Talk:Victoria Arches

[Untitled]
Interesting that certain parties do not want this location, which historically is an important part of Manchester and the heritage of the Irwell, to appear in Wikipedia.

I will have to contact the admins on Wikipedia and request that editing priviliges be the sole reserve of registered members. Parrot of Doom 23:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

'''Parrot Of Doom. The content of this page is dicussed in depth in a number of other Wikis.''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.18.194 (talk • contribs)


 * Perhaps you would be kind enough to point me in their direction? Parrot of Doom 22:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * To 212.159.18.194 - So what if it's on other wikis also? DuncanHill 22:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * To Duncan, I quite agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.197.75.125 (talk • contribs)

Air raid shelter images
The images on the Image search section of Manchester Council's website show exactly the same location as one of the images in the 28 days later forum - therefore I have presumed that they are the same place. I say this because there are arches on the opposite bank of the river, but I don't think its feasible to presume that they could be mixed up. Parrot of Doom 11:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hang on
This page clearly and undisputedly does not meet the criteria "It is a page created primarily to disparage its subject or a biography of a living person that is controversial in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral version in the history to revert to". This speedy delete seems to be a campaign I have, as an outsider observed from certain members of the 28 days who seem to wish to keep what is actually a well known site, "secret". Contrart to what the anon editor states in his edit summary the Environment Agency report referenced does actually talk about the "Cathedral Steps"

Whilst this article currently, at least, verges on original research it is an article that, in my opinion has potential, especially given the authors appear to be actively working on it and researching sources. At that point, at worst it deserves a tag that warns the reader of this Pit-yacker 14:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed the speedy deletion tag, because I don't see the attack being made in this article. It doesn't appear to be a speedy deletion candidate; anyone who thinks it should be deleted ought to used the Articles for deletion process instead. -FisherQueen (Talk) 14:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I would like to get semi-protection for this page, or at least sections of it, so that only registered users can make changes to those sections. I've looked here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection but to be honest I don't entirely understand the process and I don't want to waste anybody's time by making a pigs ear of it.  Could somebody help me out? Parrot of Doom 16:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Whats underground exactly?
I will be visiting Manchester Library and will find out all I can shortly. Parrot of Doom 18:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Cook
AFAICT the image doesnt say Thomas Cook - It appears to say "THO?COOK & SONS. Where ? appears to be an "s" Pit-yacker 18:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thats something I noticed, I tried to decypher what it said but its illegible. I think its a good guess though, although perhaps the urban explorers who visited the stages had better evidence.  I have emailed Thomas Cook anyway, to see if they have records of a building there.  I think the real photograph in the Library may yield the answer. Parrot of Doom 18:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm also posting a request for help on the Thomas Cook Wiki Parrot of Doom 18:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * One thing I noticed was that this photo (online its tricky to see but IRL its quite easy) http://www.images.manchester.gov.uk/Display.php?irn=23648&QueryPage=%2F shortens 'Latchford' into 'Latcford' - perhaps shortening words like that was quite common back then? Parrot of Doom 11:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I had a response from Thomas Cook. The shed/office is definitely theirs, I have a full colour postcard image of the front, showing the Cromwell statue and Exchange Station.  I'm just waiting for permission to upload it to Wiki.

How do I link paragraphs or sentences to the literary references section?
I need to link certain sentences and paragraphs to books that I have researched, but I don't know how to do this - could someone outline the procedure for me?


 * There is some information at WP:CITE - I must admit I've not quite got the hang of it myself. DuncanHill 20:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Just read it, doesn't seem to say anything about having a clicky thing to get down there. Oh well Parrot of Doom 20:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Here it is Footnotes DuncanHill 21:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've put them in the reflist instead, it works just as well. I can't figure out the multiple references thing though, I tried the ref name= but it showed as an error in big red letters Parrot of Doom 21:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Manchester library images
I have been given permission by Manchester Library to use one or two images for this page only. Any suggestions as to which two would be best? Parrot of Doom 18:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Manchester Evening News Article
I once read a feature article (in the 1970s, I think) in the paper about this aspect of 'underground Manchester'. It recounted the urban myth of a perfectly preserved Georgian street, complete with shopfronts etc. The reporter stated that all he found were cobbles and a rusted gaslamp, though no description of the latter was given. The article stated how the old churchyard sloped down to the river, and that there had been a cobbled riverside lane along the banks. Perhaps these cobbles were the original surface. The construction of Victoria Street upon a series of arches over the slope no doubt explains the 'tunnels'.

By the way, the text is a little misleading, suggesting that the steps predate the Cathedral. I assume that you mean that they predate 1847, when the old Collegiate Church became the Cathedral Church of the new diocese.--Train guard (talk) 11:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Predating the cathedral...
Is this article seriously saying the steps predated Manchester Cathedral? The article on the cathedral says "Work on the current building began in 1215", so that's a biggish claim! I wouldn't have thought a flight of steps would have been needed until after the river banks were canalised, but would be interested to know if anyone can back this up? Casper Gutman (talk • contributions) 22:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The current Manchester Cathedral replaced an earlier structure. I believe the current building was constructed around the middle of the 19th century, so it would seem you have discovered a minor error in the Cathedral article.  You can find images of the earlier cathedral on the Manchester Images website, linked in this article. Parrot of Doom (talk) 16:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * After reading a bit, it would seem the history of the Cathedral is more detailed than I thought. http://www.manchestercathedral.org/content/blogcategory/33/158/ will tell you more.  This wiki article is mostly about the steps down to the landing stages, and their purpose (for trips along the river, storage, etc).  I haven't been able to find any details of the precise date of construction of the landing stanges, however this would be complex as the local history around there seems quite convoluted.  It would be interesting to find out more however I'm busy doing other things right now :) Parrot of Doom (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

rename article
I think this article should be named "Victoria Arches". Its the name used by author Keith Warrender, and also by those news outlets which have reported on his book Underground Manchester. It certainly makes more sense to refer to the landing stages, than merely by the wooden steps which allowed access to them. Parrot of Doom 10:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll leave it a day or two, if nobody responds I'll move it shortly. Parrot of Doom 16:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Support I always thought it was a bit of an odd name for the article. Richerman (talk) 23:37, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Me too, seems sensible. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. This was one of my earliest articles, so was bound to be named after something silly :) Parrot of Doom 21:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)