Talk:Salford

Wouldn't it be better if this town had it's own page (with a link to the Manchester article)? -- (WT-en) Xillion 16:47, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

There's a discussion about this at Talk:Manchester, please jump in if you know the area! (WT-en) Majnoona 17:15, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

Salford , a TOWN?

If you read this you will see it is not a town, but a city and metropolitan borough of Greater Manchester in North West England. 84.71.183.168

I don't understand—where does it say this is a town? Anyway, please plunge forward and make any necessary changes. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 22:53, 8 August 2008 (EDT)

Confusing hierachy

There always is in Manchester. For the purposes of WT though, it is clear that Salford is part of Manchester, not the Greater Manchester region (i.e Salford is treated a a district of Manchester, the city). I have therefore corrected the breadcrumb. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 02:21, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Salford is not part of Manchester. It has its own clearly defined borders and is a city in its own right with a population of some 218,000. Nobody is denying, however, that it is in Greater Manchester!If you are going to claim it is part of Manchester, why not claim all the other eight districts in GM are part of Manchester too?

I am not claiming anything, merely stating the structure of the Wikivoyage Manchester article. We do often ignore administrative niceities here and set the regions up to suit the traveller, rather than government officials. That is clearly the case with Salford and Manchester.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:45, 30 March 2010 (EDT)

Enlighten me. Have you been to Manchester? Are you going to claim that, say The Manchester United Stadium is in Manchester, when it is in Trafford Borough? Our local press would have a field day, believe me.Nobody living in Manchester would ever claim Salford to be part of it, but would recognise it IS part of Greater Manchester. Salford is, by the way, an older settlement than Manchester. It is not an administritive niceity but a fact!

If you believe the Wiktitravel region structure of the Manchester article should be changed, then please propose it on the Manchester talk page and it can be discussed. You should bear in mind though that Wikivoyage often creates travel regions that bear little resemblance to administrative boundaries. Check out London where several cities are treated as part of London for travel purposes; Washington DC where the quadrant system is completely ignored; there are many other similar examples. The traveller comes first is the abiding principle here, not the way locals view their habitat or how long a place has been settled. That being said, it may well be that there is a better way to organise Manchester. It is kind of irrelevant, but yes I know Manchester a bit although I am certainly no expert on the region. Cheers. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:59, 31 March 2010 (EDT)