Talk:Scarborough, North Yorkshire/Archive 1

Rename
Let's move it to Scarborough, England and keep Scarborough as the disambig page, since the Scarborough in Canada is like 10 times bigger than this one!--Sonjaaa 06:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That's as may be, but the vast, vast majority of the links to Scarborough are for the English town, and are now pointing to the wrong place. Plus "(England)" is not the proper disambiguation for towns. Plus you're supposed to cleanup redirects once you've moved a page. I've moved it back for - use WP:RM properly if you really think it should be moved. — sjorford++ 08:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Pity they moved it, really, especially since as of now, 7 of the top 10 Google links are related to the English town, and two relate to Scarborough, Maine. This place in Canada (nicknamed 'Scarberia') doesn't come close. 133.67.65.24 06:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Spa Bridge NOT Valley Bridge
The picture at the bottom page is of Spa Bridge, a foot bridge at the end of Valley road. Valley bridge is futher up Valley Road (away from the sea) and has a road over it. I can't seem to edit the picture's title to correct it. - Thank you for correcting this!

is there any pictures of valley bridge? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.143.193.91 (talk) 23:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Photo's available for Scarborough Lighthouse
I have some photo's of Scarborough Lighthouse on my website that are available for use, with credit if anyone wishes to include them. They can be seen at the following locations

http://www.pbase.com/barking_mad/image/44699808 http://www.pbase.com/barking_mad/image/62519627 http://www.pbase.com/barking_mad/image/66858805 http://www.pbase.com/barking_mad/image/44699807 Barking_Mad

Are these photos still available? These links are dead. Flarpster (talk) 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Population
I'm going to post this here on the offchance the anonymous editor might read it. The population of 100,000+ for Scarborough is for the whole borough of Scarborough. This is not the same thing as the town of Scarborough. The borough of Scarborough contains several towns, including Whitby and Filey, but this article refers only to the town of Scarborough. The population of the town of Scarborough is only about 50,000. From the Scarborough Borough Council site:


 * ''Key Facts about the Borough


 * Scarborough Borough covers an area of 81,654 hectares or 315.27 square miles.The Borough's population is 106,243 (Source: 2001 Census Area Statistics), with 60% of residents living in the three major urban areas of Scarborough, Whitby and Filey.


 * The population of Scarborough Town (comprising Castle, Central, Eastfield, Falsgrave Park, Newby, North Bay, Northstead, Ramshill, Stepney, Weaponness and Woodlands wards) is 50,135. (Source: 2001 Census Area Statistics)


 * The population of Whitby Town (comprising Mayfield, Streonshalh and Whitby West Cliff wards) is 13,594. (Source: 2001 Census Area Statistics).


 * The population of Filey Town (comprising Filey ward) is 6,468. (Source: 2001 Census Area Statistics)

So Scarborough borough does have a population of 106,000, but this information belongs in the article Scarborough (district). The town of Scarborough has a population of 50,000, and this information belongs in this article, Scarborough. I hope that's clear, because I'm running out of ways to explain this. — sjorford++ 17:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC) "Scarborough District would be classed the same as Greater London. Therefore, the equal meaning of Metropolitan Area means the District, and the urban is the villages usually associated with the town. e.g. eastfield, crossgates, cayton etc. - User:jrobin08 18:49, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Residents
Just a query, does anyone know what adjective is used for residents of Scarborough? In the Scarborough, Ontario article there was some discussion over the suspicion that the typically Toronto use of Scarberian for a resident of Scarborough possibly being a pejoritive, or at least a derivitive of the nickname Scarberia, but no one being aware of any other adjective. So I'm just curious about the original. Any help? WilyD 18:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

'''I believe it to be Scarborian. Having lived in Scarborough this is the only term I have heard used. Hope this helps. AndyP543 01:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)'''

Yes, Scarborian is the term I'm familiar with from my 5 years living there. Nick Fraser 13:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Defintely Scarborian. Dazza-man 20.16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Whitby-folk, call Scarborough people 'Algerino's', nobody seems to know why?

Scarborough F.C fans are known as Seadogs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 10:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

A Scarborian from the original 'old' town, refers to themself as a 'Bottom-ender', not an expression used out of town! I believe it was a term used to distinguish between old Scarborough fishing 'village', and the inland settlement of Falsgrave, ( which is now a district of the town), in medieval times. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 18:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I can also vouch for 'Scarborian' Scottjbroughton (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Malcolm Hebden
Could someone add why he is connected to Scarborough? The town isn't mentioned at all on his wiki page Malcolm Hebden... Thanks Desdinova 15:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

He used to work in various capacities for the Stephen Joseph Theatre, and reside in the town. You would be correct in assuming that he was not born and/or raised in Scarborough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 13:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
This article has been renamed from Scarborough to Scarborough, North Yorkshire as the result of a move request.

Scarborough → Scarborough, North Yorkshire — The place in Ontario has a population of 600,000; the place in England has a population of 50,000 Fishhead64 22:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

 * 1) Support move and a redirect going to the Ontario city with a link for the UK city at top. However, due to the ambiguity of the cities it should be at Scarborough, Ontario. Singular cities names should only go where there is unquestion uniquness and lack of ambiguity. 205.157.110.11 22:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support the move, oppose the redirect to the Ontario city. I would suggest Scarborough (disambiguation) be moved to Scarborough.  There isn't a preeminent use of the term and WP:DAB suggest the disambiguation be moved to Scarborough. --Bobblehead 04:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Strong Support - clearly, other town is large enough to allow for a disambig. Per WP:DAB, disambiguation should be used when there is no clear majority, and, in this case, Scarborough in Yorkshire obviously doesn't fit it. Patstuarttalk 05:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Support move, oppose redirect of Scarborough to Scarborough, Ontario. Instead, Scarborough (disambiguation) should me moved to Scarborough. Indeed, Scarborough, Ontario has 600,000+ people, but it isn't a separate entity any more, but a part of Toronto (like Etobicoke, East York, York, etc), and at any rate I don't think it's necessarily the primary usage of the name (even tho' I'm only a few subway stops away and it's the first thing I think of). --  SigPig  |SEND - OVER 05:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Support move, and change Scarborough to be the disambiguous page. Wikipedia needs to reflect a world view, not a UK or US-centric view. Coming first doesn't necessarily make it the default. Especially when newer city is much larger, and a culturally distinct part of a major world city. RoyalbroilT : C 04:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Support move of page and replacing Scarborough with a disambiguation page. City size is not the only factor in determining if it is the primary usage of a term. Misdirected articles are much easier to find and redirect if they are to a dab page. Vegaswikian 06:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Ontario's Scarborough is just an "area" and former municipality while the British version is an active city. Population is not in this case necessarily reflective of the prominence of one place over the other. The Scarborough article should be the disambig page as previously suggested. --TinMan 07:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 8) Support, as per reasons given, and because "the U.K. Scarborough came first" is not a good reason to determine where the disambiguation page should go. Skeezix1000 21:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Support, Scarborough should link to disambig, and the actual site should be renamed Scarborough, (North) Yorkshire. bunny 02:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 10) Support Scarborough → Scarborough, North Yorkshire, Scarborough (disambiguation) → Scarborough. "North Yorkshire" is used in the lead and the category, not "Yorkshire". I have visited three of the places on the dab page (in different countries, including both this one and Ontario), and asked my wife "Have we been to Scarborough" with no context and she picked a different one than I did. --Scott Davis Talk 22:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 11) Support Scarborough → Scarborough, North Yorkshire, and then Scarborough (disambiguation) → Scarborough. CarolGray 08:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Survey - in opposition to the move

 * 1) I'm afraid I have to oppose. I do not think the population should be regarded as the deciding factor, as that amounts to a failure of logic and debate defaulting to a mere headcount. To me, the deciding factor is that Canadian cities are often referred to with their province (just as American cities are almost invariably referred to with their state). I would also say that 'North Yorkshire' is inappropriate (a 1974 creation for local government only). Were the move to go ahead, it would be better to move to Scarborough, Yorkshire in line with the best precedent of Richmond, Yorkshire. Sam Blacketer 22:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I would be okay with "Yorkshire" rather than "North Yorkshire." Given that your deciding factor is regular practice in naming Canadian cities, the situation is in fact mixed.  See for example, Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Ottawa, to name a few. Given this refutation, would you be prepared to reconsider? Fishhead64 23:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I wasn't talking only about Wikipedia, but mentions in general. However I did also look at List of cities in Canada where most of the links include the Province name. Sam Blacketer 23:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * For the most part the Canadian convention makes sense, except for Vancouver. That should be disambiguated because there are several other Vancouvers. 205.157.110.11 00:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's only one to my knowledge, in the State of Washington, USA, the population of which is more than fourteen times smaller of that of Vancouver, BC. Fishhead64 01:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * City size doesn't mean as much as you seem to be implying. The purpose of disambiguation is to help the reader and person searching for an article they are interested in. There are other articles that someone interested in Vancouver would search for. Again, for the most part the Canadian convention makes sense except in cases like Vancouver and Scarborough. When there are other topics that a reader could be searching for, there should be disambiguation consideration. 205.157.110.11 03:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That is somewhat disingenuous. Mention Vancouver or Ottowa or Toronto in Europe ot Africa or Asia, and most people will think of the Canadian cities. Mention Scarborough, and I doubt that many will think of Canada. -- Beardo 06:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone recently proposed that Vancouver should be disambiguated, for reasons similar to the ones mentioned by 205.157.110.11 here, and it was very soundly defeated. Skeezix1000 21:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - this came first and is still the place most likely to be thought of - Are you going to Scarborough Fair ? -- Beardo 06:46, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Of course it came to mind first; you live in Britain, where you will have heard of this one. When I think of Norfolk, I only think of the city in Virginia, but that doesn't mean Norfolk, Virginia gets its own page. Same with Richmond. Patstuarttalk 21:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose - Scarborough, Ontario is now just part of Toronto, and indeed having 'The Scarborough name is still used by most local residents' on its wikipedia page does suggest that calling that area Scarborough may be a more local thing or old fashioned as the 'still' part implies. The fact it has almost 10x the population should not, as some people are saying, be reason alone to have Scarborough redirected. People generally do not associate Scarborough (when by itself) with a part of Toronto in Canada. I do believe that the coastal town in England is where most people's thoughts go when they hear Scarborough mentioned. Stev17 10:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose The Scarborough in England is the original and the one in Canada is dar more obscure than its population implies because it is part of Toronto's metro. Sumahoy 21:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is now a part of Toronto, but for nearly 200 years until 1998 it was a city in its own rite, and the area east of Victoria Park Ave. is still known as Scarborough throughout Canada. Obscurity is hard to measure, and often depends on where the observer is sitting.  A Google search suggests relative celebrity between the competing localities is a bit of a wash, and in such a case Scarborough should at the very least redirect to a disambiguation page. Fishhead64 00:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose The place in England is the original and the place in Ontario is just a suburb of Toronto. Sumahoy 21:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC) - double vote struck, 128.118.60.168 23:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And the Boston in England was the original - try clicking the link and see where it takes you. Fishhead64 21:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose The Scarborough in England is the original and the one users will most recognise, this page also explains where the name came from. bornandbredscarborough 13:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose. I have the odd friend in Toronto (he's a very odd friend) who suggests that what's been said above about Scarborough, Ontario having been largely absorbed is correct.  I disagree with Fishhead64 that Google is of little help - Scarborough, North Yorkshire is top of the results, followed not by Scarborough, Ontario, but by a US market research company.  So I oppose, per Google and popular usage.  (That said, if editors are going to start a wiki turf-war, I'd support this move in future if the dab page were amended to reflect that North Yorkshire is the original.  That would seem to satisfy users on both sides of the debate.) — mholland 13:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) * Done. I would have done something like this after the moves anyway. Does this mean you'll change your vote? --Scott Davis Talk 13:50, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at this time; I don't think there is a strong consensus building up here anyway. The proposer here also proposed moving Scarborough, Ontario here instead of the dab page.  I assume he did so in good faith, but I do wonder if there's not a agenda behind this proposal.  I'd like to allow for some cooling off after this RM closes, for a neutral editor to investigate whether Scarborough, N Yorks meets the Primary Topic dab guideline or not.  If it is impartially found not to, then I would support this move. Thanks. — mholland 14:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As I've said elsewhere, I'd be happy to have Scarborough redirect to a dab page. That is the emerging consensus, anyway, and I think the redirect should be completed once this vote is closed.  Very few have unambiguously identified the English town as the primary topic, and those who have have offered invalid rationale. Fishhead64 16:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "The place in Ontario has a population of X; the place in England has a population of y" is not a valid reason for a page move under wikipedia policy either. Primary Topic is, but you've not made a compelling case yet. — mholland 17:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is why I say that I'm happy with a redirect to a dab page. If the competing bases for primacy cancel each other out (size vs. antiquity, or what have you), than how can one conclude anything other than that they cancel one another out? Fishhead64 01:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments:


 * It seems absurd to have Scarborough redirect to a town over ten times smaller than Scarborough, Ontario. Pace what has been done in similar cases, the redirect should be to the larger or better-known community.  I would argue that "better known" being subjective, and Google being of little help in this regard, we go with size, in which there is no contest. Fishhead64 22:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's a bit strange to have this debate occurring on both Talk:Scarborough and Talk:Scarborough, Ontario when surely it must by definition be the same issue. Also, there are alternative solutions, such as having Scarborough as a disambiguation page giving links to both places. I know "voting is evil" but this support for this option should be canvassed. Sam Blacketer 22:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Although linked, the two moves are not necessarily combined. The other move requires this one first, but this move does not require the other. As noted, a dab page could come here instead. -- Beardo 06:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sensing an emerging consensus to redirect Scarborough to a dab page and rename this Scarborough, Yorkshire - am I correct? Fishhead64 21:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm a little shocked at all these opposes. I'm afraid people just don't understand our policy. We don't link to the English article first simply because WP:ILIKEIT. For pete's sake, there is a Scarborough with over 10 times the population as this one! How should this not a be a disambig? Patstuarttalk 21:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Is it policy that the first article must be the place with the highest population? That is just one consideration. How close can the populations be before the first article becomes a disambiguation page? Sam Blacketer 16:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It isn't that surprising when you consider that Scarborough, Ontario is just an area of Toronto and not called by that name too much. Whereas Scarborough, England is a town with plenty of individual history and is what most people will be searching for when they type in Scarborough into wikipedia's search.
 * Scarborough, ON was its own city until very recently, and has plenty of "individual history" - whatever that means. I did a Google search, and if that's any indication of how well known a locality is, it seems pretty much of a wash. Fishhead64 00:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I take your point but in terms of individual history (seen as the history of the area known as Scarborough, rather than Toronto or North Yorkshire) I think Scarborough, UK has more. I don't know whether your google searches are different because of where you are but when I search 'Scarborough', 6 out of the top 10 relate to the UK Scarborough and the rest relate to things and places other than Scarborough, Ontario. I think there is a general consensus to just set Scarborough as the DAB page anyway now.Stev17 16:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think that "it came first" is any reason for it to not be moved to disambig page. It's not like Scarborough, Ontario is turning into Scarborough; plus, the votes are 10 - 4 right now in favour of move. dab page would benefit the article and remove possible confusion, because for one thing I'm living in Scarborough right now and it's weird that when I search Scarborough the UK one pops up. The population thing may not be a real argument (larger numbers WP:ILIKEIT but I'd like to see a disambig happen. &lt;3 bunny  00:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I think there may be a consensus on the redirect to a dab page but the naming of the Scarborough article should be as you originally suggested at Scarborough, North Yorkshire. If you have a look at the Category:Towns in North Yorkshire then this is the qualifier used for all locations requiring qualification. The use of just Yorkshire as a qualifier is for those items that span the divisions of Yorkshire, such as rivers. The example quoted above of Richmond, Yorkshire is just a redirect to Richmond, North Yorkshire. Keith D 22:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I have corrected about 12 articles that linked to Scarborough when they should have linked to Scarborough, Ontario. These sorts of errors are much easier to detect and fix if the "wrong" target is a disambig page instead of an article about a different place. --Scott Davis Talk 12:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The first oppose vote says to use the precedent of Richmond, Yorkshire. This has been a redirect to Richmond, North Yorkshire since November 2003. I'm not sure what the intended point is. --Scott Davis Talk 12:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The other non UK Scarboroughs are not the "original" Scarborough UK that most people will be thinking of with relation to Scarborough Fayre/Fair searches, also the other Scarboroughs are nameed after this Scarborough. I think the population size is a mute argument as it is the users of WIKI that should be considered (if you extend this argument of population then this site should be in madarin), one possible option would be to put a link at the top of every scarborough main page linking to the other Scarborough's in the world.


 * Local Government Act 1972 - North Yorkshire is the official name for the area. CarolGray 10:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

George Elliott
An anon added George Elliott to the residents' section, and I reverted. What I should have said, if I hadn't run out of edit summary characters, is that no-one on the dab page George Elliott appears to have been resident in Scarborough at any time. I'd welcome correction in this respect, if I'm wrong. Thanks. — mholland 16:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

North Yorkshire
The use of "North Yorkshire" to disambiguate seems awkward and unnecessary. There's only one Scarborough in Yorkshire, right? What's wrong with Scarborough, Yorkshire (or Richmond, Yorkshire, for that matter?) john k 23:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Scarborough is in the county of North Yorkshire -- Ian Dalziel 00:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, so what? North Yorkshire is one of the constituent parts of Yorkshire. john k 00:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The UK naming convention for settlements seems to be City, County if a city requires disambiguation, not City, Region. By your logic, the article could be named, Scarborough, United Kingdom as it is the only city named Scarborough in the UK and Yorkshire is one of the constituent parts of the UK. --Bobblehead 01:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yorkshire is a historic county of England. There is nothing that mandates that we use current administrative counties rather than traditional counties. We shouldn't use historic counties in contexts where borders have changed and it might get confusing, but Yorkshire instead of North Yorkshire is not such a context.  And Yorkshire is not a region - the region is Yorkshire and the Humber. john k 06:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe the intent of the naming convention is to use the current county, not the historic county. Names change and the current names should be used unless the article is solely about the historic name. --Bobblehead 06:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The postal address is Scarborough, North Yorkshire. Sure, North Yorkshire is one of the constituent parts of Yorkshire. Yorkshire is one of the constituent parts of England. England is one of the constituent parts of Britain. Britain is one of the constituent parts of Europe. There's only one Scarborough in any of those. As you say, so what? -- Ian Dalziel 10:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

(deindent)The article is in Category:Towns in North Yorkshire and the other articles in that category with a comma in their name also use "North Yorkshire". The infobox says the ceremonial county (which is actually used, not historic county) is North Yorkshire. The objective is predictability, where possible. --Scott Davis Talk 13:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with John, and all the others should be moved too. Scarborough may be in North Yorkshire now, but this is an encyclopaedia, not an atlas, and the current title is only appropriate in modern references &mdash; in any historical context before 1974 (of which there are plenty in Wikipedia) it's a nonsense. We should be using the title that's helpful in the most contexts. Proteus (Talk) 21:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I would disagree with this. It is a current day encyclopaedia and should reflect the present day situation not some historical reference. Scarborough, North Yorkshire follows the naming convention for English locations that need disambiguation of using the local authority name that currently applies to the place.
 * With exceptions of places where further disambiguation is needed and then a near by place is used as part of the title.
 * Yorkshire is not recognised as a local authority area and so should not be used in disabmiguation of places. Though it is used for things that cross local authority areas such as River Derwent, Yorkshire. Keith D 23:14, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not a "historical reference" &mdash; it's still in Yorkshire. The fact that a place doesn't have a local authority running it doesn't mean it's not a place. And we don't only use local authorities for disambiguation: most places in London are disambiguated (when necessary) with "London", not "London Borough of Such-and-Such" or "Greater London". Proteus (Talk) 23:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't see why, in this particular case, "local authority areas" should trump simplicity of naming. To say "Scarborough, Yorkshire" is, I think,  more  natural than "Scarborough, North Yorkshire," and no less accurate. john k 01:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Just spotted this (some ten months later!); the convention is at WP:PLACE, and also supported by WP:UKCITIES, and the Naming conventions (settlements). -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


 * PS. how would you change the name of an article..?·''' (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Why would you want to move it it is correctly titled at the moment as per the move discussion on this page? Keith D (talk) 01:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Plaxtons - Advertising?
"Luxury coachbuilding has a history of being an industry of coastal towns and Scarborough is no exception. FW Plaxton started a high class joinery business in 1907. Many of the town's buildings were built by them as well as the aforementioned bridge. The 1920s brought car manufacture and then shell cases during the war. Luxury coachbuilding began in the late 1920s and continues today at the Eastfield factory. Plaxton Park on Seamer Road is the site of the former Castle Works factory which closed in the 1990s when all manufacturing moved to Eastfield 4 miles to the south of Scarborough. Subject to closure after a disastrous buyout by Transbus then saved by management buyout in 2002, Plaxton Ltd upholds the fine tradition started by FW Plaxton by building state of art coaches and buses for British people and for export that compete with anything build abroad."

This section seems like advertising to me, especially "Plaxton Ltd upholds the fine tradition started by FW Plaxton by building state of art coaches and buses for British people and for export that compete with anything build abroad." Opinions? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DesdinovaUK (talk • contribs) 00:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

No not advertising but factual information regarding industry. It is a fact that Plaxtons have contributed so much to the well being of the area after bringing secure employment for many. Comment added by the author of the Plaxton paragraph to put it in the context tht it was intended. They don't need to advertise!

It reads like advertising and has plenty of information that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia, let alone in an article about Scarborough. There is already a perfectly good article on Plaxton.Stev17 21:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree - I removed it. Desdinova 16:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Why is there specific references to print snd small website firms, when a multinational company such as McCains is not mentioned in the text?

Algerinos
I'm quite surprised there is no mention of us Scarborians being called 'Algerinos' by the Codheads from up the coast, and the whole story behind it, I thought it was quite a well known thing, or is it just on the footballing side of things? LookingYourBest 15:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I've heard of two reasons for the 'Algerino' nickname.Firstly, a reference to a class of First World War Naval vessel,used to defend seaports? Obviously, not very well in Scarborough and Whitby's case! Secondly, a more distant connection to Barbary Pirates, and their attacks on coastal communities, Scarborough was in ancient times, also frequently visited by Ottoman traders, i.e Scarborough Fair. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 13:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Famous residents and ex-residents
The user Mighty liam just removed Ben Ellis, the contestant from 'Any Dream Will Do' I was just wondering if he is getting deleted, shouldn't the fella from 'Grease is the word' go too? --LookingYourBest 19:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

St Mary's
Nice, free-to-use photograph of Scarborough parish church here should the need arise. :) --Jza84 | Talk  14:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sport
In that chapter, it says: The Scarborough Amateur Rowing Club was founded in May 1869, and is the oldest surviving rowing club on the north-east coast. Due to the fact that "north-east" is linked to the North East England region, you can assume that the rowing club is the oldest one of that region. However, we all know that Scarborough doesn't belong to North East England, so the link is very confusing and should be removed. What's the definition of "north-east coast"? --Dionysos1988 (talk) 19:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No comments to that obvious mistake? --Dionysos1988 (talk) 00:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The information looks as if it came from here on the club web site. Keith D (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggested section, "Folklore"
Where's the Black horse of Scarborough? it's only the most famous thing in the city. Nate5713 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you any reliable sources for this then? Keith D (talk) 19:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I think the Black Horse must be Scarborough, Ontario? Interestingly if you Google "Black Horse of Scarborough" (with inverted commas), then it turns up one single result - this page... Flarpster (talk) 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Culture / Art section suggestion
An article on Scarborough based artist Frank Henry Algernon Mason now exists. Stuffed cat (talk) 12:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Top of Page

 * The map at the top of the feature, does not match the information next to it????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nix D (talk • contribs) 23:23, 12 February 2012‎ (UTC)

Which infobox?
I noticed the same thing as the previous unsigned comment: the map in the infobox is unhelpful as it does not show the town, being more appropriate for the Borough of Scarborough article where I have just added it.

On looking at the page history, the change from a town-specific map to this district map was in this edit which replaced Infobox UK place by Infobox settlement. Looking at WikiProject_UK_geography/How_to_write_about_settlements, this says "All settlements of the United Kingdom (that are not coterminous with a local government district) are to use the Template:Infobox UK place, though some very rare exceptions exist." As the local government district is called "Borough of Scarborough", I interpret this as saying that we should be using Infobox UK place here in this article.

I can see no discussion on this talk page about the change of template, so have WP:BOLDly reverted to the previous infobox. Pam D  09:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Pam, I had thought of restoring the infobox but did not want to get into edit wars with the editor who did it as I was already reverting other changes by that user of insisting on using UK rather than England. Keith D (talk) 12:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Music section - Beached Festival and Acoustic Gathering
I noticed that the information regarding both Beached Festival and Acoustic Gathering is now outdated. In regards to Beached Festival that article states ..."in the summer boasts 'Beached Festival' – an eclectic rock and pop festival which takes place on the South Bay beach...", which should now be in past tense since the cancellation of Beached Festival. Even if it were to include information on the come-back festival in 2011, that particular year it was held at the newly refurbished Open Air Theatre.

As for Acoustic Gathering, the article states "'Acoustic Gathering', a free one-day music festival, has been held annually in Peasholm Park since September 2005...". This information should also now be changed to include the addition of an extra day to the festival, as seen in recent years. Also, in 2012 there was a fee charged for entrance to the festival, making it no longer a free event.

I'm starting this discussion in case any users object to this information being added, before I edit the article?

Thanks Scottjbroughton (talk) 13:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you any sources for the changes? Keith D (talk) 13:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I have updated the sentence about Beached Festival - I have put that it ran 2001-2008 and ignored the attempted 'revival' at the Open Air Theatre in 2011 - it has its own page anyway for such technicalities... Flarpster (talk) 23:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC)