Talk:Ewell

I've removed the passage starting: "Some people have suggested that the name Ewell is an abbreviation of "Epsom well"..." as it seems superfluous to include a counter to information that is patently incorrect. The counter reasoning was sound, but unnecessary for a clean article. Discuss if you strongly think this part was of value. Tubusy 20:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

There was this box at the bottom of the page which I've pasted here. I've looked at many Surrey pages and I haven't seen this. Could someone sort it out? It really need a title or something SuzanneKn 20:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC) {{London Outer Orbital Path}}Reply

The box is explained in the center link... it's not for Surrey pages as such, but the walking route one can travel around London, so only certain towns will have it. :) Tubusy 12:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

May I suggest a link to my Fitznells Manor article? EricPolymath (talk) 19:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

The page seems to be collecting some external links; I am concerned they're little more than advertising. WP doesn't do that. WP:EL. Thoughts? Tubusy (talk) 07:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I added a {{citation needed}} to that line, partly because I'm simply interested and would like to read more, but also because it doesn't seem at all easy to find such information otherwise. I don't know the area, so am not entirely sure where I should be looking, but all I could find quickly was this page and the tunnels mentioned there are stated as being probably from no earlier than the late 17th century, so not Civil War era. Assuming that other tunnels are the ones mentioned in the WP article, I think an inline reference would be extremely helpful. Loganberry (Talk) 22:51, 18 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Interesting that both the Epsom and Petula Clark articles say that she was born in Epsom! (I was born and brought up in Ewell and was constantly irritated by people in the area, especially residents of Epsom, who claimed that they lived in Ewell when they obviously did not!!!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EricPolymath (talk • contribs) 17:47, 29 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

This article repeatedly refers to this area as a village it's very large size for a village would suggest that it is undeniably a town. It's population quoted here is even larger than Epsom the other large settlement in it's borough (although the link used as a source is a dead one but I have no reason to doubt it). I have never been to the area so is it really refered to as a village because to me that sounds very pretentious and reinforcing of Surrey stereotypes. I also dispute the sentence which states it contains a rural character that seems absurd to me as the area is very much within London's urban sprawl. Eopsid (talk) 12:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Can anyone tell me why, despite the large scale, Google thinks is important enough to include the town of Ewell here? Bizarre really...only the major cities of Europe are listed yet there is this little town in the borough of Epsom and Ewell being shown!! Is one of the programmers working on Google maps possible from this locale? Or is there a Google link? Otherwise what an incongruous inclusion, yes?109.151.96.42 (talk) 16:38, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ewell. 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/20071030192829/http://www.gwp.enta.net/surrnames.htm to http://www.gwp.enta.net/surrnames.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 01:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ewell. 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/20140426215611/http://www.nsdatabase.co.uk/locationdetail.cfm?locationid=572 to http://www.nsdatabase.co.uk/locationdetail.cfm?locationid=572

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 00:42, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply