FOPPoster_01.10.doc Anyone who uses the Park is welcome to come to the next meeting of FOPP to be held this coming Monday - see Flyer
MEETING of the Friends Of Princes Park
FOPPoster_01.10.doc Anyone who uses the Park is welcome to come to the next meeting of FOPP to be held this coming Monday - see Flyer
Meeting of the Fopps
Well I hope you remembered to talk about the Park Gates and why they're still not the Sunburst ones the rest of us all remember!
Ooh Lil,that's the second go you've had at Ms Burrage,but you tell her gerl!(Is she local ?)Originally Posted by Lil V
Think I must have missed something here - wasn't aware I was having a go at Hilary Burrage in either of my two posts. I don't know who she is apart from having something to do with the Friends of Hope Street. But perhaps you know that she had something to do with the colour of the Gates - if so I think we should be told! In my other posting if I was having a go it was at Laura Davis of the Daily Post. I think she was just making a passing reference to Ms B
I can't even go near that park after they destroyed another part of Liverpool's Heritage:
http://www.williamsontunnels.com/articles/martineau.htm
Sorry to disappoint, Lil V, but:
(a) I know absolutely nothing about, and have never been involved in, any Park Gate designs or other related goings-on;
(b) my identity is so un-secret that you can if you wish access my self-named website to find out that I really am www.hilaryburrage.com (but bear with me once you're there, as we're revamping the site, since it's now been around for nearly five years); and
(c) yes, I am indeed the person who, as also reported on my website, and indeed here on YoL!, founded the Hope Street Association and got the renewal work done on that street, so no mystery there either.
If you should want to know what I actually think about the Sefton Park renovations (but not I'm afraid any Gates) - and yes again, I have lived within a short distance of the Park for many years - you can read about that on another of my websites (www.dreamingrealist.com), too. Comment thereon is welcome....
Cheers,
Hilary
Cad, whilst I don't doubt there where tunnels there... where is the proof that Williamson allowed Martineau's children to play in them? Again we are confronted by 'in old papers'. What flipping old papers? Old newspapers? Old diaries? What are they? Where are they?
How can a group focused on history play so loose and fast with their research. I admit i'm not the best at references or most accurate in bibleographies but at least I make an effort to show people I can verify my sources.
(P.S. I'm not having a go at you Cad, per se, but I know you're involved with the Williamson Tunnels and their lack of clarity sometimes really annoys me. Could you have a word with them?)
Sorry for any misinterpretation,on my part,but just a bit of fun intended!
I'll try and find a source for you. I do know that FOWT are planning a complete redesign on the website so I will have a word and see if we can start sourcing some of our information.
In their defense on 'The Mole', if they quoted every piece of information and gave their source, you'd have a booklet which was twice the size.
Does it really matter as long as the information is correct and precise?
It does matter Cad.
If I told you "a leading national newspaper said that X" you'd probably believe whatever it was, after all it is a 'leading national newspaper'.
Now I could mean it was The Times, The Independent or The Guardian that reported this fact, or I could mean The Sun, Daily Star or even the News of the World. All of them are leading national newspapers but some are more renowned for the accuracy of their reporting than others. Mentioning a source is very important because all history is based on interpretation of given evidence.
If we hypothetically read a book entitled 'Monasteries in England' written in 1539 and then one called 'English Monasteries' written in the same year and discover they give a very different picture of the same event we'd probably be confused. Which one is more true? If however we then found out that 'Monasteries in England' was written by Abbot Richard Whiting of Glastonbury and 'English Monasteries' was written by Henry VIII we'd then see the documents in a better context and could understand their different points of view.
If the source that says Martineaus children played in Williamson's tunnels was written in a diary by Martineau himself, then I would take that as being more likely to be true than if it was suggested in a biography written after he died by someone who never knew him personally. It is the difference between Primary Source information and Secondary Source information and all must be read in context.
It is no good telling me that 'X' was found in 'old papers' without telling me what those old papers where.
Princes Park Gates
Thanks for your reply. I wasn't making any accusations, just trying to get to the bottom of a situation where it looks like we're not getting all the facts. And if you're trying to protect Hope Street from the likes of Tesco, more strength to your elbow
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks