Talk:Leeds and Liverpool Canal

Re-Write Needed

A while ago I made a lot of corrections to this page. But now due to the large number of deletions and corrections to cover the errors the article doesnt read good. It is also contradictory in places now ie it says it is the longest canal and then say its not, it says its the longest single canal then says its two canals in one etc I suggest the main article is re-written to make it sound like one article and not a bunch or edited and re-edited comments. Canalwalker 14:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed external links

I removed the following external links as I do not feel they are very relevant to this article.

• http://www.mmbc.co.uk - A boating club that uses the canal. Does not include any relevant canal info.
• http://www.ukcanals.net - A generic canal site. If there is Leeds and Liverpool info on the site, this link should go to that content, not the generic landing page.
• http://www.snaygillboats.co.uk/ - A commercial company that offers cruises on the canal, not a reliable, unbiased source of info.

Epolk 18:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I put the mmbc link back, anyone who knows anything about the LL knows how important the MMBC is.

Other readers won't know that; so the article needs to make it explicit. Andy Mabbett 10:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I pulled out.

• Mersey Motor Boat Club Site includes photographs of the early days of cruising on the Leeds Liverpool Canal

There is nothing useful as an external link. (visit the site and see) Catwhoorg 20:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Places on the route

I think this should be listed in their order along the canal, not alphabetically. Anyone else? --Aaronsharpe 17:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. You might consider a route map and/ or list of coordinates, like on Netherton Tunnel Branch Canal Andy Mabbett 18:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the need for coordinates but I will do the map this weekend --Aaronsharpe 22:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It is probably going to be June before I will have chance to sort it - Too many exams. --Aaronsharpe 17:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I've started sorting the route locations - as I don't know the area, I have to keep looking each place up to work out where it fits, but It is as least a start! Hope that helps, regards Lynbarn 14:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected a few mistakes in the list. If you need a map of the canal there is one in the external links on towpathtreks. Canalwalker 14:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

If Bradford is on the list despite not being on the canal or linked to it, then Rufford, tarleton, Manchester, Leigh etc should be on it as they are linked to the canal. And if the list includes places no longer linked to the canal, like Bradford then the Walton Summit Branch should be included. Canalwalker 14:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Photos

Looking at the history of the recent edits, I notice that someone is putting a photo of the Aire and Calder Navigation on this page, no doubt it is removed because it is on the wrong page but whoever is putting it on obviously doesnt know the reason why its being taken off.

The photograph of the warehouse in Stanley Dock doesn't seem relevent either as it is not on the Leeds Liverpool Canal. I am sure there are plenty of photos actually of the canal that can be used. Maybe a photo of the Burnley Embankment? Canalwalker (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

"no doubt removed" There's the issue. An IP user removed the picture without explaining why. Edit summaries are very helpful things, and removing content without one often leads to a revert. Mayalld (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

The edits I've been making recently are primarily because whoever was making them was changing already-referenced material without updating the references. That is a recipe for (later) disaster. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I will try to upload a couple of photos of the canal to replace the ones of the Aire and the Dock, hopefully that will keep everyone happy! The page is looking a lot better than it has done in the past. Canalwalker (talk) 08:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Geograph is usually an excellent licence-compatible source of images for articles such as this. I'd contribute more but don't really know anything about the canal. Parrot of Doom (talk) 11:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Edits

Also looking at the edit history, it looks like someone thinks Leicester is on the canal? I think it should say Leeds. Either way the sentence needs clarifying Canalwalker (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

"a load of timber passed over the full length in 1965, from Liverpool to Leicester." the line is unreferenced so there is no way of checking it, I assume it should be Leeds not Leicester and will change it at some point unless it is amended to make more sense! Canalwalker (talk) 15:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Branches

Do you think there should be separate sections or pages for the Leigh Branch, the Stanley Dock branch, the Walton Summit Branch and the various arms along the way? Canalwalker (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Bibliography

Is there a reason why it is empty? If it is just for a list of books about the canal I can add plenty, but if it is for books referenced in the text I will leave it alone. I think a list of the best books about the canal would be helpful Canalwalker (talk) 09:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Usually (but not always) Bibliography is a sub-section of References and contains details of the books to which (usually) repeated references are made in the article. Additional books to which reference is not made in the article are usually placed in Further Reading. See Runcorn for how this can work. I have started such a section here and included one book. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Warehouse

There's no mention of the canal company's warehouse at the end of the canal in Leeds. I have created an article called Granary Buildings, Leeds. Perhaps there should be a link to this? EricPolymath (talk) 09:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Limestone to coal mines?

The History section says that "Bradford merchants wanted to increase the supply of limestone to their coal mines" but this seems unlikely to me. I can't see any use for limestone in coal mining, especially as this was most often done with bell pits at the time, which require no construction or support. Further, the Bradford area has plentiful supplies of sandstone if stone was needed for construction and was not a significant mining centre, being better known for its textile industry. What was limestone used for in coal mines? Dricherby (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Limestone was used to make lime for mortar but I think it might have been used at the Low Moor Iron works est. 1791.No proof though.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:04, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes. But lime was used for all kinds of things in those days and the article says that the limestone was specifically wanted for coal mines and specifically in Bradford (and not, say, Leeds). Did coal mines use substantial amounts of mortar? Dricherby (talk) 22:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Do you have Google? I found this.[1]--J3Mrs (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The article is most likely incorrect. As I understand it the limestone was primarily used to manufacture Agricultural lime, which has been important in farming for a very long time. As farming was the country’s most important economic sector prior to the industrial revolution, lime was comparatively much more expensive than today. Argument over the route through Lancashire during the planning stages was mainly a coal v limestone one. The originally chosen northern route passed closer to limestone sources at Clitheroe (Castle Cement have a quarry there today). The rising importance of coal as the industrial revolution progressed and the delay in construction caused by the American War of Independence, led to the route change. There was a large coalfield at Burnley as well as Wigan, hence the route we ended up with. Although I see that I might be a little late with this info :-) --Trappedinburnley (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Lime was becoming increasingly important to the building trade and as you will be aware this time in history was one of great expansion for building mills and houses. There were collieries in Bradford that built tramways to the canal so Bradford was not dependent on Lancashire coal but Bradford is in millstone grit country and would need to get lime from the Skipton area where there is limestone. I doubt it would have been transported from Clitheroe when there were closer sources. Bradford coal would certainly have been transported along Airedale. As they say Wikipedia is not necessarily true but needs to be verifiable.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Don’t get me wrong lime is a widely used commodity. Lime mortar and Lime plaster are as old as the hills, and I believe Whitewash was in use by the mid 18th century as well. It was also used in Iron smelting (see: Iron# Blast furnace). I also didn’t mean to suggest that Clitheroe was the only source of the stuff. Also I wouldn’t want to speak for Bradford, but I believe that the primary motivation behind building the canal was to expand the market for the products of its backers (hence the port of Liverpool). Again I don’t mean to say that they wouldn’t have been aware of the benefits to the cost of materials that they required. Finally if you’re in need of a reference try this: Cotton Town. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't forget that canals work best when the useful traffic is in both directions. There wasn't a lot else that Bradford needed from Skipton. I think the today's changes in the article have improved it substantially. The big growth in the use of lime was for the ironworks such as Low Moor, although actually the sending of coal in the other direction was much more successful. They were both reasons the canal was a success even before the opening of Foulridge. Chris55 (talk) 17:34, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

While I agree that today’s update is an improvement, I can see a few issues:

• It’s very centred on Bradford – I know that the canal company offices were in Bradford, but who were the chief backers? What was the government’s interest? What about the international aspect? At the moment it seems more local than I think it should.
• The various routes – I’d like to see more info on the proposed routes. I’m not sure but I think that there were (at various times) 3 proposed routes.
• “supply of coal for their shipping” – at that time coal was shipped to places, it didn’t power the ships themselves (See: steamboat)
• “tap the output from the industrial regions of Lancashire” – again at that time, the I believe that industrial revolution was still in its infancy especially in this region.

Also now that I’ve stuck my beak in I’m going to do something with the Construction section, mainly so I can get some Burnley references in :-)

While I’m on the subject of Burnley, I think that the M65 motorway aqueduct at Whittlefield was the 1st time a canal aqueduct was constructed over a motorway in the UK (1980). I’ve not been able to find a ref for the claim, any ideas? --Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Limestone powder was used to supress flame in the event of any explosion. It was suspended on flat boards in the roof of tunnels. When an explosion occurred, the force would blow the piles of dust into the air and smother the flame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.94.142 (talk) 21:35, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Half-way point?

I see that an IP has changed the halfway point from Clayton-le-Moors to Church. But as far as I can see there is a long-standing difference of opinion about the halfway point, see e.g. here. The truth is I suppose in-between.

What do we do to avoid a pointless edit war? Chris55 (talk) 21:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Your source actually says that the canal was extended slightly and therefore the halfway point moved (in the footnote). I guessed that would be when the Liverpool Canal Link opened in 2009, but the geograph image was taken earlier. To move that way it would have to be an extension at the Liverpool end. Just need to find a source that explains it in more detail. As the previous version wasn't referenced I'm not in too much of a hurry to change it back. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 11:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I've been doing a little more digging and found this Leeds & Liverpool Canal Society newsletter from 1999. On page 4 it explains that they used the distance markers to calculate the halfway point. As far as I am aware these are very old and haven't been moved any time recently. I can find anything of use on the Clayton front. I have become positive that Church is the official halfway point. --Trappedinburnley (talk) 17:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

dates

'The original Liverpool terminus was at Clarke's Basin in present-day Old Hall Street.[9] This later moved to Pall Mall when land was sold to a railway company. A direct connection to the docks via Stanley Dock was built in 1846.'

On Stanley Dock it says the dock didn't open until 1948. Novalia (talk) 21:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Read it again. Mr Stephen (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

There is no need to be so rude, I was just fact checking. I was supposed to say 1848 though, but was a connection built 2 years before the dock opened? It isn't clear and looks incorrect. Novalia (talk) 16:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Stuff I've noticed while looking for other stuff

I'm putting the following notes here as I think it might be a while before I get around to researching them. If anyone else would like to do something, you'd be welcome.

• Near Wigan, Crooke lock was replaced with Pagefield Lock and Ell Meadow lock modified because of subsidence (after 1848). Also at Crooke - Tunnel Canal to Taylor Pit, similar to Worsley Navigable Levels.
• A section west of Hapton was moved to the north in the 1980s to facilitate M65 junction 8.

--Trappedinburnley (talk) 20:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Leeds and Liverpool Canal/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 or route diagram Requires addition of inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates Copy edit for WP:MOS e.g. References & links section should be split to References & External links sections Keith D (talk) 15:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 23:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 21:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leeds and Liverpool Canal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320020407/http://www.bradford.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/1F7D2D6B-8298-4893-AA99-2CE7C2EA2D00/0/Leeds_Liverpool_2_Historic_Development.pdf to http://www.bradford.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/1F7D2D6B-8298-4893-AA99-2CE7C2EA2D00/0/Leeds_Liverpool_2_Historic_Development.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 08:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leeds and Liverpool Canal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121001073057/http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/environment/documents/historictowns/BurnleyComplete_LowRes.pdf to http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/environment/documents/historictowns/BurnleyComplete_LowRes.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402093404/http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/archive/2014/02/12/11005109.Canals_came_at_high_cost_to_human_life/ to http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/archive/2014/02/12/11005109.Canals_came_at_high_cost_to_human_life/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 21:58, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• UK-Motorway-icon.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:15, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• UK-Motorway-icon.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Re-write still needed

This article is exceptionally difficult to follow, with a lot of rambling text. If someone has the relveant textbooks, they would be doing a great service if they would redraft the whole thing. Afterbrunel (talk) 10:43, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree. In fact, I think the whole of Wikipedia needs to be re-written by people who know what they're talking about! 86.25.249.162 (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2022 (UTC)