwick-Upon-Tweed and Ashington - Ashington and Berwick Blyth - Blyth Valley - Blyth and Cramlington Hexham - Hexham and Morpeth - Hexham and Morpeth Tynemouth - Tynemouth - Tynemouth Wallsend - Tyneside North - Wallsend and Benton Jesmond - Newcastle Upon Tyne East - Newcastle Upon Tyne Central Kenton - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West - Newcastle Upon Tyne North West Blaydon - Blaydon - Newcastle Upon Tyne South West and WhickhamGateshead - Gateshead - Gateshead Jarrow - Jarrow - Jarrow and Sunderland North West Boldon - South Shields - South Shields Sunderland - Sunderland Central - Sunderland Central Washington - Sunderland West - Sunderland West and Washington Beamish - Durham North and Chester-Le-Street - Chester-Le-Street and Stanley Seaham - Easington and Houghton - Peterlee and Houghton Durham - Durham, City of - Durham Consett - Durham West and Teesdale - Consett, Teesdale and Winlaton Sedgefield - Durham East - Durham East Auckland - Bishop Auckland - Bishop Auckland and Spennymoor Darlington - Darlington - Darlington Hartlepool - Hartlepool and Billingham - Hartlepool and Billingham East Stockton - Stockton West - Stockton Thornaby - Middlesbrough West and Stockton East - Middlesbrough West and Thornaby Saltburn - Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland - Middlesbrough South East and Saltburn Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar - Middlesbrough North East and Redcar Coughs loudly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2017 0:43:51 GMT
That's your criteria, not mine. I don't support single word place name constituencies, I was just getting into the spirit of his constriction. The name of a constituency should have a name identifiable to the people who live there not for the convenience of anyone else. Disagree completely. Names are always for the use of others. You know who you are and they know where they live............The identifier is for others outside the area and must have recognition value. Totally disagree as well. We don't want people from the wrong Hythe writing to the MP or similar mix ups, its obviously undesirable. Id associate Hook with Hampshire personally, but am aware of the other. Shirley is to most people the bottom but of Soluhull and Hythe is likewise a town full of old people near Folkestone.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,547
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 20, 2017 1:13:33 GMT
Off what carlton43 did, here's the same exercise for Hampshire, single word place-name constituencies in Hampshire: Aldershot Hook Basingstoke Whitchurch Romsey Winchester Eastleigh Fareham Gosport Petersfield Ringwood Hythe Bitterne Shirley Southsea Hilsea All are near the geographical centre bar Hythe (though it is in the centre of the most populated area) and Romsey (which is, outside Southampton, the only town in the constituency). Endorse the concept and know all the places myself but wonder if some distinctive enough? Whitchurch Not really well known and there is the better known one in Shropshire. Or it is to me and to Google? Ringwood Just a bit minor and insignificant? Hythe Known because of oil but Kent far better known and more famous (carnival/army/brewery/cinque port/railway) and use with Folkestone? Shirley The West Midlands better known and bigger? Bitterne You sure? Hilsea You sure? As I mentioned they're all pretty geographically central to the constituencies (which is what I was looking to do with the single word placename restraint) bar Hythe on that list. I wouldn't say Ringwood is minor, it's the same size as Lymington for example and much bigger than Fordingbridge in the constituency. As we are restricted to one word the Portsmouth and Southampton constituencies had to be named after suburbs. Again I went for the most centralish significant ones. This is what I would call the Hampshire constituencies released from any constraint (bar my own, I don't like compass points in any name unless they're part of a placename and try to avoid non-town based council names wherever possible). Aldershot & Farnborough Yateley & Fleet Andover & Tadley Basingstoke Winchester Romsey Eastleigh Petersfield & Alton Southampton Test Southampton Itchen Lymington & Fordingbridge Brockenhurst & Waterside Fareham Gosport Havant Portsmouth Spithead Portsmouth Port Creek Descriptive and identifiable!
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,547
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 20, 2017 1:22:06 GMT
Disagree completely. Names are always for the use of others. You know who you are and they know where they live............The identifier is for others outside the area and must have recognition value. Totally disagree as well. We don't want people from the wrong Hythe writing to the MP or similar mix ups, its obviously undesirable. Id associate Hook with Hampshire personally, but am aware of the other. Shirley is to most people the bottom but of Soluhull and Hythe is likewise a town full of old people near Folkestone. All of which goes to show why single word names are undesirable... Hythe & Totton or Southampton Shirley would be very clear. Hook & Fleet likewise...
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 20, 2017 1:25:10 GMT
Endorse the concept and know all the places myself but wonder if some distinctive enough? Whitchurch Not really well known and there is the better known one in Shropshire. Or it is to me and to Google? Ringwood Just a bit minor and insignificant? Hythe Known because of oil but Kent far better known and more famous (carnival/army/brewery/cinque port/railway) and use with Folkestone? Shirley The West Midlands better known and bigger? Bitterne You sure? Hilsea You sure? As I mentioned they're all pretty geographically central to the constituencies (which is what I was looking to do with the single word placename restraint) bar Hythe on that list. I wouldn't say Ringwood is minor, it's the same size as Lymington for example and much bigger than Fordingbridge in the constituency. As we are restricted to one word the Portsmouth and Southampton constituencies had to be named after suburbs. Again I went for the most centralish significant ones. This is what I would call the Hampshire constituencies released from any constraint (bar my own, I don't like compass points in any name unless they're part of a placename and try to avoid non-town based council names wherever possible). Aldershot & Farnborough Yateley & Fleet Andover & Tadley Basingstoke Winchester Romsey Eastleigh Petersfield & Alton Southampton Test Southampton Itchen Lymington & Fordingbridge Brockenhurst & Waterside Fareham Gosport Havant Portsmouth Spithead Portsmouth Port Creek Descriptive and identifiable! Fair enough and get your drift. Could live with those but prefer Aldershot Fleet Andover Petersfield Brockenhurst Portsmouth N Portsmouth S
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,874
|
Post by jamie on Mar 20, 2017 11:06:18 GMT
Blaydon - Blaydon - Newcastle Upon Tyne South West and Whickham Coughs loudly Boundary commission drew it not me! Blaydon is central in the constituency but on the name alone I wouldn't think the seat was mostly made up of Newcastle. It needs Whickham tacked on the end because Whickham is much more separate from Newcastle than Blaydon and also because Blaydon is misleading since Winlaton is in a different constituency despite it really being just one place.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,547
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Mar 20, 2017 11:24:50 GMT
Whitchurch Not really well known and there is the better known one in Shropshire. Or it is to me and to Google? Is Google localized? 7/10 on the first page are Whitchurch, Cardiff, for me. Yes. It knows where you live!
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 20, 2017 12:14:24 GMT
Whitchurch Not really well known and there is the better known one in Shropshire. Or it is to me and to Google? Is Google localized? 7/10 on the first page are Whitchurch, Cardiff, for me. No. Shropshire is nowhere near me and I don't think I had ever made a Whitchurch input. You will be making Welsh-oriented enquiries frequently so it would slew your Whitchurch to Wales but not mine. Mine would be from main menu preferencing the largest or best known or more enquired after.
|
|