Talk:Exeter

Exeter

This really ought to be at Exeter. It has been the subject of a move by BRG, which Mintguy has opposed, and then an edit war. I had an open mind on this question to begin with, however Mintguy has made a very strong case for the primacy of Exeter. Further, as someone who lives many thousands of miles away from both the UK and the US and has not visited either place, I think I'm something of an impartial judge on this one: I have never heard of any place called "Exeter" except the one in England. I'll bet good money that the same applies to most people. Tannin 16:08 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Or if it does have any disambiguating text it should be in standard disambiguation form: Exeter (England). Only the US and English-speaking Canada commonly use commas. --mav 17:43 11 Jul 2003 (UTC)

It seems to me that Australians also use commas. In fact, when I looked up Tannin, he gave his location as "Ballarat, Victoria" -- using a comma just the same way Americans would. I've also seen Monash University given an address of "Clayton, Vic." --- BRG

Exeter College in Exeter, I think New Hampshire is notable, having produced certain US politicians (certain being an attribute in some cases). It was settled, I presume, by people who fanned out from Plymouth after Landing. Its notability derives from Exeter (England) so primacy remains if it matters. Midgley 12:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: nef statement that Exeter is worst "clone town"

I have to disagree with Seglea's edit that the new economics foundation's judgement was superficial. The parameters of the survey may have been superficial, but the result, within its own terms, does not seem not to be. It clearly only refers to shops on the High Street. Exeter does indeed have a varied selection of shops in "the more interesting roads immediately connecting to it", but this is irrelevant to nef's survey. Hence my NPOV edit, which is probably being generous!

Actually I think that the whole paragraph should be struck out, because the ephemeral nef survey has little relevance to a permanent encyclopaedia article. Or maybe it should be replaced with something along the lines of "In 2005 Exeter was voted the worst clone town in Britain - an award disputed by many local residents"

See http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/news_clonetownbritainresults.aspx and the pdf of the full report. Smalljim 22:18, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think there's a need for an edit war on this one. I decidedly agree that, at least in a few months' time, the whole thing should be reduced to a sentence. One of the advantages of Wikipedia over other encyclopedias, however, is that we can give temporary prominence to ephemeral issues like this, so I wouldn't want to do so immediately. On reflection, what I was objecting to was the inclusion of the location of the more interesting shops within the matter of opinion - that is a matter of fact; the superficiality of the judgement, however, is a genuine matter of opinion and you're right, it should be flagged as such. I just whipped out the "Some say..." usage because I think it is one of the worst Wikipedia-isms - the kind of thing you tell first year students off for saying in essays - and also often inserted when the reality is "Everyone who knows anything about it agrees, but a few people with a bee in their bonnets disagree..." I'm not suggesting this is one of these cases, of course, and actually in this case it's known who says it (local residents, as correctly noted above, and also if I remember rightly the city council). I'll try to track down the official rebuttal, but for now I'll just change to "many local residents", the truth of which I can vouch for, being one. seglea 08:16, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was going to say there is far too much about that topic and how about we reduce it sharply - I'm not even sure the survey needs mentioning by name except in the deep reference stuff in here or the history trail. A year on, time to boil it down. Should we have a picture of the Princesshay developments? If so where should it be taken from? Midgley 12:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

How can the Princesshay redevelopment possibly be used as an explanation for the clone like nature of the High Street? What 'banks' moved onto the High Street from there? Princesshay was low-rent and actually used to contain many independent retailers. Its 'redevelopment' will increase rents and force out the smaller retailers; ie the number of chain-stores in Exeter will go up not down. The paragraph should be truncated to a couple sentences on the NEF findings alone IMO.Simmyymmis 01:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. Is NEF notable? There are any number of surveys and that seemed unremarkable. "Exeter has the usual range of national chains in its High St" would be a possible insertion, for the moment I've gutted that paragraph and left it. Midgley 04:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Exeter Falcons

Should the Exeter Falcons Speedway team be included in the "Sports" section? I understand that they are on 'hiatus' this year due to the County Ground changing hands, however they are almost certain that they will be back next year. They've been a prominent team on the Speedway circuit, but I didn't know whether to include it as they are currently 'inactive'. - crewdy 16:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I've only just read this and felt they should be there so i edited it in as the papers are full of the proposed move which i believe has been given the green light - Scott

Haldon FreeRide

Should Haldon Freeride be in the sports section? It's a voluntary project just outside exeter to create a series of mountainbike trails. I would just put it in the page myself but am wiki noob, so thought I'd ask first. --PeteOtaqui 14:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

John Carne Bidwill (1815-1853)

Bidwill was a botanist who was active in Australia, who was born in Exeter.

I would appreciate anyones contribution to John Carne Bidwill#Life in England - as he became a botanist I can only assume he was schooled somewhere! Given what he rose to become (a magistrate amongst other things) I am guessing his family weren't total nobodies at the time?

Hoping to hit on a local historian from Exeter, Garrie 23:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

I've removed an infobox cleanup tag from this article. I understand that it was placed there as a sugestion that the box be replaced with a standard template version. Unfortunately, no such template currently exists. {{Infobox city}} is rather US-centric, and English cities (but not Scottish cities) are currently uncatered for. A proposed solution would be to expand {{Infobox England place}} to accommodate English cities. The alternative, a new template forking either of the above templates, is less ideal, but more easily doable. — mholland 15:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Road

Someone added this to the article, ut it belongs here really:

• have you ever heard of something starting at junction 31??? think it ends in exeter with junctions 29 through 31.... oh and there is a good little backroad off the 303 that goes through Larkhill and avoids stonehenge

Totnesmartin 19:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course the M5 starts at J31... pure metropolicentricism to suppose it starts somewhere in the wilds of Birmingham. (Compare Bluff, New Zealand, which advertises itself as "The place where the highway begins"). seglea (talk) 22:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

why I meant was, logically it would start at junction 1 and end at 31. In any case metrocentrism is appropriate as that's how the motorways were conceived - thay radiate away from the major cities. Totnesmartin (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

What? is irony dead in Totnes? seglea (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The A30 starts at J31 ... as does the A38 I suppose as it is the end of the MWay at that point.90.152.33.151 13:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Geography

I have added a section for this - using some of the existing Situation information but stripping out the history bits. I am trying to see how I can add those back in - but I am having difficulty shoehorning in the ecclesiastical bit. I leave below what I have not been able to find a home for (help). "From Saxon times until the 19th century, the diocese of Exeter covered the whole of the counties of Devon and Cornwall, and civil administration and services tended to follow the lines of the ecclesiastical."

I have removed the part about Topsham - it seems well covered in the Canal section. JamesFitz 23:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added a sub category of Climate with Weather averages for Exeter (1971-2000 averages from Teignmouth from the Met Office). Bsrboy 20:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsrboy (talk • contribs)

Sport

I have removed the following which an anon had put in as a header to the Sport section:

"The city of Exeter has underachieved in all aspects of sports, relative to other towns and cities in the United Kingdom of similar size and importance:"

Actually I think this is arguably true, but it is not supported by the material which follows in the Sport section, except in relation to soccer. If we are going to say this, we need some examples of other towns and cities of comparable importance, with links to the sections of articles about them which show clearly that they have performed better. Otherwise it's just POV seglea 19:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Economy

A newly designed Mcdonald's restaurant in Exeter.

Have removed the following McDonald's photo and explanation:

... for its shameless promotion of something that isn't in the slightest representative of the economy of Exeter. If the poster of the image wants to see this on Wiki, they'd be well advised to post it to the McDonald's article. --Manusmanus (talk) 10:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Princess Hay Explosion

Removed this section: a news item that already (for some unknown reason) has its own page. An encyclopedia is not the place for filing news stories, unless the story is in itself significant.

--Manusmanus (talk) 07:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I think before this is remvoed there should be more debate on it. The inclusion in the Exeter article is minimal, because yes it has it's own page. Maybe you are unaware, it was an explosion with terrorist activity - just, unlike the Glasgow attempted attack, there was only one injured. Maybe reading the article may help you realise the severity of the incident. Thenthornthing (talk) 12:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it should have its own sub-section in the history section. A sentence at the end mentioning it with a link is sufficient. The picture might be used, if no other better ones can be found of this period, whilst moving the other images further up the page or perhaps moving them elsewhere, as they're not so much about history. bsrboy (talk) 15:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

There are already numerous articles dedicated to terrorist incidents in the UK, which is where something like this belongs. It was a minor incident with no real significance in the long term. Compared to, say, levels of fatal drug use in Exeter, the "severity" of this failed plot is minimal. If you feel an absolute need to have this linked to this article, place a link to its own page in the "See also" section. --Manusmanus (talk) 09:23, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree - a totally insignificant event compared to the daily violence on the streets of all UK cities, I'd say remove all reference to it. --C Hawke (talk) 11:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Whereas I agree with the above comment, there still should be a minor mention on it. Even if it is just a sentence. People will still remember this, people in Exeter and with an interest in Devon that is, so therefore should be mentioned. Thenthornthing (talk) 13:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done - I've added one sentence about it at the end of the history section with a link to the article. bsrboy (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Still not at all convinced that this trifling event contributes in any way shape or form to the history of Exeter any more, than, say, it's a fact that people sometimes have picnics on the Cathedral green, but will live with the compromise. --Manusmanus (talk) 14:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

It has a lot of third party references, although the main reason it has so many is because of its topic i.e. it creates good media attention. This isn't how Wikipedia works, but one sentence will not damage its reputation. bsrboy (talk) 14:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Physical Size of Exeter

Nowhere in the article is there a mention of the physical size (sq km) of Exeter. This information is usually included in the infobox. Given that it's both a city and a district, this information should readily be available on the page, no?--Criticalthinker (talk) 09:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

4,703, although I can't be bother to add it in, as the infobox should probably be converted to template:Infobox settlement. Jolly Ω Janner 13:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The High Street

As in most English towns and cities, people in Exeter don't talk about "High Street" but about "the High Street" (although "The city's High Street" and similar are perfectly ok, and an address in the High Street would just be written as "101 High Street"). I have changed wording throughout the article to reflect this. I don't know why it is so, but it is. It doesn't apply if the main street is called "Main Street" (rare in the UK) or "Fore Street" (common in Devon and Cornwall). seglea (talk) 22:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of streets, there is no mention of the usage "Hay" in Exeter's street names. Monomoit (talk) 00:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"Hay" I was informed by an Exeter City Council redcoat guide was a designation for a meadow, presumably literally - where there's hay. Therefore I presume Southernhay, Northernhay, and Princesshay were at one time meadows - no references for it though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.197.32 (talk) 18:45, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Not quite true, I think. "Haie" was a Norman French word meaning a fenced enclosure - as at Hay-on-Wye, Roundhay in Leeds, Pithay in Bristol, etc. The SOED has a definition of it: "a hedge, fence... an enclosure... a park". There's a reference to the word's use in Exeter here - I'm not sure why it is more prevalent in Exeter than elsewhere. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:15, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Interesting - got me searching a bit. The name Princesshay is modern - I think this can be trusted for that. Northernhay and Southernhay were hedged enclosures to the north and south of the city walls, according to trusty old Gover, Mawer and Stenton's Placenames of Devon (1931) p.24. On p.129, GM&S further points out that placenames ending in -hayes or -hayne are common in S.E. Devon, and probably derive from the name of a medieval owner or a short placename (Stone, Coombe, Wood, Ford etc.), with the suffix coming to mean farm or holding, similar to -bury in Essex etc. Learned opinion may have changed in the intervening 80 years, of course, but there it is, FWIW.  —SMALLJIM  22:30, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Extonian?

Just noticed the demonym for a resident of Exeter is listed as "Extonian" whereas I thought it was "Exonian". Not saying that either is necessarily correct or incorrect I am just seeking clarification so is there any chance of a source for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.43.239 (talk) 20:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I have changed it to Exonian, although I cannot find any reliable sources. Jolly Ω Janner 21:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

OED, the most reliable source possible for an English word, has Exonian, first recorded in 1871. It has no record of Extonian, the nearest related word being extonious (obsolete, rare), meaning astonishing. As an Exonian of 32 years' standing I have never heard Extonian used. OED derives Exonian from the late Latin Exonia for Exeter (the Romans of course called it Isca Dumnoniorum), which appears also in the signature of the Bishop of Exeter and in the designation of University of Exeter graduates as Exon. (Exoniensis) seglea (talk) 14:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I originaly added Extonian, but I know little about Exeter and I guess I mixed it up with Exonian. Jolly Ω Janner 16:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

From the OED dates, I strongly suspect that "Exonian" was one of those pseudo-traditional Victorian coinages. But Extonian would never do, because historically the x and t in Exeter where more separate - it was Excester or even Execester in the 16th century. I guess an Extonian should come from Exton, down on the east side of the Exe estuary. I must remember to introduce "extonious" into my everyday conversation, it should be quite self-referential. seglea (talk) 20:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Exmouth section

removed a short section on Exmouth, as follows: "Exeter also maintains a strong relationship with neighbouring Exmouth in terms of visitors, travel, schooling and the River Exe. An estimated 16000 people travel from Exeter to Exmouth every year and 6000 from Exmouth to Exeter. The local travel companies often organise trips around the landscape, places include the River Exe. Exmouth offered support and policing in shadow of the attempted terrorist attack at the Princess Hay shopping centre." This doesn't seem to belong in an Exeter article - the commuting figures are possibly interesting but don't add much unless there were comparable figures for other neighbouring towns, and anyway they are unclear and unreferenced. seglea (talk) 22:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Rougemont Castle

I removed the line "Note the red sandstone, characteristic of many older Exeter buildings." from the caption of the picture of Rougemont Castle gatehouse as it is misleading. Although it is true of many buildings in Exeter, it is not true of the castle gatehouse, which was constructed from reddish volcanic rock quarried at Rougemont circa 1068. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.196.227 (talk) 19:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks for the correction. Do you have a source for this kind of information? seglea (talk) 23:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

It's in: 'Geology Explained in South & East Devon' - Perkins, J.W. 1971, page 119. Sorry, pretty much my first ever wiki edit... I don't know how to reference stuff properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.196.227 (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

New infobox image removed

Horza1972 (talk · contribs) add the image on the right to the infobox. I really don't see how four badly-cropped, dull images of featureless buildings could possibly represent Exeter. For that reason I have removed it. Let's see what others think and if the current collage is unrepresentative then we can work to update it with different individual images rather than use this poor collection. --Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 11:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

If you think that "featureless buildings" aren't representative of Exeter than clearly you're not familiar with the city itself. Surely Wikipedia is about the facts and not about the promotion of the city through some highly selective, chocolate box images of the cathedral or Mol's Coffee House. The current images are nothing but a gross distortion of the visual reality of Exeter. It seems that my images were removed primarily because they weren't 'pretty', but the majority of central Exeter isn't pretty and I see little point in pretending that it is. This is a Wikipedia page, not a website sponsored by Exeter City Council to encourage tourism. The Wiki article on Exeter itself clearly states that: "Large areas of the city were rebuilt in the 1950s, when little attempt was made to preserve Exeter's ancient heritage. Damaged buildings were generally demolished rather than restored, and even the street plan was altered in an attempt to improve traffic circulation. The post-war buildings are generally perceived as being of little architectural merit, unlike many of those that they replaced". Shouldn't this be reflected in the city's main profile picture? My photographs of Sidwell Street, High Street and South Street represent the overall cityscape of central Exeter much more accurately than the images being used at the moment which are *totally* misleading. Horza1972 (talk) 12:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I know Exeter very well having worked there for seven years. As I said, if there are problems with the current image then let's tweak that, but your photos just went to the other extreme and are as unrepresentative of the city as what you call the chocolate box pictures are. Besides if there is to be a montage, rather than the preferred skyline image, then it should be representative of the whole city not just the centre. --Simple Bob ^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 13:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't know how to reply to individual comments. 75% of the central city dates to no earlier than 1900. The current montage of photographs on the Wiki page for Exeter shows five images, four of which depict buildings that were built before 1900. That is not an accurate representation. If we are to use five photographs then three of them, at least, should show structures built over the last century and which still remain standing today. You say my photos went from one extreme to another. Sidwell Street, South Street and the High Street are three of Exeter's main commercial and historic routes (I admit that the inclusion of Coombe Street was unnecessary) and will be familiar to anyone visiting the city. What has the fact that they are full of hideous buildings got to do with anything? As I said before, it's Wikipedia, not a promo for Exeter City Council. I am curious to know why a very small handful of tourist hot spots is an acceptable reflection of the city as a whole. Historic buildings account for much less than 25% of the pre-20th century city and yet four of the five photos are of historic structures. It is a blatant misrepresenation, no?::Horza1972 (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Just chipping in as someone who lived in Exeter for 14 years or so (working as a town planner!!). Any montage needs to be balanced, showing historic and architecturally important structures as well as modern ones. The current montage reflects that reasonably well - the one uploaded by Horza1972 doesn't and is a little pointy. Indeed, "Large areas of the city centre were rebuilt in the 1950s" - but not the whole city. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

You say that the whole city wasn't rebuilt in the 1950s. This is correct. There are numerous suburbs that escaped, including St Leonard's and Pennsylvannia, but the current montage shows the Cathedral, the Queen Street clock tower, the Iron Bridge and the Cathedral Close, ALL of which are in the city centre. So the montage IS being presented as a reflection of the city centre. You would not expect a city's profile photograph to show images from its suburbs, surely? Why are you against the inclusion of images from South Street or North Street or Paris Street or Sidwell Street or the High Street, or Princesshay or of the Guildhall Shopping Centre, or any of the other almost totally rebuilt areas of the central city? Why the focus on the chocolate box? These rebuilt areas are much more accurate reflection of what the majority of the city is like and yet none of them appear on the current montage. It is simply not accurate. Does Wikipedia prefer prettiness to accuracy?:::Horza1972 (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I just looked up what WP:POINT means and if you excuse my pun I get the point. The four building images that were chosen are clearly trying to make a point and do not in any way represent the city that I live in. The castle, the parks, the hospital, the river and canal, even Princesshay - these are all things which represent my Exeter. I feel sad for you if your Exeter is full of soulless buildings. Do not use this article as a platform for pushing your singular point of view. --

Religion

'Of which a majority ...' is not grammatically a sentence, and I don't see why the cathedral is an exception - the C of E is a Christian denomination. Mdrb55 (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Fixed this now. Mdrb55 (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Also the section in 'religion' about the 2001 census contains a 'sentence' (Although ... Buddhism) which is not grammatically a sentence. I don't understand it. I think 'exemption' should be 'exception'. Mdrb55 (talk) 21:58, 2 July 2022 (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:

• Old Houses Frog Street, Exeter.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Sources for future article expansion

There is an enormous amount of information on early Exeter in this extensively researched book that at least currently is in open availability from JSTOR. Anyone interested in the area is welcome to check for details and build out different sections of the article. Just remember any maps or other images need to be built out again to avoid copyright issues. — LlywelynII 10:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)