This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am going to see if I can fill in some of the missing data on this list. I have re-worked the first section to include coords as well as grid refs (using template:gbmappingitem) This gives extra features such as the interactive map, and the ability to show all the points on a single map, using :kml. (I also put the very handy Nature on the Map links into a template, and the citations into refs, which I think brings them a bit nearer to wikipedia standards.
I wondered (at risk of adding an extra task) if rather than breaking them up by alphabetic sections, there could be a section for each 'Natural Area' (a useful but underplayed Natural England invention (see this link). From 'Nature on the Map', clicking for info brings up various boxes including one that says which Natural Area it is in, so the grouping is pretty definitive. What I don't know is how unequal the list sizes would be, but to my mind, that is useful content about each of the areas. If no one objects, I will start hiding that information within the table entries, and see how it goes. They can't be re-organised until all the entries have an area. RobinLeicester ( talk) 00:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I have now extracted all the extra info (having found a spreadsheet table with the county lists data via http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/Special/sssi/report.cfm?category=C,CF, which speeded things up. I ran into a major hurdle when the expanded page size got too big, and all the refs vanished. I had to prune out some of the formatting, and make the OS grid ref not a maps link, to make it fit. Even so, it is a lumpy thing (200+coord calls is the culprit). However it all now fits, and the links are all still there. (NewPP limit report shows Post-expand include size is now 1742596 (max is 2048000) so there is elbow room for odd additions and edits, but no space for significant further data or formatting. The Geogroup facility now works, and the interactive map from the coord globe works very effectively to see what other sites are nearby - and will be even more useful if all the red links can be filled in! RobinLeicester ( talk) 02:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
there are 212 sites now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zemliakov ( talk • contribs) 09:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Devon. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am going to see if I can fill in some of the missing data on this list. I have re-worked the first section to include coords as well as grid refs (using template:gbmappingitem) This gives extra features such as the interactive map, and the ability to show all the points on a single map, using :kml. (I also put the very handy Nature on the Map links into a template, and the citations into refs, which I think brings them a bit nearer to wikipedia standards.
I wondered (at risk of adding an extra task) if rather than breaking them up by alphabetic sections, there could be a section for each 'Natural Area' (a useful but underplayed Natural England invention (see this link). From 'Nature on the Map', clicking for info brings up various boxes including one that says which Natural Area it is in, so the grouping is pretty definitive. What I don't know is how unequal the list sizes would be, but to my mind, that is useful content about each of the areas. If no one objects, I will start hiding that information within the table entries, and see how it goes. They can't be re-organised until all the entries have an area. RobinLeicester ( talk) 00:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I have now extracted all the extra info (having found a spreadsheet table with the county lists data via http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/Special/sssi/report.cfm?category=C,CF, which speeded things up. I ran into a major hurdle when the expanded page size got too big, and all the refs vanished. I had to prune out some of the formatting, and make the OS grid ref not a maps link, to make it fit. Even so, it is a lumpy thing (200+coord calls is the culprit). However it all now fits, and the links are all still there. (NewPP limit report shows Post-expand include size is now 1742596 (max is 2048000) so there is elbow room for odd additions and edits, but no space for significant further data or formatting. The Geogroup facility now works, and the interactive map from the coord globe works very effectively to see what other sites are nearby - and will be even more useful if all the red links can be filled in! RobinLeicester ( talk) 02:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
there are 212 sites now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zemliakov ( talk • contribs) 09:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Devon. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)