This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi, is there someone in Oxford who can help photograph Robert Hues' memorial brass in Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford, for the article about him, and upload it to the Wikimedia Commons? Thanks! — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 09:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
A requested move has popped up at WP:RM about moving Norfolk around. 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 13:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Any input at Talk:Leeds would be appreciated. Thanks, — Jeremy ( talk) 20:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks. DDStretch (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC) (on behalf of the taskforce)
Keep an eye out on this article, I've twice had people insert POV into the article, calling it 'lovely' or 'a perfect tourist destination.' Example: [1]. Being someone who has driven through this place, I can tell you it is none of these things, but that's just my opinion. At least, me and everyone else I know who's been there. Anyhow, no OR. Zazaban ( talk) 22:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the London article. It's currently a GA, but even from a cursory glance at the lead I'm confident that this article would fail a GA-review. We have several outstanding "citation needed" tags, as well as dead links and uncited claims. London is a Top priority for this project, and is one of the most important cities in human history. Perhaps this project could apply some collective TLC? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Buckingham Palace for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I am sure we are all aware that some counties have their own projects and some counties do not. Although the county projects are generally inactive (the ones I use are), they do provide a means of grouping together the appropriate articles. This is useful for someone looking for articles to work on, or with tools such as User:WolterBot.
My hypothesis is that they are people who want to take part in a local county project, but setting one up is a bit of a daunting task.
My suggestion is that we create a project for all Counties. Just a basic page, with all the necessary templates. MortimerCat ( talk) 10:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi all
I have proposed a new project " Wikiproject Norfolk & Suffolk" and would appreciate any support that I can get for getting this through.
I did think of making it a task force, but that would limit action as it would have to belong to a parent.
Many thanks-- Chaosdruid ( talk) 04:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there any interest in forming a sub-project for this county? I'm surprised to find it doesn't exist already, and considering it contains such notable topics as Stonehenge, Longleat and others, it would seem to be worthy of interested parties gathering together. -- Rodhull andemu 18:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated J. R. R. Tolkien for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I have rewritten the Battle of Barnet, and plan to take it to FAC. In light that the battle saw the death of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, the "Kingmaker", and the securing of Edward IV of England's throne, I thought this project might be interested in the article. Please take a look and leave comments/suggestions at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Barnet/archive1. Thank you. Jappalang ( talk) 16:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:07, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Bruce Castle is currently up for peer review. This is a somewhat unusual article in that, while as far as I know it covers the subject as comprehensively (within reason) as possible, there are large gaps where sources don't exist, so ideally I'd like any issues that can be fixed, fixed before it goes to any potential FAC. – iridescent 17:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
BBC has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. — Levi van Tine ( t – c) 08:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Soliciting input at the AfD. - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 19:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
So what's the status of Cornwall now then? From what I have gathered there is the ceremonial/shire county of Cornwall, which in it contains two unitary districts: the Isles of Scilly and Cornwall. Is this accurate? -- Joowwww ( talk) 16:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, I just joined :) I have a few English articles at GAN ( Worsley, Eccles, and The Dark Side of the Moon) but wanted to draw wider attention to the above article. I'd like to get that to GA, and who knows, maybe FA one day. It makes me giggle slightly every time I look at it. Anyhow, if anyone has any books on rude words, or medieval history, and can contribute, feel free to do so. I'm reaching the end of what is possible online, so a visit to Manchester library will be in order methinks. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 10:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Why do we have two User WikiProject Boxes Template:User WPEngland and Template:User WikiProject England
This user is a member of WikiProject England |
This user
participates in WikiProject England. |
:
Can we have one that does not over use the
Flag of England and use a map of
England like
Template:User WPScotland
This user is a participant in WikiProject Scotland. |
Mr Taz ( talk) 13:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
We are
Wikimedia UK - the group of local Wikimedians helping the Foundation to create " a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". Love Wikipedia? Based in the UK? Can you support us in projects such as generating free-content photographs, freeing up archive material and media relations? Or are there other projects you'd like us to help with? if so, please click here to Join up, Donate and Get Involved |
AndrewRT( Talk) 21:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I have proposed to the WikiProject Council that I create WikiProject Nottinghamshire. Please go to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Nottinghamshire to add your support or comments. I have started a template page in my sandbox for this project too. KlickingKarl ( talk) 02:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could I ask for some eyes on Ramblers, formerly Ramblers' Association, where a new user and spa is intent on inserting a negative POV into the article, please? Thanks, -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Could somebody explain the purpose and criteria for membership of Category:People from Essex (before 1965), Category:People from Middlesex (before 1965), Category:People from Kent (before 1965), Category:People from Surrey (before 1965), and Category:People from Hertfordshire (before 1965). I don't mean explain to me here, I mean explain to the public at large on the relevant Category page. I presume it has something to do with 1965 county boundary changes, but the precise logic is obscure. jnestorius( talk) 23:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Graham Chapman is IMHO in serious need of cites. -- 201.37.230.43 ( talk) 12:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a Mormon temple in London. Should the article belong to this WikiProject? LDS-SPA1000 ( talk) 18:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a Mormon temple in Preston, Lancashire. Should the article belong to this WikiProject. LDS-SPA1000 ( talk) 20:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Peterborough Chronicle for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hail and listen to this lil request. The Battle of Barnet has come to challenge for a bronze FA star at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Barnet/archive1. Prithee to go and comment on the article, to decide if it deserves to be Wikipedia's best article. For Harry, England, and St George! Jappalang ( talk) 08:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I would appreciate input in the dispute which is occurring at Talk:Anglophobia. Some editors think that my edits regarding Welsh anglophobia are not in accordance with WP policy. I would value other perspectives on the version I have submitted: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anglophobia&oldid=290071633 BillMasen ( talk) 11:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone interested in taking photos of village signs and adding them to Wikipedia? I've been adding some myself but it's a slow process and was just wondering if anyone else can help. See my userpage for some examples. If you've got a sign nearby to you then why not take a photo! -- Uksignpix ( talk) 19:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 06:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
This article is a mess. Virtually all that is encyclopaedic is said in the lead. I removed the entire External Links section as it was just linkspam but it still needs a good rewrite. Mjroots ( talk) 05:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, here is an article on the battle (yet again) that killed a king and crowned his opponent. Henry VII of England, the winner, however, established the Tudor dynasty that lasted a century. I greatly appreciate it if you would take a look and offer your comments and critiques at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Bosworth Field/archive1 to help this article to become a Featured Article. Thank you. Jappalang ( talk) 08:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Doctor Who for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 02:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
A range of issues have been identified with the England article, which was promoted to GA status a couple of months ago. The problems are detailed at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/England/1 and if anyone wanted to help improve the article to meet these concerns that would be great.— Rod talk 07:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
As talked about above I tried creating a watchlist for the project but there is obviously some limits on the links that Special:RecentChangesLinked can cope with.
A list of everything is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchAll, a list of just the articles is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchArticles and a list of talk pages with non-article entries is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchOther. I suggest that you do not view these pages as they are very slow to load and usually give a page load error. The Special:RecentChangesLinked appears to operate correctly on the article only list so that may be useful, on the everything and other lists it does not return any information.
This link shows you what you get with this recent changes linked function for the articles only list.
As the number of articles tagged increases there may be problems with the article only list.
Anyone any ideas?
Keith D ( talk) 22:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Having browsed the History of England article and some of its linked articles, I have to agree with the remarks made by User:Jza84, above. Most are in need of some TLC. Am I correct in thinking that there is no Wikiproject for British or English history? If I am correct most will benefit from being tagged by WP:England so that we can keep a constructive eye on them. As some of the articles purport to be part of a series they really need looking at as a whole, which is quite a daunting prospect.-- Harkey ( talk) 11:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Can all English Wikipedians stop starting WikiProjects for each of England's Counties etc and join together under for the English Regions WikiProjects Mr Taz ( talk) 16:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Jza84 Do you mean WP:Yorkshire Mr Taz ( talk) 18:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject East Midlands England - Wikipedia:WikiProject East of England - Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater London - Wikipedia:WikiProject North East England - Wikipedia:WikiProject North West England - Wikipedia:WikiProject South East England - Wikipedia:WikiProject South West England - Wikipedia:WikiProject West Midlands England - Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire and the Humber Mr Taz ( talk) 17:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, we know what the English regions are, but what advantage is to be gained by having regional rather than county Wikiprojects? I am in agreement with Jza84 here.-- Harkey ( talk) 17:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
London has it's own region WP:Greater London and not in the WP:South East England Region Mr Taz ( talk)
Ok, consensus seems to be heavily against this idea, but what problems was it trying to address? (Some input from Mr Taz would be helpful here). What seems to have emerged from this discussion (being mentioned by at least three different people) is that communication between the existing projects needs to be improved. Many projects have a wealth of experience in a wide range of areas, yet there are some which are struggling.
So the question is, how can the current system be improved? Strength comes from diversity and experience, the more members a project has, the better it should be doing (in theory). At the moment, the most effective way of recruiting members is posting notes on editor's talk pages; I don't see that there's a hugh amount WP:E can do about that. What I think might be effective is helping editors to learn the skills of writing good articles (delibarate lower case, not every article has to be Good although hopefully the end product of trying to give editors more experience would be an increase in the numbers of GAs and FAs). The way I would like to see this happen is individual projects identfing a few articles and working on them. They could ask for suggestions within the project, then go to other projects with more experience in the relevant area. There are problems with this idea, but could it work?
I'm not sure what WP:E's role within this would be, perhaps as a central hub where people looking for help can come instead of other projects and a centralised place for discussion. Nev1 ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I think this project's importance in encouraging good article work from the ground up is as important as addressing the big articles such as history of England. I don't know how successful or practical my suggestion of collaborations for county projects is, but I think we should give it a try with one project. After looking quickly through the WP:UKGEO list of subprojects, there seem to be a few candidates which might benefit from such a scheme: WP:DERBYS is the only county level project I've seen without any Good or Featured Articles, WP:BEDS and WP:SURREY hava 2 GAs each, and WP:BERKS has 1 FL and 1 GA. WP:DERBYS seems most in need, and has a few active editors I think, but another good candidate IMO is WP:NOTTS; it has 1 FA and 2 GAs and was only started in April of this year. Hopefully, its members are more likely to be active/still around than some of the other projects and as WP:NOTTS is still expanding (only 196 articles ATM) I think it needs our help. I'd like to pick one, leave a note on the project's talk page and on the talk pages of all its members to see if we can get this off the ground. Nev1 ( talk) 14:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Update I've left a note on WT:NOTTS to see if there's any interest in trying this collaboration thing. Nev1 ( talk) 11:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Is it appropriate at this time to discuss the Scope of the WP:ENGLAND? If all articles from all other WPs are tagged it will make it quite unwieldy particularly as I would like to request that we have a 'Watchlist' to keep abreast of changes and patrol for vandals.-- Harkey ( talk) 14:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Picking up on Nev1's ideas I have mulled it over and have put together an aunt Sally of an idea. It may not be appropriate or well thought out but it is a start. Comments welcome, but if you think it is rubbish then come up with something better to address the problem of dissemination information on article improvement to inexperienced editors. See User:Keith D/sandbox3 for details. Keith D ( talk) 20:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
University of Cambridge has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 23:33, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
There is no project on this "England" article and there is no edit to it since 2 years. Why can I not redirect "WikiProject England" to "Wikipedia:WikiProject England"? Is it reserved or something? ~ R. T. G 11:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
If anyone is in proximity to Donington Hall, Castle Donington, would someone mind photographing the BMI (airline) headquarters? WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I posted this at Reference desk, but perhaps there might be editors here who do not visit there.
The window in question can be seen at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jayt47/3212958113/in/set-72057594129234850/. I have been in communications with the author, and he said that he forgot all the details about this photo. I doubt its location is at Husbands Bosworth: looking through the set of photos, this image was taken just less than 10 minutes from the Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre (where the diorama is located). Hence, I suspect the window could be at Sutton Cheney or somewhere nearby. If anyone knows the church this window is at, please do tell. Information on the creator and period in which the window is created are also appreciated. Jappalang ( talk) 02:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Come all! Your comments and critiques are welcomed for the Battle of Bosworth Field at its FAC. Please read the article and decide if it deserves the bronze star, or if it needs a wee push or more. Thank ye all. Jappalang ( talk) 08:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Could some template expert provide a moddable Cite book (or Cite web?) template for citing the Victoria History of the Counties of England, please? See talk:Victoria County History for background. It is a very useful resource for the histories of English villages. Thanks. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Southport#disambiguation requesting to move Southport and replace it with Southport (disambiguation). Comments welcome! Jeni ( talk)(Jenuk1985) 20:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated BBC television drama for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found a large number of concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Natasha Bedingfield/GA1. I have de-listed the article which can be renominated at WP:GAN when these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells ( talk) 20:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone play bingo here? This list of bingo nicknames is up for deletion and could do with a little fattening up. Nick mallory ( talk) 06:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Penda of Mercia for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 18:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently expanding the article on List of UNESCO World Heritage Sites in the United Kingdom and am pondering what should be used as the lead image(s). It's not the most important issue in developing the article, but I thought that as the list covers the whole of the UK that as many editors as possible should be given a say. I'll leave a note at the England and Scotland wikiprojects and see if the discussion goes anywhere. Please leave any comments on the article talk page. Thanks, Nev1 ( talk) 19:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
England has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. — Kpalion (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I have always been told that "Georgian" only applied to the first group of kings called George (I-IV) and have edited a couple of articles based on this. If I am wrong could someone point me the right way? Thanks. Britmax ( talk) 19:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, there's a slightly disheartening discussion going on over at Durham at the moment about renaming the page to the fictional title "Durham, County Durham" to make way for a disambiguation, or even the US city. I was wondering if anyone could help? Bob talk 08:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Hull City A.F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
This article has recently been nominated for DYK, and before it appears on the Main page it would be nice to have some type of independent confirmation of the facts claimed in the article. As noted in the DYK discussion, this article has proven resistant to verification. A person with more local knowledge of Letchworth and its history, or merely access to the local interest publications cited by this article, and who could help clarify things it would be greatly appreciated. -- Allen3 talk 10:48, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Talk:Lincoln#Attempts at a consensus regarding wording on the disambiguation page, extra opinions are needed to generate a consensus. Jeni ( talk) 03:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a nudge that I plan to overright the Cornish people article with this draft very soon. That is, unless there is objection? If there is, or even any support, please direct it at Talk:Cornish people. -- Jza84 | Talk 22:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Alerting all WikiProject England members that England is undergoing a reveiw for WP:GA status. Things you can help with are listed here. Please help if you can, thanks, -- Jza84 | Talk 14:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
1224 articles about geographically locatable subjects in England are missing geographical coordinates. Finding the latitude and longitude of locations, and entering coordinates into articles is straightforwards, and explained at Wikipedia:How to add geocodes to articles. Having coordinates on articles using the {{ coord}} template provides a link to the article's subject on a wide range of maps, and that links to the articles are provided in GoogleMaps, MultiMap and other such places which use wikipedia data. A breakdown of articles needing coordinates by county is found at Category talk:England articles missing geocoordinate data. All help in geo-coording them is welcome/urged/implored. thanks -- Tagishsimon (talk) 18:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! I've recently made significant additions to the Capel St. Mary article. This was rated as stub-class by a bot in 2007, but I think that contributions since then, as well as my additions, have probably changed the article's class. I'd appreciate having someone impartial and more experienced than me check it over and re-rate it if they have the time. Sorry if I'm barking up the wrong tree; this is the first time I've dealt with a WikiProject.
Many thanks!
Brammers ( talk) 21:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any reason why {{ WikiProject England}} does not generate importance scale categories? MRSC ( talk) 07:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Now that importance has been added to the template, would this be a good time to revisit the Priority Scale given on Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Assessment? (which may also involve reconsideration of the goals & scope of the project). We did some work on this at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/Assessment and although the projects have different scopes this might be a helpful starting point?— Rod talk 10:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I would like to propose a task force as part of this project (and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography). I want to include the 326 English local government districts. These are highly variable in quality and content, some are developed fully and others are barely stubs. I am particularly interested in this area and have a fair bit of knowledge on UK subdivisions. It is a fairly big task and I wonder if anyone is interested in joining me? MRSC ( talk) 08:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Category:Towns in Gloucestershire has (to me) wrongly included Category:Cheltenham and Category:Stroud, Gloucestershire. Is there any discussion/guidance on what parent cats these 'town category pages' should have? Eldumpo ( talk) 13:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Relevant AfD to this WikiProject, on the article Bethel Church, Mansfield Woodhouse. Cirt ( talk) 05:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
As this wikiproject seems to be getting active I had a look for some of the tools wikiprojects can use to help manage articles. Would other members like me to set up a monthly popular pages listing (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset/Popular pages for an example)? In addition Wikipedia:Article alerts can help to track any pages with the WikiProject England banner which are included in DYK, nominations for GA. FA etc and also any proposed for deletion or similar. Another tool is cleanup listings which are less frequently updated but highlight articles with problems such as {{ unreferenced}}, {{ uncat}}, or {{ cleanup}}, or inline markers like {{ fact}}. Would these be helpful?— Rod talk 19:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
List of abbeys and priories in England contains at least 46 transclusions from of other articles. Needs work. MRSC ( talk) 16:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I have just joined this project. I see a very few biographies are included in the project. What are your guidelines on including biographies in this project? Also, what sort of historical articles are appropriate? Thanks! - PKM ( talk) 18:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
eg - Ross-on-Wye and other towns in Herefordshire (mostly).
Numerous editors have removed the Welsh place names (they're not relevant - and isn't there a Welsh language Wikipedia?), yet user Hoary seems to be on a one man campaign to keep them in place. These areas are in England, and the Welsh name has no legal standing outside of Wales - particularly the placing of the Welsh namess in the infobox under the real names seems to suggest the names have any signifiance.
92.14.197.200 ( talk) 22:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note There appears to be significant anonymous meatpuppetry going on in this debate and edit war from the following (and possibly others):
These IPs all have very short contribution histories that mainly or only include edits related to this particular topic of discussion and edit war. This should be taken into account when determining consensus. Ioeth ( talk contribs twinkle friendly) 16:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This debate came up in various places last year, and the proposal at User:Jza84/Sandbox was, so far as I recall, the nearest we got to a consensus over it. In summary, my view (now - it might have moved slightly over the period) is that, where modern Welsh names exist for places close to the Welsh border they should be included (in my view there is absolutely no reason not to include them), and it may in some circumstances also add to the interest and content of an article to refer to historical and toponymic (=etymological) relationships (eg. between Eboracum (=York) and Welsh Efrog, and Devon and Welsh Dyfnaint). Unless it is very important to the article (as it may be, say, at Oswestry, which is close to a Welsh-speaking area), I don't necessarily favour including the reference in the introduction itself. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 14:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the English wikipedia, and these articles relate to English towns. The names of these places in foreign languages should never be included in the intro or infobox, and only included in a history section if it is relevant. Skinmeister ( talk) 09:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
There are examples of exonyms being included in the lead in articles on places near other linguistic boundaries (Dutch for Lille and Calais, Italian for Menton and Nice, French for Trier), presumably on the grounds that the names are used by people living nearby. On this basis the Welsh name might be justified in the lead in Oswestry, but probably not the other cases. Mhockey ( talk) 21:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I would like to propose the replacement of the following projects:
and extend the coverage to include, what would have been:
These projects are largely inactive and have much in common. It is possible to tag articles, creating task forces on a per-county basis and organise alerts assesment that way. I was thinking of doing a South East England / East of England split, but it seems a pretty arbitrary boundary. The functional region includes both areas. Do I have support for this? MRSC ( talk) 21:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
OK. I'm sensing this it too radical for your tastes. I'll wait for the projects to lapse completely and look to do it then. MRSC ( talk) 14:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some possible splits:
Not sure how well this will go down? MRSC ( talk) 15:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Before taking this further... Has anyone done an "audit" of he various county, city, town etc wikiprojects to see how "active" they are? I'm thinking of any DYK's new articles, lists, GA's FAs etc + how many active memebrs, whether they are in discussions, proposing guidelines, having collaborations or anything similar? Which ones have "lapsed" are moribund etc & how is this decided?— Rod talk 15:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm prepared to review the current projects. What are our criteria for "inactive"?
Anything else? MRSC ( talk) 16:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Findings:
Hardly a working system at all. I'll leave others to draw conclusions about other regions as I am most interested in London & the SE. MRSC ( talk) 17:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I have recently become interested in improving Sussex-related articles as time permits. I noticed the existence of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sussex as well as WP:Brighton and Hove (linked from there) and would have added my name if both didn't seem inactive. I am doubtful if I would have added my name to a project with a larger title such as South East, South Coast, Home Counties etc. It would not seem relevant or worth the effort. Also, being new to this meta game, I am unsure what would be gained from having a larger project group, with a proportionately larger task list and not proportionately more members.
So I would not wish the Sussex project to be merged to a vaguely worded one: maybe "Sussex and Kent", "Surrey and Sussex" (or Hampshire), but to keep the name seeming local, include the county names. Sussexonian ( talk) 20:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
One project (Thames) has removed the inactive tag. Two, Hertfordshire and Coventry have replaced with "semi-active". I've put a note on the talk page of WikiProject Hertfordshire to see if there is any interest in any form of expansion in order to reinvigorate the project. MRSC ( talk) 15:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a CFD discussion here on Category:Places historically in Berkshire.
This raises the question of the best way of dealing with places which changed counties in 1974 (there have been other boundary changes, but it is the pre-1974 counties which readers are most likely to find references to). Put another way, what is the best way of helping users follow up a reference (in a pre-1974 text) to Abingdon, Berkshire or Pusey, Berkshire?
Possible methods include
It seems to me that each method has drawbacks, but we really need all of them, because readers find articles in different ways. Any views? Mhockey ( talk) 14:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
A thought came to me that for these categories to be accurate and verifiable they would need to be of the form:
This is hopelessly too granular, but the only way to have any meaningful scope or accuracy. MRSC ( talk) 11:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I have taken Totnesmartin's suggestion and opened a discussion here - with an attempt to assess the size of the task. It's quite interesting to see the differences in how the issue is handled for different counties, and at the least some consistency would be desirable. As I suspected, the trickiest bits would be the places transferred to some of the metropolitan counties, but overall the problems do not seem insurmountable. Mhockey ( talk) 15:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Can someone please explain to me in simple terms what is so bad about redirects to identify a place? The article for the place itself should detail any historic boundary changes. Nothing wrong with a list, if someone wishes to maintain one. The advantage of a list is that it can concentrate on the matter in hand, whether the articles exist or not - many civil parishes currently have no articles. As for extra categories, why, why, why! Jan1naD - (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I have left some concerns at Talk:Restoration spectacular#4 years on. Simply south ( talk) 14:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, I put Buildings and architecture of Bath up for GA and a reviewer has started the review, making several comments (at Talk:Buildings and architecture of Bath/GA1) about the structure of the article and areas for development. If any of you had any time to take a look and make any edits or comments you feel are appropriate that would be great.— Rod talk 20:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated George III of the United Kingdom for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Marskell ( talk) 17:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
County Borough of Leeds is nominated for good article status. If you can make any improvements to the article please do. MRSC ( talk) 19:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I want to make some bold but, I believe, effective and fair changes to those articles about districts that have city status which contain a freestanding settlement by the same name, in terms of their title.
That is to say, I would like the "settlement" articles moved to the form "PLACE, CEREMONIAL COUNTY" (per WP:PLACE) with the space presently occupied by the settlement becoming a disambiguation page.
I believe there are several key benefits to this:
The disbenefits are:
Thoughts? -- Jza84 | Talk 11:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
In principle, it is a good move to distinguish between the settlement (the core urban area?) and the local government district, but it would be helpful to have guidelines on what goes in each article. The more controversial bit is whether the article on the settlement is the primary topic in the terms of WP:DAB. It may need to be determined case by case: e.g. I can anticipate some opposition to a move of Canterbury or Winchester. There is a similar issue with Newport (where there is no separate article on City of Newport). If the discussion here is anything to go by, there would be a riot if anyone suggested a move to Newport, Gwent or Newport, Monmouthshire! Mhockey ( talk) 12:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I totally disagree, for what it's worth. If I were on the other side of the world, and looking for information on Salford, say, I would not expect to go to a disamb page with a myriad of different articles all about what is basically the same place. I would be likely to find that confusing. I realise that there are different boundaries for different functions, but to most readers I suspect that those differences are likely to be trivial. In my opinion (and I'm fully expecting to be opposed here by those with an undue fixation on admninistrative geography), it would be far clearer if there were one article on Salford which covered all aspects of the place, ideally with a map or two to show the different boundaries. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 15:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Just coming back to this after a couple of days pause: putting aside the mergers (which for me is a different issue) may I assume there is enough support to start gearing up to move these articles? We may need users with the WP:AWB to help facilitate the transition. -- Jza84 | Talk 21:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
(<--) It's coming up to 72 hours since I posted on Talk:Sunderland. I therefore plan to "test the water" with Sunderland within the next 24 hours. -- Jza84 | Talk 23:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I see some arguments about how some articles should be merged and I would highly recommend starting a discussion at the talk page of WP:UKDISTRICTS, which deals with this exact thing. However, these *moves* are not intended to split or merge any articles. We've recently had a lengthy argument at Talk:Leeds about how "Leeds" primarily means the local government district, and now here we learn that "Sunderland" primarily means the settlement. Different people, different priorities, different ideas of primacy; and no solution will ever please all of them. We should focus our energy on making concise and useful disambiguation pages that direct the reader to the correct article. That, and fix all inbound links. MRSC ( talk) 05:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
As far as I can see several editors had a discussion and brought together a variety of views. Through the course of the discussion a consensus was formed. The Carlisle disambiguation page needs to be edited to ensure it complies with layout detailed at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, that should be the overriding objective. MRSC ( talk) 19:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
This discussion does not have the authority to make name changes to various articles without wider consultation. There are far too many objections, and far too few overall participants in this discussion to make such fundamental changes. We shouldn't be using disambiguation as a default position if there is any doubt, we should be considering the evidence. This cannot be done on a uniform basis, but rather should be done article by article, where the evidence can be properly considered. In this situation, where there are generally 2 alternatives, I do not see the problem with hatnotes to the alternative article. That way it's still only one click away from the other article if the reader had gone to the wrong one, but those who were wanting the article get straight to it. The titles do not disambiguate one from the other - Salford, Greater Manchester could just as easily be about the administrative area as the settlement. If anything, it makes more sense for it to be about the administrative area, given that its disambiguator is another administrative area. As for evidence - the Leeds article had about 10 times the number of hits as the City of Leeds one, before they were merged, which is a pretty good indicator that that is what most people were after. The other problem is the names. City of Foo implies, an actual settlement, not some arbitrary administrative area that the good old 1974 reorganisation gave us. The city status thing in the UK is very peculiar, which few people in the country understand, let alone worldwide. People getting taken to a disambig page and seeing City of Foo at the top will likely think that is talking about a settlement, without reading what the explanation says. If we are serious in our aim to be helping readers, we should be thinking about changing the district article to something like Foo (metropolitan district). This makes it clear that it is different to what most people think of as a city. Quantpole ( talk) 22:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
WP:KENT member commenting. Canterbury does not need to be disambiguated. The use of the word to denote the city is the primary useage. City of Canterbury is the article about the council that has responsibility for the city and surrounding area, something completely different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjroots ( talk • contribs) 15:40, 20 October 2009
As a general point I think the 'place' should be the primary article, and thus I would disagree with the change whereby 'Sunderland' does not go direct to the place but to a dab page. I think this should be done on a place by place basis though, because as pointed out above, there may be times when it is appropriate for a dab. The separate question is whether the primary 'Sunderland' article should have a hatnote pointing to other uses of the name, or whether these are needed at all i.e. could the text for 'City of Sunderland' not just be merged back into 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' - although I again I feel this is a case by case issue.
Eldumpo (
talk)
12:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I too think the 'place' should be the primary article with a hatnote to a 'place'(disambiguation)page. The 'place' article can then, if it's appropriate, explain and link to other entities bearing the name of the place. We have to remember that a lot, possibly the majority, of readers are outside the UK and will be unfamiliar with the niceties of our administrative geography. -- Harkey ( talk) 10:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Not sure where we got to with this? There seems to be quite a heavy weight of opinion against User:Jza84's proposal, but not really anything that could be described as a consensus for anything. I guess the changes to the Sunderland articles ought to be reverted. Should everything else be taken up on individual talk pages? JimmyGuano ( talk) 21:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
After a recent request, I added WikiProject England to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr. Z-man 04:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at talk:Northern Counties? There's a discussion about what the content of the page should be, for example whether it should be a dab page. Nev1 ( talk) 18:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
To the poet " George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron" alone? Or to " Baron Byron" (of which title each holder has been addressed as "Lord Byron" in his own turn)? Currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Lord Byron. — Sizzle Flambé ( ☎/ ✍) 01:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
If someone could take a photo of this architect's work that would be a nice addition to their article. I'm on th ewrong side of the pond. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if anyone can point me at the discussion that we had about using the constituent countries rather than UK on articles? I am unsure which project it was on. Keith D ( talk) 18:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
To the Wonderful Wikipedians Here, on a related topic, I was recently trying to edit WP:MOSDAB#Places to show the top-level nation name just like the actual WP:DAB for Kimberley does. Some quickly verifiable research on modern English usage of the term "England" may be found in WT:MOSDAB/Archive 39#England. I would like to hear what viewpoints are espoused by editors on this project, WP:England. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 13:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Why should we give WP:UNDUE weight to the UK and the UK alone and claim WP:NPOV when that clearly contradicts our own policies and the conventions of international communications, diplomatic, and political bodies like the EU [1], IPU [2], ISO [3], ITU [4], UN [5], UPU [6], the UN List of Non-Self-Governing Territories [7], the Internet's ccTLD [8], the closely related ISO 3166-2 [9], and the one specific to this occasion, ISO 3166-2:GB [10] even though much of the Anglosphere is already confused about the difference between Britain, England, Great Britain, and the UK? :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 23:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Constituent country | Population |
---|---|
England | 50 million |
Scotland | 5 million |
Wales | 3 million |
Northern Ireland | 2 million |
This article has been moved to Cumbric language? It only exists on this page!; which screams out as a somewhat WP:POINTY move. In fact the user has previous with regard to this same redirect ... Any comments? Refutations? Kbthompson ( talk) 22:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
There's a planned press release from at least two Wikimedia chapters (UK and Sweden) for an upcoming image donation from the Mary Rose Trust scheduled for January 3. It's going to be accompanied by a major update of the article on the Mary Rose which is going to be suggested as a DYK in conjunction with the press release. If anyone here is interested in joining in, check out Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Scheduling a DYK date.
Peter Isotalo 23:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Since this is one of the bigger WikiProjects, and that several Wikipedia-Books are England-related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WP England people can oversee books like Towns in Trafford or London Underground much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts. I'm placing this here rather than on the template page since several taskforces would be concerned.
There's an article in this week Signpost if you aren't familiar with Wikipedia-Books and classes in general. Thanks. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 03:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Jonathan Wild for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Parrot of Doom 19:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
A bot has recently been set up to maintain the lists of "Recognised content" for projects eg FAs, FLs, GAs, FPs etc, which can be a pain to maintain by hand. I've set this up for Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset, see User:JL-Bot/Project content for the instructions etc. Would this be useful for this project?— Rod talk 16:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi- Would someone with code expertise be able to fix the Bristol mapbox template? I also left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bristol. Thanks much! -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 18:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Anyone familiar wih Dartmoor? Casliber ( talk · contribs) 20:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Putting aside the fact that Robin Hood is one of England's most important ledgendary and cultural figures, the article is going to start reciving very high amounts of traffic in a couple of months owing to Robin Hood (2010 film). If one googles "Robin Hood", our Wikipedia article is up there near the top result.
It should be one of this project's highest priorities, and greatest assets. Would anyone be interested in taking this to WP:FA ready for May 2010? It's in an OK condition, but lacks zest. -- Jza84 | Talk 12:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I have created and edited quite a few articals on Staffordshire and should like to know if a task force on Staffordshire (as a historical county) could be started. DanielR235 18:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Folks, looking for some help with images for the Marcus Cornish article:
If anyone lives close to any of these or happens to be visiting close by, would you be able to take some pics and upload them to Commons? Thanks in advance. – ukexpat ( talk) 19:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Already done, thanks! File:Jesus-in-Jeans-by-Peter-Royle.jpg. Phew that was fun! – ukexpat ( talk) 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello! I have nominated Bosnian Royal Family article for deletion. The reason for this can be found in this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bosnian Royal Family. Related discussions have been taking place here and here. Your opinion is requested because you are members of Wikipedia:WikiProject England, and therefore you may be interested in the discussion. Some of the disputed claims made in the article, the one which may be of interest to you, include the sentences:
Please note that this is not mean to be canvassing for support; it's done according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Notifying interested people. Regards, Surtsicna ( talk) 13:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
FYI - A massive discussion is taking place at a Request for comment (RfC) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people. About 50k of articles are currently unreferenced and therefore in danger of deletion, some of those are on English subjects (like Edward Burman and Areski Belkacem, deleted for that reason; Alex Leigh, David Brewerton, proposed for deletion, now referenced). The cleanup link in the title above points to a list of unreferenced articles with the WikiProject England template on its talk page. Please revise articles on the list,
We need a lot of hands for this task. Power.corrupts ( talk) 20:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Folks, any advice as to which is the best infobox to use for a Grade 2 listed building -- Fitznells Manor in particular? There does not seem to be a consistent practice, I have seen {{ Infobox UK property}} and {{ Infobox building}} used and I cannot find a specific one for UK listed buildings. Thanks in advance. – ukexpat ( talk) 18:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I would like to draw the attention of the WikiProject to the ongoing discussion at
Template talk:Infobox UK place#Dublin. In summary: {{
Infobox UK place}}
has the following four fields - |dublin_distance=
, |dublin_distance_mi=
, |dublin_distance_km=
, and |dublin_direction=
- should these be kept, or removed? --
Jza84 |
Talk
16:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I've put a $50 bounty on Blenheim Palace for delivery to FA by 11 July 2010, if anyone here is interested.-- Labattblueboy ( talk) 02:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
This project has a declared interest in the Charlie Chaplin article, which is one our most important and most viewed articles. It is being reviewed to see if it matches the criteria for a WP:Good Article. Among other issues it is poorly sourced. The review has been put on hold for seven days to allow time for the article to be sourced. Reference sources can be found on the "Find sources" notice on the talkpage. Further comments can be found at Talk:Charlie Chaplin/GA1. If you feel that Charlie Chaplin doesn't quite match this project's interests, please let me know, and I will remove the project tag from the talkpage. SilkTork * YES! 08:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Please tell me if I'm wrong, but surely Only Fools and Horses is not a top importance article for WP:England?.... especially when the Norman conquest of England is apparently only a high importance article? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Mendip Hills for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles ( BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.
The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>> Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Archive 3/Unreferenced BLPs<<<
If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.
Thank you.
Hi WP:England, I have created a new article Charter fair because so many other articles refer to charter fairs. It is a stub so far and needs substantial expansion. I hope editors in WP:England may be able to help. Thanks, Andy F ( talk) 09:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated John Vanbrugh for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 06:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey all, we would like to invite all of you to join WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. This newly formed WikiProject is seeking to improve the articles associated with the period between the departure of the Roman Empire in 410 to the Norman Conquest in 1066. Any help would be sincerely appreciated! Sadads ( talk) 21:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear all,
I'm pleased to announce that the BM is offering a "backstage pass" tour to any Wikimedians who wish to come along on Friday the 4th of June. Details below, copied from the Announcement by Mike Peel from Wikimedia UK. All Wikipedians are very welcome to come along. The crucial info and signup page is all here
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass.
Sincerely,
Seddon
talk|
WikimediaUK
00:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
From Mike:
Wikimedia UK and the British Museum would like to invite you to a very special event taking place from 11am on Friday 4 June - a "Backstage Pass" to the British Museum!
"You may have heard of the British Museum’s exciting initiative, a Wikipedian-in-Residence, with Liam Wyatt joining us in June to work with museum staff and Wikipedia editors to encourage mutual understanding and improve the encyclopaedia in areas relevant to the Museum’s collection. In order to kick off the residency, I’d like to invite you to join us at the British Museum Wikipedia Backstage Pass Day, on Friday 4 June.
In the morning we have arranged a number of behind-the-scenes and gallery tours for Wikipedians. Then, after lunch together in the staff canteen, we will get together in the Clore Education Centre to talk about collaboration, have a question and answer sessions, hear pitches for adding notable objects and developing featured articles, and hopefully also forming some relationships for future working, during and beyond Liam’s residency.
I hope you can come; there’s a lot of interest here at the Museum about it. I look forward to welcoming you to the Museum. Matthew Cock, Head of Web, the British Museum
This will be an exciting, incredibly important, and - most of all - fun event, so I would encourage you to attend if you are able to. You can find out more information about what will be happening, and sign up to say that you are coming, at: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass
Thanks, Mike Peel, on behalf of Wikimedia UK
The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.
Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Unreferenced BLPs. As of May 17 you have approximately 59 articles to be referenced. The list of all other WikiProject UBLPs can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.
Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope ( talk) 17:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
UK Local Authorities are inherently notable. Yet many council names are currently redirects to articles about places; which are not the same thing at all. I feel we should do the same for all authorities which don't at the moment have their own articles. For example, I recently split Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council out from Metropolitan Borough of Walsall. I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Councils vs Places; what are your thoughts? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know River Parrett has been nominated for Featured Article status and discussion is ongoing at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/River Parrett/archive2. It would be great if anyone had any comments.— Rod talk 19:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
This article is rated "High importance" on your scale. It's been fully protected due to an edit war. Specifically, one editor feels it lacks sources, and there's an IP that keeps reverting that. Some experienced eyes might want to take a look at it. N419 BH 04:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Is anyone actively maintaing/updating this Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Projects page?-- Kudpung ( talk) 14:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a new RFC at Talk:List of cities proper by population#Guiding principles for List of cities proper by population that asks which definition of city proper to use consistently for the purpose of List of cities proper by population. The outcome of this RFC can significantly influence the representation of UK cities on this list. One option on the RFC could result in the removal of all UK cities from the list -- BsBsBs ( talk) 05:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The article Woolston, Shropshire currently deals with two different places and needs to be split into separate articles. WP:UKPLACE indicates that articles for two places of the same name in the same ceremonial county should have their titles disambiguated by local government district; but if I'm reading Shropshire correctly, there are no longer (since the 2009 restructuring) such local districts in Shropshire. As an American, I'm not really conversant with the fine points of political organization in the UK. Could someone expert in handling the relevant WP naming conventions deal with this in an appropriate way? Deor ( talk) 18:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
This football team article would benefit from the attentions of a Wikipedia Editor, please Stranger on the shore ( talk) 02:12, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Sutton Hoo has been nominated to be listed as a Good Article. A review has started and is now on hold while the reviewer does more background reading on the topic. In the meantime a few points have been listed for improvement or discussion here. This project is tagged on the talkpage as one that has an interest in the article, and any extra assistance is always appreciated during a GA review. SilkTork * YES! 10:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Everton F. C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 00:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Category:Hamlets in England has sub-categories for about half of the counties. While 119 places are directly in the category, I suspect many more small villages end up in Category:Villages in Foo. Should we try to achieve consistency across the country? The concept of a village is well understood but, I think, a hamlet less so. What should be the lower limit for a village? Wiktionary gives a UK usage as 'A village that does not have its own church'. Some places consist of little more than a church and I'm not convinced that these should be villages while much bigger places without a church would be hamlets. I tend towards calling everything smaller than a town a village and removing the hamlet categories. Cavrdg ( talk) 20:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
A huge list of map images created by (now absent) User:Morwen that illustrate our articles are currently being deleted because of licensing issues. It is a big task to go through these and review it. Can an administrator undelete those images already deleted (see User talk:Morwen). For those images not yet deleted, source information needs to be filled in where it is missing. MRSC ( talk) 20:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Royal Standard of England is a pretty terrible article, which concerns me deeply given that it appears immediately at the top of our England article, and also that the Royal Standard of Scotland is so very much a better article. Does anybody have the will and ability to make some improvements? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
There are a remaining 131 (out of a total of 326) English local government district articles that do not have {{ Infobox settlement}}. List can be found here. The majority are two-tier non-metropolitan districts. MRSC ( talk) 10:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
The Cheshire portal has been nominated for Featured Portal status. To join the discussion, visit Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Cheshire. Espresso Addict ( talk) 23:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Going through these infoboxes I find a lot of the coats of arms have been deleted because of a lack of non-free use rationale. It appears that the only notification of this was a deletion bot talking to an upload bot! What a sorry state of affairs. If someone could restore the images in User:HeraldicBot/Gallery, I'll work through the correct licensing. MRSC ( talk) 07:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Dorset for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. kind regards Tom B ( talk) 21:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Today an internet spoof has been launched based on Paddlesworth a small village in Kent (see Guardian report & fake newspaper. It is likely that this will lead to disruptive edits to the village article & I would welcome the help of others in keeping an eye on it. I think wikipedia should probably have an article on the spoof (once there is enough coverage) but we need to inform readers what is real & what is spoof - I'm not sure of the best way to do this & I would appreciate any help.— Rod talk 10:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Just for information. Keith D ( talk) 10:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Can an administrator please please please, check out that article and verify that he was English, there seems to be a theory that hes British Just because his dad was Scottish, even the word British is redirected to Anglo-Scot which makes no sense whatsoever Anglo-Scot isn't a nationality, and most notable people from england are listed as English for accuracy in the UK despite whether their heritage is from another country or not cheers all the same WikiEngland. Davido488 ( talk) 12:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Just thought I'd drop a line here to point people to the forthcoming "GLAM-WIKI:UK" conference being held on the 26&27th of November, run by the UK Chapter at the British Museum: http://glamwiki.org/ You'd be very welcome to attend! Keynotes include Sue Gardner, Cory Doctorow and Kenneth Crews (director of the copyright law center at Columbia University). If you would like to present something, please contact me directly. Sincerely, Witty Lama 09:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
There is a current proposal at Talk:Plymouth to rename the article and replace the page with a disambiguation page. The proposal has already been flagged for attention by the automobile wikiproject and as a result a number of comments proposing the car is just as important as the city and keeping the article represents a UK bias. Consequently raising for attention here to give appropriate balance. Comments either way are welcome. Fæ ( talk) 06:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Are there any instructions on how to use this ? Thanks 213.246.122.131 ( talk) 18:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
The Law of England and Wales portal has been nominated for featured status at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Law of England and Wales, and I am notifying related WikiProjects as requested in the nomination instructions. All comments for and against its promotion are welcome, ideally with reference to the featured portal criteria. Bencherlite Talk 11:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Feedback would be appreciated. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the England-related articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:32, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Gunpowder Plot for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick ( talk) 20:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, my friends: A group of us are working on clearing the backlog at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_lacking_sources_from_October_2006. The article in the above header has been without sources for the past four years and may be removed if none are added. I wonder if you can help do so. Sincerely, and all the best to you, GeorgeLouis ( talk) 07:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Does the College of West Anglia really rhyme with flyer? Seems a tad odd. — kwami ( talk) 01:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
There is a proposal for a separate WP:WikiProject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Cambridgeshire that editors here may wish to comment on. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 01:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Please can I have some help with Wikipedia:WikiProject Suffolk and Essex, and Wikipedia:Wikiproject English Hamlets Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 14:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
This article has been nominated for GA listing, and this project's tag is on the talkpage. The article is on hold for seven days as there are some issues which need to be dealt with. If you feel the article has been tagged inappropriately, please remove the tag. If this article is within this project's interest, please visit, and see if you can help out. SilkTork * YES! 01:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
These very similarly named villages are both described as being 9 miles from Alnwick. Can an expert check if they are actually the same place please? Thanks. There's also a Brunton, Northumberland that is 7 miles from Alnwick to add to the confusion... - TB ( talk) 23:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) they both became separate civil parishes in 1866, and were both merged into the new civil parish of Ingram in 1955.
Lozleader (
talk)
00:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
A cleanup list for this project is available here. This list replaces this one which hasn't been updated since March and is not longer being maintained. The new list shows articles, lists etc with this wikiprojects banner and any of a range of tags identifying problems with the article. Unfortunately of the 17062 articles in this project 5020 or 29.4 % are marked for cleanup. There is a template available to add a link to this list (which is updated weekly) from the project page - shall I do this? Can anyone help with starting to cleanup some of the articles listed?— Rod talk 16:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Can I please have some more volunteers for the two Wikiprojects above, especially the English hamlets one, Thankyou. Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 16:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Somerset has been nominated at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Somerset since November and hasn't received many comments. Would you be willing to take a look and comment on whether you feel it meets the Featured portal criteria?— Rod talk 20:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
If a talk page bears {{
WikiProject England}}
, and a project banner for a county (such as {{
WikiProject Essex}}
) is added at a later stage, should the {{
WikiProject England}}
then be removed? --
Redrose64 (
talk)
13:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Editors here may be interested in assisting with the Good Article nomination of Tony Blair. The review can be found at Talk:Tony Blair/GA1. GA is reachable, but it will require hard work. Any assistance would be appreciated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Somerset Levels has been nominated at featured article candidates for a while and has recently been moved to the "Older nominations" section. It really needs more reviewers to examine whether it meets the Featured article criteria, so please visit Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Somerset Levels/archive1 and contribute.— Rod talk 16:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Someone, possibly from Shugborough Hall, appears to be repeatedly deleting information key to the Shugborough inscription article. What can we do to prevent pseudo-historians and other Grail/Arthurian/Da Vinci nutters from vomiting, or in this case v-omitting, details from the page? 92.231.222.12 ( talk) 19:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm planning to add to the pages of villages in England a link with {{ commonscat}} to the related category on Commons (if it exists). Most of these categories are well populated from the ever expanding Geograph project on Commons. I'm going to edit the intersection of articles categorised as villages in England on en.wikipedia and categories categorised as villages in England on Commons. Do you like the idea? -- Basilicofresco ( msg) 12:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
The United Kingdom Census 2011 is topical at the moment. Obviously it will be a while before the results start to become available (particularly the detail down to parish or ward level) but is there a coherent plan anywhere of how the thousands of affected articles on wikipedia will be updated with the new data, perhaps involving county or regional wikiprojects, or is this left to ad hoc editing?— Rod talk 20:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The lead of the article Regions of England defines the scope as “The English Regions are currently the highest tier of sub-national entity of England, used by central Government for statistical purposes. They are defined as first level NUTS regions ("NUTS 1 regions") within the European Union. They have also, until 2010, had an administrative role in the implementation of UK Government policy, and as (mostly indirectly) elected bodies.” By way of background, it also has a bloated history section. The part that deals with the history post the accession to the EEC (as it was then) is largely all right. However, everything before this date is irrelevant to an entity that has no proper existance outside of NUTS and Eurostat. Suggest that Historical and alternative regions of England is the appropriate place for this stuff. I propose to delete the pre EEC history. I also propose to rename the article to NUTS 1 statistical regions of England to correspond with its eponymous category and with similar NUTS 1 article in the EU. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 16:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
can someone check the veracity of Mebyon Kernow#Devonwal (and the realted buts at Devonwall and United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum, 2011) which lead to Devonwall (UK Parliament constituency). are they accruate, factuaklly? Lihaas ( talk) 01:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. :) WP:OTRS has received an e-mail from a reader who suggests that the location of the city of Norwich on the map in the infobox of the article is wrong. I am passing this on in courtesy to our correspondent. If anyone with a familiarity with Norwich wants to take a look at it and verify that it's where it should be, that would be great. Thanks. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Please be aware of the discussion at Talk:The_Beatles#Template_removal.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
The Kennet and Avon Canal article, which is tagged as being of interest to this project, has been a Good Article since 2006. A few editors have recently been expanding and improving this article in an attempt to get it up to Featured Article standard. Could you take a look and help to improve the article?— Rod talk 13:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
For some reason he is listed under WikiProject England. He is a German/Irish Actor so that flag should probably be removed Sue De Nimes ( talk) 16:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Govynn ( talk · contribs) is pushing his Cornish nationalist point of view into a number of this project's articles and is now becoming quite disruptive with some of his/her edits - particularly at Cornwall where the editor is trying to remove all mention of England. Obviously this has been tried before by others and consensus has prevailed, so this is most likely a minor storm and the editor will soon get bored and move on, but in the meantime I would ask members of this project to be vigilant and (if you so wish) weigh in on talk pages with your own view for or against Govynn's actions. -- Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator ( Talk) 08:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
This is getting quite deeply nested, so I propose that any further discussion of Cornwall-related articles take place at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cornwall. Govynn ( talk) 19:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a new weekly section on the main page called "Today's featured list" and I have nominated Timeline of Jane Austen to have a spot here. There has been some opposition to the nomination and it looks like the list could become a removal candidate very soon unless the quality of the list is improved. If you are interested in maintaining the list's featured status and seeing a summary of it up on the main page, your help in improving the article would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 21:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Readers here may be interested in contributing to the discussion at Talk:Diet, Apparel, etc. Act 1363#Requested move. Cheers. - GTBacchus( talk) 01:57, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bonfire Night (disambiguation)#Requested move. Trevj ( talk) 23:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bonfire Night#Requested move. Trevj ( talk) 23:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
The Kennet and Avon Canal article has now been under review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kennet and Avon Canal/archive2 for some time but has not received many comments. I am worried that it will be archived soon unless more comments are received, therefore can I ask anyone interested to participate in the review.— Rod talk 19:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Should articles on hundreds be titled Foo (hundred) or Hundred of Foo? Input and comments please at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Hundreds. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I'm translating Oadby for fr:wp and I read "Danish rule continued until 920, when King Alfred the Great won his battles against the Danes". But Alfred the Great died in 899 according to his article. So I think that there could be some correction to write for this part, I just don't know what is correct. Was it conquered after Alfred the Great's reign? Or did Danish rule was removed as a consequence of Alfred's battle but maybe 20 years later? Thanks. Erdrokan ( talk) 18:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion, started on August 8, in Cfd relating to the renaming of categories for Alumni of schools in England. Any contributions to the discussion would be appreciated. Cjc13 ( talk) 21:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm writing a blog post about what makes a good local article (or set of articles) on Wikipedia - in other words articles about a specific place, such as a town or village, and its features, people, etc.
What do you think we currently do well, or badly, in that regard. What do you, or would you, like to see, in such articles? What are the best examples?
Please feel free to prior discussion, if you know of any. Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion, started on August 17, in Cfd relating to the renaming of categories for Former pupils of schools in England. Any contributions to the discussion would be appreciated. Cjc13 ( talk) 11:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
There is a proposal to merge Fred West and Rosemary West into a single article entitled Fred and Rosemary West. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Might be of interest this proposal Mo ainm ~Talk 15:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
There is discussion at the above AfD as to which NHS hospitals should or should not be considered notable, and how the bar should be assessed for passing WP:GNG, that could do with wider input.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Health Service seems slightly moribund, but I have posted there saying that it might be useful for that project to set out a note of what sort of things a basic entry-level article on an NHS hospital should aim to contain; and perhaps co-ordinate a drive to turn List of hospitals in England blue, at least for as many hospitals as are considered do pass notability, in case anyone would be prepared to put a shoulder to the wheel on this. Royal Surrey County Hospital seems to me a reasonable example of the sort of facts a basic stub article should aim to contain. Jheald ( talk) 09:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When you have time, could you see Talk:Cultural impact of the Falklands War#Malouines ? Thank you. Takabeg ( talk) 08:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about converting the OSGB36 (OS grid refs) on various lists including Grade I listed buildings in Taunton Deane, Grade I listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in Mendip, Grade I listed buildings in North Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in Sedgemoor, Grade I listed buildings in South Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in West Somerset, List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Avon, List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Somerset and List of locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal to use Template:Coord, as I think this offers advantages for users worldwide (who may be unfamiliar with the OS system) and the use of Template:GeoGroupTemplate to enable mapping on googlemaps etc. I have been told that a bot could be tasked to do this, however this would be quite a significant change and would not want to do it without consensus. If anyone has any comments could they join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Automagically converting OSGB36 to coord?.— Rod talk 16:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
It has been suggested that most historical persons before the 16th century should be removed from Category:English Roman Catholics - at least those who were Roman Catholics by default without a significant impact of their Catholicism on their lives, such as, say, Henry V of England. Input would be welcome at Category talk:English Roman Catholics. Huon ( talk) 17:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I was just wondering what would be needed for the page England to be given featured status. Eng66 ( talk) 16:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:England will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in England's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch ( talk) 22:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a dispute about the legitimacy of flags shown for some counties which popped up at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard here. As a FT/N regular I attempted to deal with the issue but it's apparent to me that this is matter for expert opinion in the realm of English history and government, so I'm passing the ball to you guys. Mangoe ( talk) 20:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Now, I have no information about English county flags at all (I was linked here from WP:WPHV) but I can say the idea that there is not a bright line rule that no banner of arms can be used to represent anyone other than the armiger. One need only to look at the Flag of Washington, DC and Flag of Maryland to see counter-examples. Granted, these come from a nation that has no heraldic tradition, but I'm to understand that the Calvert arms were used as Maryland's flag even under colonization. Achowat ( talk) 13:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I thought that if someone was born in a place which at the time was part of one county, but is now part of another county, then it is the former county used on Wikipedia not the latter. Andrew Schofield was born in 1958 and at that time Kirkby was part Lancashire, but a user keeps changing it to Merseyside. There are many examples on Wikipedia where the former county used for someone's county birthplace. Cricketer Alan Wilson was born in Kendal in 1942, and at that time it was part of Westmorland, but is now part of Cumbria. Steeplejack Fred Dibnah was born in Bolton in 1938, then part of Lancashire, but now part of Greater Manchester. Should Wikipedia describe the former birth county or use the current county? This issue goes beyond English counties and covers all the birth (and death) places around the world on Wikipedia. Should we say Frederick I of Prussia was born in the then city of Königsberg, Duchy of Prussia or the current city of Kalingrad, Russia? It is the same city, just it has changed its name and country over the centuries. Rajiv Gandhi was born in 1944, so should Wikipedia keep his birth place as Bombay, British India or change it to the current Mumbai, India? What is the guideline/concensus on how to describe where someone was born/died at the time not how it is at the present? Scrivener-uki ( talk) 17:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I just discovered this list and started a talk point. It is supposedly rereporting the 2001 census data but has totally confused what the report says. Either this needs to quote Birmingham and Manchester by the Greater urban areas as separate entities or London would need to come off the list. It is worrying that this is being requoted elsewhere because of the wiki page. Tetron76 ( talk) 16:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I would like a photo of the main entrance sign to BMI complex, Castle Donington - See google map - The Donington Hall building itself already has a photo, but you are welcome to take additional photos if you please WhisperToMe ( talk) 04:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this discussion about the naming of an upcoming local election. I'd like input from others about how these articles should be named. Thanks. Lugnuts ( talk) 17:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI, Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board has been nominated for deletion. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 04:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello all. If any of you are interested, there is currently a debate going on at the London talk page about whether to change the page's main infobox image montage. It would be useful to have a few more editors' opinions on this matter, so please drop by if you can. -- ThunderingTyphoons! ( talk) 19:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been redirected to Wikipedia:UK Wikipedians' notice board. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 23:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI, Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board has been nominated for deletion. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 04:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello all. If any of you are interested, there is currently a debate going on at the London talk page about whether to change the page's main infobox image montage. It would be useful to have a few more editors' opinions on this matter, so please drop by if you can. -- ThunderingTyphoons! ( talk) 19:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been redirected to Wikipedia:UK Wikipedians' notice board. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 23:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there any consensus, guideline, or policy on the use of "British" and "English" to describe particular people (eg, lead sentence of biography), label them (infobox nationality), or put related articles in categories (eg, British children's writers)?
This doesn't concern England only, or people only, but it's best to ask in terms of one example and this may be the biggest one at wikipedia.
For example,
· Should "British" reflect the person's self-identification or politics? such as opposition to UK devolution.
· Should "British" positively signify geographical or ethnic complexity? such as raised here, migrated and raised a family there; writes in Welsh, doesn't live in Wales; mixed English and Scottish parentage and upbringing; etc.
Not strictly a third alternative,
· Should "British" be a preliminary and residual description, label, category? Then most editors should use it liberally, I believe, in effect "pending further research"; more knowledgeable editors should use "English"; this project should [given enough members] work on reducing the British backlog.
One good example category: Category:British children's writers now contains 227 articles --almost all biographies of what is says-- while its English, Scottish, and Welsh subcategories contain 434, 37, and 19 articles. If I tool correctly ( Combine wiki-Categories), 19, 1, and 10(!) of the latter overlap with the British.
One good example article: Jenny Nimmo is consistently "British" here at wikipedia. She was English, has lived in Wales since marrying a Welshman almost 40 years ago(?). Her books have been first published in the UK, and some previous editors may have known no more than that. She writes some fiction(?) with Welsh background ( Tir na n-Og Award).
Here at WPE my higher priority is to learn about describing people as British or English, etc, rather than what is specific to literature. But any guidance will be appreciate. -- P64 ( talk) 20:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Anybody care to do a quick update of Burke's Peerage?
It currently says
Thanks.
-- 186.221.136.197 ( talk) 13:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I have just completed a List article named List of national parks of England and Wales, having been inspired to create it after I read the List of national parks of the United States. I would very much like to have the review and revision necessary to make this article as good as it can be. Is there a designated place where I should do this? Kwib ( talk) 11:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Category:Banburyshire, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.
Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 ( talk) 06:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Category:English independent ministers of the Rebellion period, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Black Falcon ( talk) 04:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated List of English football champions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by OdinFK ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that in the article on Elizabethan era, the infobox at right that lists the eras ends at the Edwardian era. What happens after that? If you actually go the Edwardian era article, it has the same infobox, which says it's followed by "World War I" (that is, History of the United Kingdom during World War I). THAT article has the same infobox which says that it's followed by " Interwar period", which isn't about England specifically (it's about Europe and the world in general) and which doesn't have an infobox at all, so a reader would have no idea what comes after that or where to go for the next phase of English history.
Basically the continuity starts to fall apart in Edwardian era and peters out completely two articles later in the sequence, at Interwar period. I'm not sure how to fix this, but you guys seem the right people to do so. Or is the history of the UK no longer defined in "eras" after that point?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookgrrl ( talk • contribs) 19:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Is this videogame character really top importance to WPENGLAND? See Talk:Captain Price -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 03:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC) Some one has vandalised the tudor page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.220.196.249 ( talk) 17:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi -- I think someone has been messing with your List of English Words of Anglo-Saxon Origin page... I'm pretty sure the Saxons did not leave their home in "Levittown", arrive in England's green and pleasant land in an "Ironside", and present the Celts with an "I.O.U." Nor did they celebrate "Arbor Day", invent "LED"s, or indulge in "Abderian Laughter" (although that might be a telling addition.) I removed "The Beatle" and "Beatlemania" because, come on. But I don't have the time to sort throuh all of them -- enjoy! Grammargal ( talk) 16:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm a student at Cornell University working on a class project to improve/expand the Brick Lane Market article. I've personally never been to the market (another member of my project group has) but if anyone here who knows about the market wouldn't mind taking a look at our proposed additions, that would be much appreciated. Thanks! Joey236 ( talk) 20:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I've created this new article. If you've got additional input for secondary sources, please feel free to suggest them at the article's talk page, I'd really appreciate it. :) Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 18:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Would there be any interest in starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Staffordshire? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated the Cheshire portal for featured portal status. Please join the discussion here. Espresso Addict ( talk) 21:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Linked move requests concering the Baron de Ros have come up, see Talk:William de Ros, 3rd Baron de Ros and Talk:William de Ros, 4th Baron de Ros. A related BOLD move was performed on William de Ros, 2nd Baron de Ros. -- 70.24.248.246 ( talk) 22:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated University of Cambridge as a good article. Since it falls within the scope of your project and was classified high-importance, I thought you may be able to help or want to take part in the process. Thanks, -- Mark91 it's my world 12:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
An American user keeps on trying to emtpty/delete this, opinions please? -- MacRùsgail ( talk) 15:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK is committed to supporting our volunteers and to encourage them to teach others how to edit Wikipedia, we are running a weekend training workshop that will take place on the weekend of 23–24 February in Newcastle. We would particularly encourage anyone from North East England and Scotland to attend. Richard Nevell (WMUK) ( talk) 10:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Should Jan Łaski (John Laski) use the Polish spelling, or the spelling used while he was in England? See talk:Jan Łaski -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 17:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Several sub-categories of Category:Seasons in English cricket, which are all within the scope of this WikiProject, have been nominated for renaming or upmerger.
If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the categories' entry on the Categories for discussion page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi all,
Just to let you know that the Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums are advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence ( announcement). It's a funded post, part-time through spring and early summer, based in Newcastle (so may well suit a student). Applications are open until 4th March. They're particularly interested in the prospect of someone wanting to work with the shipbuilding & industrial history collections, and digitising some of the material they have in their archives.
Details are available on their website, and there's some details about other upcoming UK residency programs here.
Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested, and feel free to get in touch with me if you've any questions! Andrew Gray ( talk) 15:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
file:Colonel John McClure, Founder of Heaton Mersey Cricket and Lacrosse.jpg has been nominated for deletion. This is a portrait of his time as Lord Mayor of Stockport (Manchester). -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 03:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Nominated
River Welland and
River Witham
--
Robert EA Harvey (
talk)
11:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Was the current Bracknell Leisure Centre, located in Bracknell, England, formerly the Bracknell Sports Centre, which used to host concerts in the 1970s and early 80s? Can someone give me a history lesson on this venue? I'm currently trying to write an article on this historical venue. Evangp ( talk) 10:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Category:Parliament of England, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Parliament of England (pre-1707). If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Comment would be welcome here on what category names should be used for the Members of Parliament who sat at Westminster during the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland in the 1650s. Thanks. Opera hat ( talk) 20:30, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
have been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 05:36, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Lì (chinese surname) for a mess regarding various Lee/Li surnames. -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 04:12, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
From AfC. Feel free to improve it. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to the Bristol Wiki Meetup which will take place at The Commercial Rooms, 43-45 Corn Street, Bristol BS1 1HT on Sunday 28 July 2013 from 1.00 pm. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Bristol topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. Philafrenzy ( talk) 22:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Relevant submission to this Project. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 21:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Another one. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
In September the UK is taking part for the first time in the international photography competition Wiki Loves Monuments. Participants will be invited to submit pictures of listed buildings of significant importance (grades I or grade II*), as recorded by English Heritage. The main external website for competitors can be found here, and you can leave a message there if you have queries about competing. Do please join in, and let people in your local area know of this excellent way in which both existing and new Wiki users can help improve the encyclopaedia by contributing photographs of local listed structures. What about organizing a local Wikimeet to attract new people?
In preparation for the start of the competition on 1st September there is still quite a lot of work to do, and we would like to ask for the help of members of this wikiproject. Your local and expert knowledge will be invaluable in ensuring that the lists of eligible buildings are up to date and correctly formatted. If you look at Listed buildings in the United Kingdom you will see how many structures are included. If you then follow the link to Listed buildings in England, you can get to the detailed lists for your area. Alternatively have a look at the WLM planning table. Can you help to ensure that the lists for your area are up to date and well presented?
Some of the lists have been semi-automatically generated from data provided by English Heritage. These use pre formatted templates (eg EH header) which will make it much easier for competition participants to upload their photographs to Commons as an automated process. Please don't change the template structure, as we need to ensure that the templates are properly compatible with the WLM standards that are in use worldwide. The format will allow a bot automatically to collect the information and to put it into the international Monuments Database.
The data still needs the attention of local editors:
For further information, please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom.
If you have any queries, please post them not below but on the Organizers' help page on Commons.
Anything you can do to help improve these lists will be much appreciated. The final deadline for cleaning up is 31st August.
-- MichaelMaggs ( talk) 16:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
-- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 05:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Category:Extra Knights Companion of the Garter has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 06:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
category:Extra Ladies of the Order of the Garter has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 08:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
image:Berkshire flag.svg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 10:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
image:Eleanor of Guelders.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 11:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
I have been resolving red links in List of civil parishes in Lincolnshire#South Kesteven, and have created:
I have, where required, created and populated the matching commons category - all further contributions gratefully received.
None of them have infoboxes. I am not an infobox sort of person. If anyone is madly enthusiastic about them, feel free.
I have one more to do, then on to North Kesteven. On the way I discovered a whole range of parish councils, from the madly efficient to the about-to-be-sanctioned. Some have just been rolled up with next door.
-- Robert EA Harvey ( talk) 07:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
File:Fr. Rolfe III.JPG has been nominated for deletion - 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 22:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Would you mind having a look at this article. It seems ite decent. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 16:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
There are some serious deficiencies which several users have identified in the Stephen Hawking article which was promoted to FA status earlier this year after an FAC that wasn't rigorous. Please feel free to comment and contribute to the debate at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Hawking/archive1 on whether this article should be delisted and what work needs to be done.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 17:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Winston Churchill, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer ( talk) 01:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Halton Lea Gate. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 20:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crowhurst Park. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot ( talk) (for Mr. Z-man) 05:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Plymouth#Requested_move_at_22:14.2C_23_February_2014_.28UTC.29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.121.43 ( talk) 22:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster ( talk) 20:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC).
Discussion started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities#Weather_box on the use of Template:Weather box in articles. SilkTork ✔Tea time 16:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
An editor has been manually merging categories for comprehensive schools in England up into Secondary schools, without discussion. Please see the nomination to reinstate these at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Category:Comprehensive schools in London. – Fayenatic L ondon 15:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Could somebody take a critical look at Ascension Parish Burial Ground? A rather disruptive IP-hopper is getting really annoying in his editing. Help needed to bring this article up to standard. The Banner talk 12:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Europe may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 18:47, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
09:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I have a suggestion for streamlining pages and making them more accessible. I've noticed that "English" and "British" have separate category pages, for example: "English women writers" and "British women writers" are separate categories, with different lists. Can these pages be merged? 71.119.37.82 ( talk) 13:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Mansion House - Hurstpierpoint. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 16:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey All, just wanted to let everyone know, that we have about 15 more slots available for access to British Newspaper Archive through WP:The Wikipedia Library. If you would like access, apply at WP:BNA. Sadads ( talk) 14:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Sir Richard Threston. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at Prehistoric Norfolk ? There's 6 different kinds of references going on here, and references and content running into each other, several separate references sections in the middle of content sections. It's rather a mess, and has been since atleast 2009. -- 65.94.171.126 ( talk) 11:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
There are current discussions about the title of these articles at Talk:National Character Area, Talk:Natural Areas of England and Talk:Local Nature Reserve which may be of interest. Bermicourt ( talk) 13:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
If community councils in England are notable, could someone approve Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Myland Community Council? If they aren't, could this AfC submission me merged into the appropriate article? Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
The usage of English rose ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion, see talk:English rose (personal description) -- 65.94.169.222 ( talk) 06:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Other articles that maybe worth a look are May Queen (with a suggested split of article as mentioned at Talk:May_Queen#Oldest) and Bulldog (with a suggested reference to British Bulldog as at Talk:Bulldog#British_bulldog). Gregkaye ( talk) 09:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion may be of interest to this wikiproject. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics#Local_Election_Results_.28Particularly_in_Wales.29 Gaijin42 ( talk) 16:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Template:Lang-en-emodeng ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.169.222 ( talk) 08:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
On the main page, paragraph 4, we read: "The kingdom of England (which included Wales). . ."
Now, how did that happen? When one nation comes to "include" another, it seems some explanation is needed!
Likewise, "In 1800, Great Britain was united with Ireland" makes it sound as if it was by mutual consent; a glance at Irish history tells us it was not so!
We mustn't let our natural pride in our nation blind us to the realities of our relationships with other nations. For our own well-being more than for our neighbours', we need to be honest. Hoffoholi ( talk) 12:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Church of England dioceses to go up on the main page, and some concerns have been raised here, specifically with respect to sourcing. Any help you are able to provide in finding additional sourcing for the information in the list would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 18:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Following is a list of sculptures, monuments and memorials without Wikipedia articles. User:Ham and I have put this list together and we believe the links below reflect the most appropriate article titles based on naming conventions. I have been creating many articles for London artworks since my recent visit to the city, but I welcome other editors to please assist with the creation of these articles to help improve the encyclopedia.
All help welcome! ---- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
There are quite a few parishes with names duplicated within the same district or UA. There is a discussion here suggesting a change to UK:PLACE. Views welcome.-- Mhockey ( talk) 20:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the usage of "Anglo-Nubian" is up for discussion, see Talk:Anglo-Nubian -- 65.94.171.225 ( talk) 05:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Contributors to this WikiProject are invited to comment at Talk:English settlement in Nicaragua about the nature and purpose of that article. I cannot determine what the article's purpose is, and whether it might be merged or redirected to Mosquito Coast. Cnilep ( talk) 00:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I just found a short article about Compendium Competorum and thought I'd add a reference to it, but have been unable to verify this subject exists let alone finding sources for it. (There are no results returned in either Google Books or Google Scholar once Wikipedia-derived sources are excluded.) I thought I'd bring it to the attention of this project, as it may have better luck finding offline sources. Mind matrix 16:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
This article from the Observer points out that it will be the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta next year (15 June 2015) and suggests there will be various TV and radio programmes (and books etc) to coincide with the significant date. I note this article regularly gets 150,000+ page views per month and this is likely to increase. Would it be worth trying to get a collaboration going to get it to at least GA or even FA standard before the anniversary?— Rod talk 18:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I've nominated Exhumation of Richard III of England for consideration as a Good Article in advance of his reburial next March, which will attract a huge amount of interest. The article is in good shape and is quite comprehensive, so I'm sure it will be a good GA candidate. I'd be grateful for any help with the GA review. Prioryman ( talk) 18:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Vivien Leigh for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej ( talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
20th January 2015 is the 750th anniversary of the first English Parliament. [10] However the article De Montfort's Parliament is not eligible for Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/January 20 because it's tagged with refimprove. Does anyone have the references at hand and knowledge to clean this up?
The BBC [11] are planning a "Democracy Day" of live events, discussions and debate, produced in partnership with the Speaker’s Office of the House of Commons, including broadcasts from inside Westminster. Whizz40 ( talk) 23:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
WP:GA article From The Doctor to my son Thomas had a couple quote boxes at time of promotion to GA quality.
Now there's a discussion about use of those quote boxes.
Please see discussion, at Talk:From_The_Doctor_to_my_son_Thomas#Quote_boxes.
Thank you,
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi, is there someone in Oxford who can help photograph Robert Hues' memorial brass in Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford, for the article about him, and upload it to the Wikimedia Commons? Thanks! — Cheers, JackLee – talk– 09:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
A requested move has popped up at WP:RM about moving Norfolk around. 76.66.198.171 ( talk) 13:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Any input at Talk:Leeds would be appreciated. Thanks, — Jeremy ( talk) 20:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks. DDStretch (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC) (on behalf of the taskforce)
Keep an eye out on this article, I've twice had people insert POV into the article, calling it 'lovely' or 'a perfect tourist destination.' Example: [1]. Being someone who has driven through this place, I can tell you it is none of these things, but that's just my opinion. At least, me and everyone else I know who's been there. Anyhow, no OR. Zazaban ( talk) 22:49, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the London article. It's currently a GA, but even from a cursory glance at the lead I'm confident that this article would fail a GA-review. We have several outstanding "citation needed" tags, as well as dead links and uncited claims. London is a Top priority for this project, and is one of the most important cities in human history. Perhaps this project could apply some collective TLC? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Buckingham Palace for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Mattisse ( Talk) 19:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
I am sure we are all aware that some counties have their own projects and some counties do not. Although the county projects are generally inactive (the ones I use are), they do provide a means of grouping together the appropriate articles. This is useful for someone looking for articles to work on, or with tools such as User:WolterBot.
My hypothesis is that they are people who want to take part in a local county project, but setting one up is a bit of a daunting task.
My suggestion is that we create a project for all Counties. Just a basic page, with all the necessary templates. MortimerCat ( talk) 10:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi all
I have proposed a new project " Wikiproject Norfolk & Suffolk" and would appreciate any support that I can get for getting this through.
I did think of making it a task force, but that would limit action as it would have to belong to a parent.
Many thanks-- Chaosdruid ( talk) 04:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot ( Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there any interest in forming a sub-project for this county? I'm surprised to find it doesn't exist already, and considering it contains such notable topics as Stonehenge, Longleat and others, it would seem to be worthy of interested parties gathering together. -- Rodhull andemu 18:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated J. R. R. Tolkien for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I have rewritten the Battle of Barnet, and plan to take it to FAC. In light that the battle saw the death of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, the "Kingmaker", and the securing of Edward IV of England's throne, I thought this project might be interested in the article. Please take a look and leave comments/suggestions at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Barnet/archive1. Thank you. Jappalang ( talk) 16:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows ( full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to
report bugs and
request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a
"news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none
parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at
Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. — Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:07, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Bruce Castle is currently up for peer review. This is a somewhat unusual article in that, while as far as I know it covers the subject as comprehensively (within reason) as possible, there are large gaps where sources don't exist, so ideally I'd like any issues that can be fixed, fixed before it goes to any potential FAC. – iridescent 17:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
BBC has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. — Levi van Tine ( t – c) 08:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Soliciting input at the AfD. - Dan Dank55 ( push to talk) 19:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
So what's the status of Cornwall now then? From what I have gathered there is the ceremonial/shire county of Cornwall, which in it contains two unitary districts: the Isles of Scilly and Cornwall. Is this accurate? -- Joowwww ( talk) 16:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, I just joined :) I have a few English articles at GAN ( Worsley, Eccles, and The Dark Side of the Moon) but wanted to draw wider attention to the above article. I'd like to get that to GA, and who knows, maybe FA one day. It makes me giggle slightly every time I look at it. Anyhow, if anyone has any books on rude words, or medieval history, and can contribute, feel free to do so. I'm reaching the end of what is possible online, so a visit to Manchester library will be in order methinks. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 10:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Why do we have two User WikiProject Boxes Template:User WPEngland and Template:User WikiProject England
This user is a member of WikiProject England |
This user
participates in WikiProject England. |
:
Can we have one that does not over use the
Flag of England and use a map of
England like
Template:User WPScotland
This user is a participant in WikiProject Scotland. |
Mr Taz ( talk) 13:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
We are
Wikimedia UK - the group of local Wikimedians helping the Foundation to create " a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge". Love Wikipedia? Based in the UK? Can you support us in projects such as generating free-content photographs, freeing up archive material and media relations? Or are there other projects you'd like us to help with? if so, please click here to Join up, Donate and Get Involved |
AndrewRT( Talk) 21:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I have proposed to the WikiProject Council that I create WikiProject Nottinghamshire. Please go to the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Nottinghamshire to add your support or comments. I have started a template page in my sandbox for this project too. KlickingKarl ( talk) 02:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could I ask for some eyes on Ramblers, formerly Ramblers' Association, where a new user and spa is intent on inserting a negative POV into the article, please? Thanks, -- Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Could somebody explain the purpose and criteria for membership of Category:People from Essex (before 1965), Category:People from Middlesex (before 1965), Category:People from Kent (before 1965), Category:People from Surrey (before 1965), and Category:People from Hertfordshire (before 1965). I don't mean explain to me here, I mean explain to the public at large on the relevant Category page. I presume it has something to do with 1965 county boundary changes, but the precise logic is obscure. jnestorius( talk) 23:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Graham Chapman is IMHO in serious need of cites. -- 201.37.230.43 ( talk) 12:01, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a Mormon temple in London. Should the article belong to this WikiProject? LDS-SPA1000 ( talk) 18:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a Mormon temple in Preston, Lancashire. Should the article belong to this WikiProject. LDS-SPA1000 ( talk) 20:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Peterborough Chronicle for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey ( cricket calendar poll!) 04:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hail and listen to this lil request. The Battle of Barnet has come to challenge for a bronze FA star at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Barnet/archive1. Prithee to go and comment on the article, to decide if it deserves to be Wikipedia's best article. For Harry, England, and St George! Jappalang ( talk) 08:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I would appreciate input in the dispute which is occurring at Talk:Anglophobia. Some editors think that my edits regarding Welsh anglophobia are not in accordance with WP policy. I would value other perspectives on the version I have submitted: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anglophobia&oldid=290071633 BillMasen ( talk) 11:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone interested in taking photos of village signs and adding them to Wikipedia? I've been adding some myself but it's a slow process and was just wondering if anyone else can help. See my userpage for some examples. If you've got a sign nearby to you then why not take a photo! -- Uksignpix ( talk) 19:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.
We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.
If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 06:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
This article is a mess. Virtually all that is encyclopaedic is said in the lead. I removed the entire External Links section as it was just linkspam but it still needs a good rewrite. Mjroots ( talk) 05:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, here is an article on the battle (yet again) that killed a king and crowned his opponent. Henry VII of England, the winner, however, established the Tudor dynasty that lasted a century. I greatly appreciate it if you would take a look and offer your comments and critiques at Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Bosworth Field/archive1 to help this article to become a Featured Article. Thank you. Jappalang ( talk) 08:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Doctor Who for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 02:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
A range of issues have been identified with the England article, which was promoted to GA status a couple of months ago. The problems are detailed at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/England/1 and if anyone wanted to help improve the article to meet these concerns that would be great.— Rod talk 07:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
As talked about above I tried creating a watchlist for the project but there is obviously some limits on the links that Special:RecentChangesLinked can cope with.
A list of everything is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchAll, a list of just the articles is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchArticles and a list of talk pages with non-article entries is at WP:WikiProject England/WatchOther. I suggest that you do not view these pages as they are very slow to load and usually give a page load error. The Special:RecentChangesLinked appears to operate correctly on the article only list so that may be useful, on the everything and other lists it does not return any information.
This link shows you what you get with this recent changes linked function for the articles only list.
As the number of articles tagged increases there may be problems with the article only list.
Anyone any ideas?
Keith D ( talk) 22:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Having browsed the History of England article and some of its linked articles, I have to agree with the remarks made by User:Jza84, above. Most are in need of some TLC. Am I correct in thinking that there is no Wikiproject for British or English history? If I am correct most will benefit from being tagged by WP:England so that we can keep a constructive eye on them. As some of the articles purport to be part of a series they really need looking at as a whole, which is quite a daunting prospect.-- Harkey ( talk) 11:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Can all English Wikipedians stop starting WikiProjects for each of England's Counties etc and join together under for the English Regions WikiProjects Mr Taz ( talk) 16:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Jza84 Do you mean WP:Yorkshire Mr Taz ( talk) 18:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject East Midlands England - Wikipedia:WikiProject East of England - Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater London - Wikipedia:WikiProject North East England - Wikipedia:WikiProject North West England - Wikipedia:WikiProject South East England - Wikipedia:WikiProject South West England - Wikipedia:WikiProject West Midlands England - Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire and the Humber Mr Taz ( talk) 17:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, we know what the English regions are, but what advantage is to be gained by having regional rather than county Wikiprojects? I am in agreement with Jza84 here.-- Harkey ( talk) 17:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
London has it's own region WP:Greater London and not in the WP:South East England Region Mr Taz ( talk)
Ok, consensus seems to be heavily against this idea, but what problems was it trying to address? (Some input from Mr Taz would be helpful here). What seems to have emerged from this discussion (being mentioned by at least three different people) is that communication between the existing projects needs to be improved. Many projects have a wealth of experience in a wide range of areas, yet there are some which are struggling.
So the question is, how can the current system be improved? Strength comes from diversity and experience, the more members a project has, the better it should be doing (in theory). At the moment, the most effective way of recruiting members is posting notes on editor's talk pages; I don't see that there's a hugh amount WP:E can do about that. What I think might be effective is helping editors to learn the skills of writing good articles (delibarate lower case, not every article has to be Good although hopefully the end product of trying to give editors more experience would be an increase in the numbers of GAs and FAs). The way I would like to see this happen is individual projects identfing a few articles and working on them. They could ask for suggestions within the project, then go to other projects with more experience in the relevant area. There are problems with this idea, but could it work?
I'm not sure what WP:E's role within this would be, perhaps as a central hub where people looking for help can come instead of other projects and a centralised place for discussion. Nev1 ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I think this project's importance in encouraging good article work from the ground up is as important as addressing the big articles such as history of England. I don't know how successful or practical my suggestion of collaborations for county projects is, but I think we should give it a try with one project. After looking quickly through the WP:UKGEO list of subprojects, there seem to be a few candidates which might benefit from such a scheme: WP:DERBYS is the only county level project I've seen without any Good or Featured Articles, WP:BEDS and WP:SURREY hava 2 GAs each, and WP:BERKS has 1 FL and 1 GA. WP:DERBYS seems most in need, and has a few active editors I think, but another good candidate IMO is WP:NOTTS; it has 1 FA and 2 GAs and was only started in April of this year. Hopefully, its members are more likely to be active/still around than some of the other projects and as WP:NOTTS is still expanding (only 196 articles ATM) I think it needs our help. I'd like to pick one, leave a note on the project's talk page and on the talk pages of all its members to see if we can get this off the ground. Nev1 ( talk) 14:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Update I've left a note on WT:NOTTS to see if there's any interest in trying this collaboration thing. Nev1 ( talk) 11:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Is it appropriate at this time to discuss the Scope of the WP:ENGLAND? If all articles from all other WPs are tagged it will make it quite unwieldy particularly as I would like to request that we have a 'Watchlist' to keep abreast of changes and patrol for vandals.-- Harkey ( talk) 14:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Picking up on Nev1's ideas I have mulled it over and have put together an aunt Sally of an idea. It may not be appropriate or well thought out but it is a start. Comments welcome, but if you think it is rubbish then come up with something better to address the problem of dissemination information on article improvement to inexperienced editors. See User:Keith D/sandbox3 for details. Keith D ( talk) 20:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
University of Cambridge has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 23:33, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
There is no project on this "England" article and there is no edit to it since 2 years. Why can I not redirect "WikiProject England" to "Wikipedia:WikiProject England"? Is it reserved or something? ~ R. T. G 11:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
If anyone is in proximity to Donington Hall, Castle Donington, would someone mind photographing the BMI (airline) headquarters? WhisperToMe ( talk) 21:17, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I posted this at Reference desk, but perhaps there might be editors here who do not visit there.
The window in question can be seen at http://www.flickr.com/photos/jayt47/3212958113/in/set-72057594129234850/. I have been in communications with the author, and he said that he forgot all the details about this photo. I doubt its location is at Husbands Bosworth: looking through the set of photos, this image was taken just less than 10 minutes from the Bosworth Battlefield Heritage Centre (where the diorama is located). Hence, I suspect the window could be at Sutton Cheney or somewhere nearby. If anyone knows the church this window is at, please do tell. Information on the creator and period in which the window is created are also appreciated. Jappalang ( talk) 02:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Come all! Your comments and critiques are welcomed for the Battle of Bosworth Field at its FAC. Please read the article and decide if it deserves the bronze star, or if it needs a wee push or more. Thank ye all. Jappalang ( talk) 08:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Could some template expert provide a moddable Cite book (or Cite web?) template for citing the Victoria History of the Counties of England, please? See talk:Victoria County History for background. It is a very useful resource for the histories of English villages. Thanks. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Southport#disambiguation requesting to move Southport and replace it with Southport (disambiguation). Comments welcome! Jeni ( talk)(Jenuk1985) 20:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated BBC television drama for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found a large number of concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Natasha Bedingfield/GA1. I have de-listed the article which can be renominated at WP:GAN when these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells ( talk) 20:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone play bingo here? This list of bingo nicknames is up for deletion and could do with a little fattening up. Nick mallory ( talk) 06:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Penda of Mercia for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cirt ( talk) 18:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently expanding the article on List of UNESCO World Heritage Sites in the United Kingdom and am pondering what should be used as the lead image(s). It's not the most important issue in developing the article, but I thought that as the list covers the whole of the UK that as many editors as possible should be given a say. I'll leave a note at the England and Scotland wikiprojects and see if the discussion goes anywhere. Please leave any comments on the article talk page. Thanks, Nev1 ( talk) 19:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
England has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. — Kpalion (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I have always been told that "Georgian" only applied to the first group of kings called George (I-IV) and have edited a couple of articles based on this. If I am wrong could someone point me the right way? Thanks. Britmax ( talk) 19:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, there's a slightly disheartening discussion going on over at Durham at the moment about renaming the page to the fictional title "Durham, County Durham" to make way for a disambiguation, or even the US city. I was wondering if anyone could help? Bob talk 08:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Hull City A.F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Malleus Fatuorum 15:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
This article has recently been nominated for DYK, and before it appears on the Main page it would be nice to have some type of independent confirmation of the facts claimed in the article. As noted in the DYK discussion, this article has proven resistant to verification. A person with more local knowledge of Letchworth and its history, or merely access to the local interest publications cited by this article, and who could help clarify things it would be greatly appreciated. -- Allen3 talk 10:48, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Talk:Lincoln#Attempts at a consensus regarding wording on the disambiguation page, extra opinions are needed to generate a consensus. Jeni ( talk) 03:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Just a nudge that I plan to overright the Cornish people article with this draft very soon. That is, unless there is objection? If there is, or even any support, please direct it at Talk:Cornish people. -- Jza84 | Talk 22:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Alerting all WikiProject England members that England is undergoing a reveiw for WP:GA status. Things you can help with are listed here. Please help if you can, thanks, -- Jza84 | Talk 14:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
1224 articles about geographically locatable subjects in England are missing geographical coordinates. Finding the latitude and longitude of locations, and entering coordinates into articles is straightforwards, and explained at Wikipedia:How to add geocodes to articles. Having coordinates on articles using the {{ coord}} template provides a link to the article's subject on a wide range of maps, and that links to the articles are provided in GoogleMaps, MultiMap and other such places which use wikipedia data. A breakdown of articles needing coordinates by county is found at Category talk:England articles missing geocoordinate data. All help in geo-coording them is welcome/urged/implored. thanks -- Tagishsimon (talk) 18:30, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! I've recently made significant additions to the Capel St. Mary article. This was rated as stub-class by a bot in 2007, but I think that contributions since then, as well as my additions, have probably changed the article's class. I'd appreciate having someone impartial and more experienced than me check it over and re-rate it if they have the time. Sorry if I'm barking up the wrong tree; this is the first time I've dealt with a WikiProject.
Many thanks!
Brammers ( talk) 21:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there any reason why {{ WikiProject England}} does not generate importance scale categories? MRSC ( talk) 07:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Now that importance has been added to the template, would this be a good time to revisit the Priority Scale given on Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Assessment? (which may also involve reconsideration of the goals & scope of the project). We did some work on this at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/Assessment and although the projects have different scopes this might be a helpful starting point?— Rod talk 10:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
I would like to propose a task force as part of this project (and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography). I want to include the 326 English local government districts. These are highly variable in quality and content, some are developed fully and others are barely stubs. I am particularly interested in this area and have a fair bit of knowledge on UK subdivisions. It is a fairly big task and I wonder if anyone is interested in joining me? MRSC ( talk) 08:58, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Category:Towns in Gloucestershire has (to me) wrongly included Category:Cheltenham and Category:Stroud, Gloucestershire. Is there any discussion/guidance on what parent cats these 'town category pages' should have? Eldumpo ( talk) 13:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Relevant AfD to this WikiProject, on the article Bethel Church, Mansfield Woodhouse. Cirt ( talk) 05:19, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
As this wikiproject seems to be getting active I had a look for some of the tools wikiprojects can use to help manage articles. Would other members like me to set up a monthly popular pages listing (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset/Popular pages for an example)? In addition Wikipedia:Article alerts can help to track any pages with the WikiProject England banner which are included in DYK, nominations for GA. FA etc and also any proposed for deletion or similar. Another tool is cleanup listings which are less frequently updated but highlight articles with problems such as {{ unreferenced}}, {{ uncat}}, or {{ cleanup}}, or inline markers like {{ fact}}. Would these be helpful?— Rod talk 19:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
List of abbeys and priories in England contains at least 46 transclusions from of other articles. Needs work. MRSC ( talk) 16:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I have just joined this project. I see a very few biographies are included in the project. What are your guidelines on including biographies in this project? Also, what sort of historical articles are appropriate? Thanks! - PKM ( talk) 18:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
eg - Ross-on-Wye and other towns in Herefordshire (mostly).
Numerous editors have removed the Welsh place names (they're not relevant - and isn't there a Welsh language Wikipedia?), yet user Hoary seems to be on a one man campaign to keep them in place. These areas are in England, and the Welsh name has no legal standing outside of Wales - particularly the placing of the Welsh namess in the infobox under the real names seems to suggest the names have any signifiance.
92.14.197.200 ( talk) 22:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note There appears to be significant anonymous meatpuppetry going on in this debate and edit war from the following (and possibly others):
These IPs all have very short contribution histories that mainly or only include edits related to this particular topic of discussion and edit war. This should be taken into account when determining consensus. Ioeth ( talk contribs twinkle friendly) 16:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This debate came up in various places last year, and the proposal at User:Jza84/Sandbox was, so far as I recall, the nearest we got to a consensus over it. In summary, my view (now - it might have moved slightly over the period) is that, where modern Welsh names exist for places close to the Welsh border they should be included (in my view there is absolutely no reason not to include them), and it may in some circumstances also add to the interest and content of an article to refer to historical and toponymic (=etymological) relationships (eg. between Eboracum (=York) and Welsh Efrog, and Devon and Welsh Dyfnaint). Unless it is very important to the article (as it may be, say, at Oswestry, which is close to a Welsh-speaking area), I don't necessarily favour including the reference in the introduction itself. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 14:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the English wikipedia, and these articles relate to English towns. The names of these places in foreign languages should never be included in the intro or infobox, and only included in a history section if it is relevant. Skinmeister ( talk) 09:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
There are examples of exonyms being included in the lead in articles on places near other linguistic boundaries (Dutch for Lille and Calais, Italian for Menton and Nice, French for Trier), presumably on the grounds that the names are used by people living nearby. On this basis the Welsh name might be justified in the lead in Oswestry, but probably not the other cases. Mhockey ( talk) 21:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I would like to propose the replacement of the following projects:
and extend the coverage to include, what would have been:
These projects are largely inactive and have much in common. It is possible to tag articles, creating task forces on a per-county basis and organise alerts assesment that way. I was thinking of doing a South East England / East of England split, but it seems a pretty arbitrary boundary. The functional region includes both areas. Do I have support for this? MRSC ( talk) 21:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
OK. I'm sensing this it too radical for your tastes. I'll wait for the projects to lapse completely and look to do it then. MRSC ( talk) 14:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Here are some possible splits:
Not sure how well this will go down? MRSC ( talk) 15:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Before taking this further... Has anyone done an "audit" of he various county, city, town etc wikiprojects to see how "active" they are? I'm thinking of any DYK's new articles, lists, GA's FAs etc + how many active memebrs, whether they are in discussions, proposing guidelines, having collaborations or anything similar? Which ones have "lapsed" are moribund etc & how is this decided?— Rod talk 15:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm prepared to review the current projects. What are our criteria for "inactive"?
Anything else? MRSC ( talk) 16:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Findings:
Hardly a working system at all. I'll leave others to draw conclusions about other regions as I am most interested in London & the SE. MRSC ( talk) 17:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I have recently become interested in improving Sussex-related articles as time permits. I noticed the existence of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sussex as well as WP:Brighton and Hove (linked from there) and would have added my name if both didn't seem inactive. I am doubtful if I would have added my name to a project with a larger title such as South East, South Coast, Home Counties etc. It would not seem relevant or worth the effort. Also, being new to this meta game, I am unsure what would be gained from having a larger project group, with a proportionately larger task list and not proportionately more members.
So I would not wish the Sussex project to be merged to a vaguely worded one: maybe "Sussex and Kent", "Surrey and Sussex" (or Hampshire), but to keep the name seeming local, include the county names. Sussexonian ( talk) 20:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
One project (Thames) has removed the inactive tag. Two, Hertfordshire and Coventry have replaced with "semi-active". I've put a note on the talk page of WikiProject Hertfordshire to see if there is any interest in any form of expansion in order to reinvigorate the project. MRSC ( talk) 15:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
There is currently a CFD discussion here on Category:Places historically in Berkshire.
This raises the question of the best way of dealing with places which changed counties in 1974 (there have been other boundary changes, but it is the pre-1974 counties which readers are most likely to find references to). Put another way, what is the best way of helping users follow up a reference (in a pre-1974 text) to Abingdon, Berkshire or Pusey, Berkshire?
Possible methods include
It seems to me that each method has drawbacks, but we really need all of them, because readers find articles in different ways. Any views? Mhockey ( talk) 14:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
A thought came to me that for these categories to be accurate and verifiable they would need to be of the form:
This is hopelessly too granular, but the only way to have any meaningful scope or accuracy. MRSC ( talk) 11:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I have taken Totnesmartin's suggestion and opened a discussion here - with an attempt to assess the size of the task. It's quite interesting to see the differences in how the issue is handled for different counties, and at the least some consistency would be desirable. As I suspected, the trickiest bits would be the places transferred to some of the metropolitan counties, but overall the problems do not seem insurmountable. Mhockey ( talk) 15:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Can someone please explain to me in simple terms what is so bad about redirects to identify a place? The article for the place itself should detail any historic boundary changes. Nothing wrong with a list, if someone wishes to maintain one. The advantage of a list is that it can concentrate on the matter in hand, whether the articles exist or not - many civil parishes currently have no articles. As for extra categories, why, why, why! Jan1naD - (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I have left some concerns at Talk:Restoration spectacular#4 years on. Simply south ( talk) 14:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi all, I put Buildings and architecture of Bath up for GA and a reviewer has started the review, making several comments (at Talk:Buildings and architecture of Bath/GA1) about the structure of the article and areas for development. If any of you had any time to take a look and make any edits or comments you feel are appropriate that would be great.— Rod talk 20:05, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated George III of the United Kingdom for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Marskell ( talk) 17:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
County Borough of Leeds is nominated for good article status. If you can make any improvements to the article please do. MRSC ( talk) 19:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I want to make some bold but, I believe, effective and fair changes to those articles about districts that have city status which contain a freestanding settlement by the same name, in terms of their title.
That is to say, I would like the "settlement" articles moved to the form "PLACE, CEREMONIAL COUNTY" (per WP:PLACE) with the space presently occupied by the settlement becoming a disambiguation page.
I believe there are several key benefits to this:
The disbenefits are:
Thoughts? -- Jza84 | Talk 11:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
In principle, it is a good move to distinguish between the settlement (the core urban area?) and the local government district, but it would be helpful to have guidelines on what goes in each article. The more controversial bit is whether the article on the settlement is the primary topic in the terms of WP:DAB. It may need to be determined case by case: e.g. I can anticipate some opposition to a move of Canterbury or Winchester. There is a similar issue with Newport (where there is no separate article on City of Newport). If the discussion here is anything to go by, there would be a riot if anyone suggested a move to Newport, Gwent or Newport, Monmouthshire! Mhockey ( talk) 12:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I totally disagree, for what it's worth. If I were on the other side of the world, and looking for information on Salford, say, I would not expect to go to a disamb page with a myriad of different articles all about what is basically the same place. I would be likely to find that confusing. I realise that there are different boundaries for different functions, but to most readers I suspect that those differences are likely to be trivial. In my opinion (and I'm fully expecting to be opposed here by those with an undue fixation on admninistrative geography), it would be far clearer if there were one article on Salford which covered all aspects of the place, ideally with a map or two to show the different boundaries. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 15:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Just coming back to this after a couple of days pause: putting aside the mergers (which for me is a different issue) may I assume there is enough support to start gearing up to move these articles? We may need users with the WP:AWB to help facilitate the transition. -- Jza84 | Talk 21:46, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
(<--) It's coming up to 72 hours since I posted on Talk:Sunderland. I therefore plan to "test the water" with Sunderland within the next 24 hours. -- Jza84 | Talk 23:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I see some arguments about how some articles should be merged and I would highly recommend starting a discussion at the talk page of WP:UKDISTRICTS, which deals with this exact thing. However, these *moves* are not intended to split or merge any articles. We've recently had a lengthy argument at Talk:Leeds about how "Leeds" primarily means the local government district, and now here we learn that "Sunderland" primarily means the settlement. Different people, different priorities, different ideas of primacy; and no solution will ever please all of them. We should focus our energy on making concise and useful disambiguation pages that direct the reader to the correct article. That, and fix all inbound links. MRSC ( talk) 05:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
As far as I can see several editors had a discussion and brought together a variety of views. Through the course of the discussion a consensus was formed. The Carlisle disambiguation page needs to be edited to ensure it complies with layout detailed at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, that should be the overriding objective. MRSC ( talk) 19:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
This discussion does not have the authority to make name changes to various articles without wider consultation. There are far too many objections, and far too few overall participants in this discussion to make such fundamental changes. We shouldn't be using disambiguation as a default position if there is any doubt, we should be considering the evidence. This cannot be done on a uniform basis, but rather should be done article by article, where the evidence can be properly considered. In this situation, where there are generally 2 alternatives, I do not see the problem with hatnotes to the alternative article. That way it's still only one click away from the other article if the reader had gone to the wrong one, but those who were wanting the article get straight to it. The titles do not disambiguate one from the other - Salford, Greater Manchester could just as easily be about the administrative area as the settlement. If anything, it makes more sense for it to be about the administrative area, given that its disambiguator is another administrative area. As for evidence - the Leeds article had about 10 times the number of hits as the City of Leeds one, before they were merged, which is a pretty good indicator that that is what most people were after. The other problem is the names. City of Foo implies, an actual settlement, not some arbitrary administrative area that the good old 1974 reorganisation gave us. The city status thing in the UK is very peculiar, which few people in the country understand, let alone worldwide. People getting taken to a disambig page and seeing City of Foo at the top will likely think that is talking about a settlement, without reading what the explanation says. If we are serious in our aim to be helping readers, we should be thinking about changing the district article to something like Foo (metropolitan district). This makes it clear that it is different to what most people think of as a city. Quantpole ( talk) 22:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
WP:KENT member commenting. Canterbury does not need to be disambiguated. The use of the word to denote the city is the primary useage. City of Canterbury is the article about the council that has responsibility for the city and surrounding area, something completely different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjroots ( talk • contribs) 15:40, 20 October 2009
As a general point I think the 'place' should be the primary article, and thus I would disagree with the change whereby 'Sunderland' does not go direct to the place but to a dab page. I think this should be done on a place by place basis though, because as pointed out above, there may be times when it is appropriate for a dab. The separate question is whether the primary 'Sunderland' article should have a hatnote pointing to other uses of the name, or whether these are needed at all i.e. could the text for 'City of Sunderland' not just be merged back into 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' - although I again I feel this is a case by case issue.
Eldumpo (
talk)
12:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I too think the 'place' should be the primary article with a hatnote to a 'place'(disambiguation)page. The 'place' article can then, if it's appropriate, explain and link to other entities bearing the name of the place. We have to remember that a lot, possibly the majority, of readers are outside the UK and will be unfamiliar with the niceties of our administrative geography. -- Harkey ( talk) 10:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Not sure where we got to with this? There seems to be quite a heavy weight of opinion against User:Jza84's proposal, but not really anything that could be described as a consensus for anything. I guess the changes to the Sunderland articles ought to be reverted. Should everything else be taken up on individual talk pages? JimmyGuano ( talk) 21:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
After a recent request, I added WikiProject England to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Popular pages.
The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr. Z-man 04:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Could someone take a look at talk:Northern Counties? There's a discussion about what the content of the page should be, for example whether it should be a dab page. Nev1 ( talk) 18:47, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
To the poet " George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron" alone? Or to " Baron Byron" (of which title each holder has been addressed as "Lord Byron" in his own turn)? Currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Lord Byron. — Sizzle Flambé ( ☎/ ✍) 01:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
If someone could take a photo of this architect's work that would be a nice addition to their article. I'm on th ewrong side of the pond. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 23:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wonder if anyone can point me at the discussion that we had about using the constituent countries rather than UK on articles? I am unsure which project it was on. Keith D ( talk) 18:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
To the Wonderful Wikipedians Here, on a related topic, I was recently trying to edit WP:MOSDAB#Places to show the top-level nation name just like the actual WP:DAB for Kimberley does. Some quickly verifiable research on modern English usage of the term "England" may be found in WT:MOSDAB/Archive 39#England. I would like to hear what viewpoints are espoused by editors on this project, WP:England. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 13:18, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Why should we give WP:UNDUE weight to the UK and the UK alone and claim WP:NPOV when that clearly contradicts our own policies and the conventions of international communications, diplomatic, and political bodies like the EU [1], IPU [2], ISO [3], ITU [4], UN [5], UPU [6], the UN List of Non-Self-Governing Territories [7], the Internet's ccTLD [8], the closely related ISO 3166-2 [9], and the one specific to this occasion, ISO 3166-2:GB [10] even though much of the Anglosphere is already confused about the difference between Britain, England, Great Britain, and the UK? :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 23:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Constituent country | Population |
---|---|
England | 50 million |
Scotland | 5 million |
Wales | 3 million |
Northern Ireland | 2 million |
This article has been moved to Cumbric language? It only exists on this page!; which screams out as a somewhat WP:POINTY move. In fact the user has previous with regard to this same redirect ... Any comments? Refutations? Kbthompson ( talk) 22:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
There's a planned press release from at least two Wikimedia chapters (UK and Sweden) for an upcoming image donation from the Mary Rose Trust scheduled for January 3. It's going to be accompanied by a major update of the article on the Mary Rose which is going to be suggested as a DYK in conjunction with the press release. If anyone here is interested in joining in, check out Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Scheduling a DYK date.
Peter Isotalo 23:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Since this is one of the bigger WikiProjects, and that several Wikipedia-Books are England-related, could this project adopt the book-class? This would really help WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as the WP England people can oversee books like Towns in Trafford or London Underground much better than we could as far as merging, deletion, content, and such are concerned. Eventually there probably will be a "Books for discussion" process, so that would be incorporated in the Article Alerts. I'm placing this here rather than on the template page since several taskforces would be concerned.
There's an article in this week Signpost if you aren't familiar with Wikipedia-Books and classes in general. Thanks. Headbomb { ταλκ κοντριβς – WP Physics} 03:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Jonathan Wild for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Parrot of Doom 19:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
A bot has recently been set up to maintain the lists of "Recognised content" for projects eg FAs, FLs, GAs, FPs etc, which can be a pain to maintain by hand. I've set this up for Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset, see User:JL-Bot/Project content for the instructions etc. Would this be useful for this project?— Rod talk 16:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi- Would someone with code expertise be able to fix the Bristol mapbox template? I also left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bristol. Thanks much! -- Funandtrvl ( talk) 18:54, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Anyone familiar wih Dartmoor? Casliber ( talk · contribs) 20:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Putting aside the fact that Robin Hood is one of England's most important ledgendary and cultural figures, the article is going to start reciving very high amounts of traffic in a couple of months owing to Robin Hood (2010 film). If one googles "Robin Hood", our Wikipedia article is up there near the top result.
It should be one of this project's highest priorities, and greatest assets. Would anyone be interested in taking this to WP:FA ready for May 2010? It's in an OK condition, but lacks zest. -- Jza84 | Talk 12:37, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
I have created and edited quite a few articals on Staffordshire and should like to know if a task force on Staffordshire (as a historical county) could be started. DanielR235 18:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Folks, looking for some help with images for the Marcus Cornish article:
If anyone lives close to any of these or happens to be visiting close by, would you be able to take some pics and upload them to Commons? Thanks in advance. – ukexpat ( talk) 19:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Already done, thanks! File:Jesus-in-Jeans-by-Peter-Royle.jpg. Phew that was fun! – ukexpat ( talk) 20:35, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 03:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello! I have nominated Bosnian Royal Family article for deletion. The reason for this can be found in this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bosnian Royal Family. Related discussions have been taking place here and here. Your opinion is requested because you are members of Wikipedia:WikiProject England, and therefore you may be interested in the discussion. Some of the disputed claims made in the article, the one which may be of interest to you, include the sentences:
Please note that this is not mean to be canvassing for support; it's done according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Notifying interested people. Regards, Surtsicna ( talk) 13:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
FYI - A massive discussion is taking place at a Request for comment (RfC) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people. About 50k of articles are currently unreferenced and therefore in danger of deletion, some of those are on English subjects (like Edward Burman and Areski Belkacem, deleted for that reason; Alex Leigh, David Brewerton, proposed for deletion, now referenced). The cleanup link in the title above points to a list of unreferenced articles with the WikiProject England template on its talk page. Please revise articles on the list,
We need a lot of hands for this task. Power.corrupts ( talk) 20:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Folks, any advice as to which is the best infobox to use for a Grade 2 listed building -- Fitznells Manor in particular? There does not seem to be a consistent practice, I have seen {{ Infobox UK property}} and {{ Infobox building}} used and I cannot find a specific one for UK listed buildings. Thanks in advance. – ukexpat ( talk) 18:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I would like to draw the attention of the WikiProject to the ongoing discussion at
Template talk:Infobox UK place#Dublin. In summary: {{
Infobox UK place}}
has the following four fields - |dublin_distance=
, |dublin_distance_mi=
, |dublin_distance_km=
, and |dublin_direction=
- should these be kept, or removed? --
Jza84 |
Talk
16:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
I've put a $50 bounty on Blenheim Palace for delivery to FA by 11 July 2010, if anyone here is interested.-- Labattblueboy ( talk) 02:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
This project has a declared interest in the Charlie Chaplin article, which is one our most important and most viewed articles. It is being reviewed to see if it matches the criteria for a WP:Good Article. Among other issues it is poorly sourced. The review has been put on hold for seven days to allow time for the article to be sourced. Reference sources can be found on the "Find sources" notice on the talkpage. Further comments can be found at Talk:Charlie Chaplin/GA1. If you feel that Charlie Chaplin doesn't quite match this project's interests, please let me know, and I will remove the project tag from the talkpage. SilkTork * YES! 08:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Please tell me if I'm wrong, but surely Only Fools and Horses is not a top importance article for WP:England?.... especially when the Norman conquest of England is apparently only a high importance article? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Mendip Hills for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles ( BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.
The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>> Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Archive 3/Unreferenced BLPs<<<
If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.
Thank you.
Hi WP:England, I have created a new article Charter fair because so many other articles refer to charter fairs. It is a stub so far and needs substantial expansion. I hope editors in WP:England may be able to help. Thanks, Andy F ( talk) 09:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated John Vanbrugh for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 06:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey all, we would like to invite all of you to join WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. This newly formed WikiProject is seeking to improve the articles associated with the period between the departure of the Roman Empire in 410 to the Norman Conquest in 1066. Any help would be sincerely appreciated! Sadads ( talk) 21:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Dear all,
I'm pleased to announce that the BM is offering a "backstage pass" tour to any Wikimedians who wish to come along on Friday the 4th of June. Details below, copied from the Announcement by Mike Peel from Wikimedia UK. All Wikipedians are very welcome to come along. The crucial info and signup page is all here
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass.
Sincerely,
Seddon
talk|
WikimediaUK
00:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
From Mike:
Wikimedia UK and the British Museum would like to invite you to a very special event taking place from 11am on Friday 4 June - a "Backstage Pass" to the British Museum!
"You may have heard of the British Museum’s exciting initiative, a Wikipedian-in-Residence, with Liam Wyatt joining us in June to work with museum staff and Wikipedia editors to encourage mutual understanding and improve the encyclopaedia in areas relevant to the Museum’s collection. In order to kick off the residency, I’d like to invite you to join us at the British Museum Wikipedia Backstage Pass Day, on Friday 4 June.
In the morning we have arranged a number of behind-the-scenes and gallery tours for Wikipedians. Then, after lunch together in the staff canteen, we will get together in the Clore Education Centre to talk about collaboration, have a question and answer sessions, hear pitches for adding notable objects and developing featured articles, and hopefully also forming some relationships for future working, during and beyond Liam’s residency.
I hope you can come; there’s a lot of interest here at the Museum about it. I look forward to welcoming you to the Museum. Matthew Cock, Head of Web, the British Museum
This will be an exciting, incredibly important, and - most of all - fun event, so I would encourage you to attend if you are able to. You can find out more information about what will be happening, and sign up to say that you are coming, at: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass
Thanks, Mike Peel, on behalf of Wikimedia UK
The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.
Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Unreferenced BLPs. As of May 17 you have approximately 59 articles to be referenced. The list of all other WikiProject UBLPs can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.
Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope ( talk) 17:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
UK Local Authorities are inherently notable. Yet many council names are currently redirects to articles about places; which are not the same thing at all. I feel we should do the same for all authorities which don't at the moment have their own articles. For example, I recently split Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council out from Metropolitan Borough of Walsall. I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Councils vs Places; what are your thoughts? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Just to let you know River Parrett has been nominated for Featured Article status and discussion is ongoing at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/River Parrett/archive2. It would be great if anyone had any comments.— Rod talk 19:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
This article is rated "High importance" on your scale. It's been fully protected due to an edit war. Specifically, one editor feels it lacks sources, and there's an IP that keeps reverting that. Some experienced eyes might want to take a look at it. N419 BH 04:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Is anyone actively maintaing/updating this Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Projects page?-- Kudpung ( talk) 14:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
There is a new RFC at Talk:List of cities proper by population#Guiding principles for List of cities proper by population that asks which definition of city proper to use consistently for the purpose of List of cities proper by population. The outcome of this RFC can significantly influence the representation of UK cities on this list. One option on the RFC could result in the removal of all UK cities from the list -- BsBsBs ( talk) 05:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The article Woolston, Shropshire currently deals with two different places and needs to be split into separate articles. WP:UKPLACE indicates that articles for two places of the same name in the same ceremonial county should have their titles disambiguated by local government district; but if I'm reading Shropshire correctly, there are no longer (since the 2009 restructuring) such local districts in Shropshire. As an American, I'm not really conversant with the fine points of political organization in the UK. Could someone expert in handling the relevant WP naming conventions deal with this in an appropriate way? Deor ( talk) 18:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
This football team article would benefit from the attentions of a Wikipedia Editor, please Stranger on the shore ( talk) 02:12, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Sutton Hoo has been nominated to be listed as a Good Article. A review has started and is now on hold while the reviewer does more background reading on the topic. In the meantime a few points have been listed for improvement or discussion here. This project is tagged on the talkpage as one that has an interest in the article, and any extra assistance is always appreciated during a GA review. SilkTork * YES! 10:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Everton F. C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey ( new photo poll) 00:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Category:Hamlets in England has sub-categories for about half of the counties. While 119 places are directly in the category, I suspect many more small villages end up in Category:Villages in Foo. Should we try to achieve consistency across the country? The concept of a village is well understood but, I think, a hamlet less so. What should be the lower limit for a village? Wiktionary gives a UK usage as 'A village that does not have its own church'. Some places consist of little more than a church and I'm not convinced that these should be villages while much bigger places without a church would be hamlets. I tend towards calling everything smaller than a town a village and removing the hamlet categories. Cavrdg ( talk) 20:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
A huge list of map images created by (now absent) User:Morwen that illustrate our articles are currently being deleted because of licensing issues. It is a big task to go through these and review it. Can an administrator undelete those images already deleted (see User talk:Morwen). For those images not yet deleted, source information needs to be filled in where it is missing. MRSC ( talk) 20:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Royal Standard of England is a pretty terrible article, which concerns me deeply given that it appears immediately at the top of our England article, and also that the Royal Standard of Scotland is so very much a better article. Does anybody have the will and ability to make some improvements? -- Jza84 | Talk 15:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
There are a remaining 131 (out of a total of 326) English local government district articles that do not have {{ Infobox settlement}}. List can be found here. The majority are two-tier non-metropolitan districts. MRSC ( talk) 10:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
The Cheshire portal has been nominated for Featured Portal status. To join the discussion, visit Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Cheshire. Espresso Addict ( talk) 23:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Going through these infoboxes I find a lot of the coats of arms have been deleted because of a lack of non-free use rationale. It appears that the only notification of this was a deletion bot talking to an upload bot! What a sorry state of affairs. If someone could restore the images in User:HeraldicBot/Gallery, I'll work through the correct licensing. MRSC ( talk) 07:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Dorset for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. kind regards Tom B ( talk) 21:25, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Today an internet spoof has been launched based on Paddlesworth a small village in Kent (see Guardian report & fake newspaper. It is likely that this will lead to disruptive edits to the village article & I would welcome the help of others in keeping an eye on it. I think wikipedia should probably have an article on the spoof (once there is enough coverage) but we need to inform readers what is real & what is spoof - I'm not sure of the best way to do this & I would appreciate any help.— Rod talk 10:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Just for information. Keith D ( talk) 10:00, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Can an administrator please please please, check out that article and verify that he was English, there seems to be a theory that hes British Just because his dad was Scottish, even the word British is redirected to Anglo-Scot which makes no sense whatsoever Anglo-Scot isn't a nationality, and most notable people from england are listed as English for accuracy in the UK despite whether their heritage is from another country or not cheers all the same WikiEngland. Davido488 ( talk) 12:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Just thought I'd drop a line here to point people to the forthcoming "GLAM-WIKI:UK" conference being held on the 26&27th of November, run by the UK Chapter at the British Museum: http://glamwiki.org/ You'd be very welcome to attend! Keynotes include Sue Gardner, Cory Doctorow and Kenneth Crews (director of the copyright law center at Columbia University). If you would like to present something, please contact me directly. Sincerely, Witty Lama 09:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
There is a current proposal at Talk:Plymouth to rename the article and replace the page with a disambiguation page. The proposal has already been flagged for attention by the automobile wikiproject and as a result a number of comments proposing the car is just as important as the city and keeping the article represents a UK bias. Consequently raising for attention here to give appropriate balance. Comments either way are welcome. Fæ ( talk) 06:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Are there any instructions on how to use this ? Thanks 213.246.122.131 ( talk) 18:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
The Law of England and Wales portal has been nominated for featured status at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Law of England and Wales, and I am notifying related WikiProjects as requested in the nomination instructions. All comments for and against its promotion are welcome, ideally with reference to the featured portal criteria. Bencherlite Talk 11:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Feedback would be appreciated. Headbomb { talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the England-related articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:32, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Gunpowder Plot for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick ( talk) 20:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, my friends: A group of us are working on clearing the backlog at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_lacking_sources_from_October_2006. The article in the above header has been without sources for the past four years and may be removed if none are added. I wonder if you can help do so. Sincerely, and all the best to you, GeorgeLouis ( talk) 07:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Does the College of West Anglia really rhyme with flyer? Seems a tad odd. — kwami ( talk) 01:31, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
There is a proposal for a separate WP:WikiProject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Cambridgeshire that editors here may wish to comment on. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 01:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Please can I have some help with Wikipedia:WikiProject Suffolk and Essex, and Wikipedia:Wikiproject English Hamlets Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 14:03, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
This article has been nominated for GA listing, and this project's tag is on the talkpage. The article is on hold for seven days as there are some issues which need to be dealt with. If you feel the article has been tagged inappropriately, please remove the tag. If this article is within this project's interest, please visit, and see if you can help out. SilkTork * YES! 01:19, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
These very similarly named villages are both described as being 9 miles from Alnwick. Can an expert check if they are actually the same place please? Thanks. There's also a Brunton, Northumberland that is 7 miles from Alnwick to add to the confusion... - TB ( talk) 23:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) they both became separate civil parishes in 1866, and were both merged into the new civil parish of Ingram in 1955.
Lozleader (
talk)
00:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
A cleanup list for this project is available here. This list replaces this one which hasn't been updated since March and is not longer being maintained. The new list shows articles, lists etc with this wikiprojects banner and any of a range of tags identifying problems with the article. Unfortunately of the 17062 articles in this project 5020 or 29.4 % are marked for cleanup. There is a template available to add a link to this list (which is updated weekly) from the project page - shall I do this? Can anyone help with starting to cleanup some of the articles listed?— Rod talk 16:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Can I please have some more volunteers for the two Wikiprojects above, especially the English hamlets one, Thankyou. Crouch, Swale talk to me My contribs 16:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Portal:Somerset has been nominated at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Somerset since November and hasn't received many comments. Would you be willing to take a look and comment on whether you feel it meets the Featured portal criteria?— Rod talk 20:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
If a talk page bears {{
WikiProject England}}
, and a project banner for a county (such as {{
WikiProject Essex}}
) is added at a later stage, should the {{
WikiProject England}}
then be removed? --
Redrose64 (
talk)
13:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Editors here may be interested in assisting with the Good Article nomination of Tony Blair. The review can be found at Talk:Tony Blair/GA1. GA is reachable, but it will require hard work. Any assistance would be appreciated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:56, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
The article Somerset Levels has been nominated at featured article candidates for a while and has recently been moved to the "Older nominations" section. It really needs more reviewers to examine whether it meets the Featured article criteria, so please visit Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Somerset Levels/archive1 and contribute.— Rod talk 16:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Someone, possibly from Shugborough Hall, appears to be repeatedly deleting information key to the Shugborough inscription article. What can we do to prevent pseudo-historians and other Grail/Arthurian/Da Vinci nutters from vomiting, or in this case v-omitting, details from the page? 92.231.222.12 ( talk) 19:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I'm planning to add to the pages of villages in England a link with {{ commonscat}} to the related category on Commons (if it exists). Most of these categories are well populated from the ever expanding Geograph project on Commons. I'm going to edit the intersection of articles categorised as villages in England on en.wikipedia and categories categorised as villages in England on Commons. Do you like the idea? -- Basilicofresco ( msg) 12:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
The United Kingdom Census 2011 is topical at the moment. Obviously it will be a while before the results start to become available (particularly the detail down to parish or ward level) but is there a coherent plan anywhere of how the thousands of affected articles on wikipedia will be updated with the new data, perhaps involving county or regional wikiprojects, or is this left to ad hoc editing?— Rod talk 20:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The lead of the article Regions of England defines the scope as “The English Regions are currently the highest tier of sub-national entity of England, used by central Government for statistical purposes. They are defined as first level NUTS regions ("NUTS 1 regions") within the European Union. They have also, until 2010, had an administrative role in the implementation of UK Government policy, and as (mostly indirectly) elected bodies.” By way of background, it also has a bloated history section. The part that deals with the history post the accession to the EEC (as it was then) is largely all right. However, everything before this date is irrelevant to an entity that has no proper existance outside of NUTS and Eurostat. Suggest that Historical and alternative regions of England is the appropriate place for this stuff. I propose to delete the pre EEC history. I also propose to rename the article to NUTS 1 statistical regions of England to correspond with its eponymous category and with similar NUTS 1 article in the EU. Laurel Lodged ( talk) 16:20, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
can someone check the veracity of Mebyon Kernow#Devonwal (and the realted buts at Devonwall and United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum, 2011) which lead to Devonwall (UK Parliament constituency). are they accruate, factuaklly? Lihaas ( talk) 01:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. :) WP:OTRS has received an e-mail from a reader who suggests that the location of the city of Norwich on the map in the infobox of the article is wrong. I am passing this on in courtesy to our correspondent. If anyone with a familiarity with Norwich wants to take a look at it and verify that it's where it should be, that would be great. Thanks. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Please be aware of the discussion at Talk:The_Beatles#Template_removal.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
The Kennet and Avon Canal article, which is tagged as being of interest to this project, has been a Good Article since 2006. A few editors have recently been expanding and improving this article in an attempt to get it up to Featured Article standard. Could you take a look and help to improve the article?— Rod talk 13:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
For some reason he is listed under WikiProject England. He is a German/Irish Actor so that flag should probably be removed Sue De Nimes ( talk) 16:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Govynn ( talk · contribs) is pushing his Cornish nationalist point of view into a number of this project's articles and is now becoming quite disruptive with some of his/her edits - particularly at Cornwall where the editor is trying to remove all mention of England. Obviously this has been tried before by others and consensus has prevailed, so this is most likely a minor storm and the editor will soon get bored and move on, but in the meantime I would ask members of this project to be vigilant and (if you so wish) weigh in on talk pages with your own view for or against Govynn's actions. -- Simple Bob a.k.a. The Spaminator ( Talk) 08:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
This is getting quite deeply nested, so I propose that any further discussion of Cornwall-related articles take place at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cornwall. Govynn ( talk) 19:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
There is a new weekly section on the main page called "Today's featured list" and I have nominated Timeline of Jane Austen to have a spot here. There has been some opposition to the nomination and it looks like the list could become a removal candidate very soon unless the quality of the list is improved. If you are interested in maintaining the list's featured status and seeing a summary of it up on the main page, your help in improving the article would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 21:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Readers here may be interested in contributing to the discussion at Talk:Diet, Apparel, etc. Act 1363#Requested move. Cheers. - GTBacchus( talk) 01:57, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bonfire Night (disambiguation)#Requested move. Trevj ( talk) 23:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Bonfire Night#Requested move. Trevj ( talk) 23:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
The Kennet and Avon Canal article has now been under review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kennet and Avon Canal/archive2 for some time but has not received many comments. I am worried that it will be archived soon unless more comments are received, therefore can I ask anyone interested to participate in the review.— Rod talk 19:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Should articles on hundreds be titled Foo (hundred) or Hundred of Foo? Input and comments please at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Hundreds. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I'm translating Oadby for fr:wp and I read "Danish rule continued until 920, when King Alfred the Great won his battles against the Danes". But Alfred the Great died in 899 according to his article. So I think that there could be some correction to write for this part, I just don't know what is correct. Was it conquered after Alfred the Great's reign? Or did Danish rule was removed as a consequence of Alfred's battle but maybe 20 years later? Thanks. Erdrokan ( talk) 18:55, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion, started on August 8, in Cfd relating to the renaming of categories for Alumni of schools in England. Any contributions to the discussion would be appreciated. Cjc13 ( talk) 21:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm writing a blog post about what makes a good local article (or set of articles) on Wikipedia - in other words articles about a specific place, such as a town or village, and its features, people, etc.
What do you think we currently do well, or badly, in that regard. What do you, or would you, like to see, in such articles? What are the best examples?
Please feel free to prior discussion, if you know of any. Cheers, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion, started on August 17, in Cfd relating to the renaming of categories for Former pupils of schools in England. Any contributions to the discussion would be appreciated. Cjc13 ( talk) 11:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
There is a proposal to merge Fred West and Rosemary West into a single article entitled Fred and Rosemary West. -- Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Might be of interest this proposal Mo ainm ~Talk 15:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
There is discussion at the above AfD as to which NHS hospitals should or should not be considered notable, and how the bar should be assessed for passing WP:GNG, that could do with wider input.
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Health Service seems slightly moribund, but I have posted there saying that it might be useful for that project to set out a note of what sort of things a basic entry-level article on an NHS hospital should aim to contain; and perhaps co-ordinate a drive to turn List of hospitals in England blue, at least for as many hospitals as are considered do pass notability, in case anyone would be prepared to put a shoulder to the wheel on this. Royal Surrey County Hospital seems to me a reasonable example of the sort of facts a basic stub article should aim to contain. Jheald ( talk) 09:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. When you have time, could you see Talk:Cultural impact of the Falklands War#Malouines ? Thank you. Takabeg ( talk) 08:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I have started a discussion about converting the OSGB36 (OS grid refs) on various lists including Grade I listed buildings in Taunton Deane, Grade I listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in Mendip, Grade I listed buildings in North Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in Sedgemoor, Grade I listed buildings in South Somerset, Grade I listed buildings in West Somerset, List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Avon, List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Somerset and List of locks on the Kennet and Avon Canal to use Template:Coord, as I think this offers advantages for users worldwide (who may be unfamiliar with the OS system) and the use of Template:GeoGroupTemplate to enable mapping on googlemaps etc. I have been told that a bot could be tasked to do this, however this would be quite a significant change and would not want to do it without consensus. If anyone has any comments could they join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Automagically converting OSGB36 to coord?.— Rod talk 16:19, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
It has been suggested that most historical persons before the 16th century should be removed from Category:English Roman Catholics - at least those who were Roman Catholics by default without a significant impact of their Catholicism on their lives, such as, say, Henry V of England. Input would be welcome at Category talk:English Roman Catholics. Huon ( talk) 17:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I was just wondering what would be needed for the page England to be given featured status. Eng66 ( talk) 16:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:England will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in England's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch ( talk) 22:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a dispute about the legitimacy of flags shown for some counties which popped up at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard here. As a FT/N regular I attempted to deal with the issue but it's apparent to me that this is matter for expert opinion in the realm of English history and government, so I'm passing the ball to you guys. Mangoe ( talk) 20:54, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Now, I have no information about English county flags at all (I was linked here from WP:WPHV) but I can say the idea that there is not a bright line rule that no banner of arms can be used to represent anyone other than the armiger. One need only to look at the Flag of Washington, DC and Flag of Maryland to see counter-examples. Granted, these come from a nation that has no heraldic tradition, but I'm to understand that the Calvert arms were used as Maryland's flag even under colonization. Achowat ( talk) 13:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I thought that if someone was born in a place which at the time was part of one county, but is now part of another county, then it is the former county used on Wikipedia not the latter. Andrew Schofield was born in 1958 and at that time Kirkby was part Lancashire, but a user keeps changing it to Merseyside. There are many examples on Wikipedia where the former county used for someone's county birthplace. Cricketer Alan Wilson was born in Kendal in 1942, and at that time it was part of Westmorland, but is now part of Cumbria. Steeplejack Fred Dibnah was born in Bolton in 1938, then part of Lancashire, but now part of Greater Manchester. Should Wikipedia describe the former birth county or use the current county? This issue goes beyond English counties and covers all the birth (and death) places around the world on Wikipedia. Should we say Frederick I of Prussia was born in the then city of Königsberg, Duchy of Prussia or the current city of Kalingrad, Russia? It is the same city, just it has changed its name and country over the centuries. Rajiv Gandhi was born in 1944, so should Wikipedia keep his birth place as Bombay, British India or change it to the current Mumbai, India? What is the guideline/concensus on how to describe where someone was born/died at the time not how it is at the present? Scrivener-uki ( talk) 17:05, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I just discovered this list and started a talk point. It is supposedly rereporting the 2001 census data but has totally confused what the report says. Either this needs to quote Birmingham and Manchester by the Greater urban areas as separate entities or London would need to come off the list. It is worrying that this is being requoted elsewhere because of the wiki page. Tetron76 ( talk) 16:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I would like a photo of the main entrance sign to BMI complex, Castle Donington - See google map - The Donington Hall building itself already has a photo, but you are welcome to take additional photos if you please WhisperToMe ( talk) 04:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Please see this discussion about the naming of an upcoming local election. I'd like input from others about how these articles should be named. Thanks. Lugnuts ( talk) 17:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI, Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board has been nominated for deletion. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 04:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello all. If any of you are interested, there is currently a debate going on at the London talk page about whether to change the page's main infobox image montage. It would be useful to have a few more editors' opinions on this matter, so please drop by if you can. -- ThunderingTyphoons! ( talk) 19:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been redirected to Wikipedia:UK Wikipedians' notice board. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 23:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI, Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board has been nominated for deletion. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 04:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello all. If any of you are interested, there is currently a debate going on at the London talk page about whether to change the page's main infobox image montage. It would be useful to have a few more editors' opinions on this matter, so please drop by if you can. -- ThunderingTyphoons! ( talk) 19:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:English Wikipedians' notice board ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been redirected to Wikipedia:UK Wikipedians' notice board. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 23:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there any consensus, guideline, or policy on the use of "British" and "English" to describe particular people (eg, lead sentence of biography), label them (infobox nationality), or put related articles in categories (eg, British children's writers)?
This doesn't concern England only, or people only, but it's best to ask in terms of one example and this may be the biggest one at wikipedia.
For example,
· Should "British" reflect the person's self-identification or politics? such as opposition to UK devolution.
· Should "British" positively signify geographical or ethnic complexity? such as raised here, migrated and raised a family there; writes in Welsh, doesn't live in Wales; mixed English and Scottish parentage and upbringing; etc.
Not strictly a third alternative,
· Should "British" be a preliminary and residual description, label, category? Then most editors should use it liberally, I believe, in effect "pending further research"; more knowledgeable editors should use "English"; this project should [given enough members] work on reducing the British backlog.
One good example category: Category:British children's writers now contains 227 articles --almost all biographies of what is says-- while its English, Scottish, and Welsh subcategories contain 434, 37, and 19 articles. If I tool correctly ( Combine wiki-Categories), 19, 1, and 10(!) of the latter overlap with the British.
One good example article: Jenny Nimmo is consistently "British" here at wikipedia. She was English, has lived in Wales since marrying a Welshman almost 40 years ago(?). Her books have been first published in the UK, and some previous editors may have known no more than that. She writes some fiction(?) with Welsh background ( Tir na n-Og Award).
Here at WPE my higher priority is to learn about describing people as British or English, etc, rather than what is specific to literature. But any guidance will be appreciate. -- P64 ( talk) 20:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Anybody care to do a quick update of Burke's Peerage?
It currently says
Thanks.
-- 186.221.136.197 ( talk) 13:49, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I have just completed a List article named List of national parks of England and Wales, having been inspired to create it after I read the List of national parks of the United States. I would very much like to have the review and revision necessary to make this article as good as it can be. Is there a designated place where I should do this? Kwib ( talk) 11:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Category:Banburyshire, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.
Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 ( talk) 06:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Category:English independent ministers of the Rebellion period, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Black Falcon ( talk) 04:35, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated List of English football champions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by OdinFK ( talk • contribs) 19:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that in the article on Elizabethan era, the infobox at right that lists the eras ends at the Edwardian era. What happens after that? If you actually go the Edwardian era article, it has the same infobox, which says it's followed by "World War I" (that is, History of the United Kingdom during World War I). THAT article has the same infobox which says that it's followed by " Interwar period", which isn't about England specifically (it's about Europe and the world in general) and which doesn't have an infobox at all, so a reader would have no idea what comes after that or where to go for the next phase of English history.
Basically the continuity starts to fall apart in Edwardian era and peters out completely two articles later in the sequence, at Interwar period. I'm not sure how to fix this, but you guys seem the right people to do so. Or is the history of the UK no longer defined in "eras" after that point?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookgrrl ( talk • contribs) 19:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Is this videogame character really top importance to WPENGLAND? See Talk:Captain Price -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 03:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC) Some one has vandalised the tudor page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.220.196.249 ( talk) 17:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi -- I think someone has been messing with your List of English Words of Anglo-Saxon Origin page... I'm pretty sure the Saxons did not leave their home in "Levittown", arrive in England's green and pleasant land in an "Ironside", and present the Celts with an "I.O.U." Nor did they celebrate "Arbor Day", invent "LED"s, or indulge in "Abderian Laughter" (although that might be a telling addition.) I removed "The Beatle" and "Beatlemania" because, come on. But I don't have the time to sort throuh all of them -- enjoy! Grammargal ( talk) 16:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm a student at Cornell University working on a class project to improve/expand the Brick Lane Market article. I've personally never been to the market (another member of my project group has) but if anyone here who knows about the market wouldn't mind taking a look at our proposed additions, that would be much appreciated. Thanks! Joey236 ( talk) 20:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I've created this new article. If you've got additional input for secondary sources, please feel free to suggest them at the article's talk page, I'd really appreciate it. :) Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 18:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Would there be any interest in starting Wikipedia:WikiProject Staffordshire? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated the Cheshire portal for featured portal status. Please join the discussion here. Espresso Addict ( talk) 21:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Linked move requests concering the Baron de Ros have come up, see Talk:William de Ros, 3rd Baron de Ros and Talk:William de Ros, 4th Baron de Ros. A related BOLD move was performed on William de Ros, 2nd Baron de Ros. -- 70.24.248.246 ( talk) 22:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated University of Cambridge as a good article. Since it falls within the scope of your project and was classified high-importance, I thought you may be able to help or want to take part in the process. Thanks, -- Mark91 it's my world 12:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
An American user keeps on trying to emtpty/delete this, opinions please? -- MacRùsgail ( talk) 15:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK is committed to supporting our volunteers and to encourage them to teach others how to edit Wikipedia, we are running a weekend training workshop that will take place on the weekend of 23–24 February in Newcastle. We would particularly encourage anyone from North East England and Scotland to attend. Richard Nevell (WMUK) ( talk) 10:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Should Jan Łaski (John Laski) use the Polish spelling, or the spelling used while he was in England? See talk:Jan Łaski -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 17:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Several sub-categories of Category:Seasons in English cricket, which are all within the scope of this WikiProject, have been nominated for renaming or upmerger.
If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the categories' entry on the Categories for discussion page. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:21, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi all,
Just to let you know that the Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums are advertising for a Wikipedian in Residence ( announcement). It's a funded post, part-time through spring and early summer, based in Newcastle (so may well suit a student). Applications are open until 4th March. They're particularly interested in the prospect of someone wanting to work with the shipbuilding & industrial history collections, and digitising some of the material they have in their archives.
Details are available on their website, and there's some details about other upcoming UK residency programs here.
Please pass this on to anyone who might be interested, and feel free to get in touch with me if you've any questions! Andrew Gray ( talk) 15:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
file:Colonel John McClure, Founder of Heaton Mersey Cricket and Lacrosse.jpg has been nominated for deletion. This is a portrait of his time as Lord Mayor of Stockport (Manchester). -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 03:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Nominated
River Welland and
River Witham
--
Robert EA Harvey (
talk)
11:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Was the current Bracknell Leisure Centre, located in Bracknell, England, formerly the Bracknell Sports Centre, which used to host concerts in the 1970s and early 80s? Can someone give me a history lesson on this venue? I'm currently trying to write an article on this historical venue. Evangp ( talk) 10:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Category:Parliament of England, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Parliament of England (pre-1707). If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Comment would be welcome here on what category names should be used for the Members of Parliament who sat at Westminster during the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland in the 1650s. Thanks. Opera hat ( talk) 20:30, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
have been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 05:36, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Lì (chinese surname) for a mess regarding various Lee/Li surnames. -- 65.94.79.6 ( talk) 04:12, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
From AfC. Feel free to improve it. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to the Bristol Wiki Meetup which will take place at The Commercial Rooms, 43-45 Corn Street, Bristol BS1 1HT on Sunday 28 July 2013 from 1.00 pm. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Bristol topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. Philafrenzy ( talk) 22:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Relevant submission to this Project. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 21:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Another one. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
In September the UK is taking part for the first time in the international photography competition Wiki Loves Monuments. Participants will be invited to submit pictures of listed buildings of significant importance (grades I or grade II*), as recorded by English Heritage. The main external website for competitors can be found here, and you can leave a message there if you have queries about competing. Do please join in, and let people in your local area know of this excellent way in which both existing and new Wiki users can help improve the encyclopaedia by contributing photographs of local listed structures. What about organizing a local Wikimeet to attract new people?
In preparation for the start of the competition on 1st September there is still quite a lot of work to do, and we would like to ask for the help of members of this wikiproject. Your local and expert knowledge will be invaluable in ensuring that the lists of eligible buildings are up to date and correctly formatted. If you look at Listed buildings in the United Kingdom you will see how many structures are included. If you then follow the link to Listed buildings in England, you can get to the detailed lists for your area. Alternatively have a look at the WLM planning table. Can you help to ensure that the lists for your area are up to date and well presented?
Some of the lists have been semi-automatically generated from data provided by English Heritage. These use pre formatted templates (eg EH header) which will make it much easier for competition participants to upload their photographs to Commons as an automated process. Please don't change the template structure, as we need to ensure that the templates are properly compatible with the WLM standards that are in use worldwide. The format will allow a bot automatically to collect the information and to put it into the international Monuments Database.
The data still needs the attention of local editors:
For further information, please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom.
If you have any queries, please post them not below but on the Organizers' help page on Commons.
Anything you can do to help improve these lists will be much appreciated. The final deadline for cleaning up is 31st August.
-- MichaelMaggs ( talk) 16:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
-- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 05:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Category:Extra Knights Companion of the Garter has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 06:12, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
category:Extra Ladies of the Order of the Garter has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 ( talk) 08:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
image:Berkshire flag.svg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 10:06, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
image:Eleanor of Guelders.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 11:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
I have been resolving red links in List of civil parishes in Lincolnshire#South Kesteven, and have created:
I have, where required, created and populated the matching commons category - all further contributions gratefully received.
None of them have infoboxes. I am not an infobox sort of person. If anyone is madly enthusiastic about them, feel free.
I have one more to do, then on to North Kesteven. On the way I discovered a whole range of parish councils, from the madly efficient to the about-to-be-sanctioned. Some have just been rolled up with next door.
-- Robert EA Harvey ( talk) 07:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
File:Fr. Rolfe III.JPG has been nominated for deletion - 70.24.249.39 ( talk) 22:42, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Would you mind having a look at this article. It seems ite decent. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 16:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
There are some serious deficiencies which several users have identified in the Stephen Hawking article which was promoted to FA status earlier this year after an FAC that wasn't rigorous. Please feel free to comment and contribute to the debate at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Stephen Hawking/archive1 on whether this article should be delisted and what work needs to be done.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 17:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Winston Churchill, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer ( talk) 01:06, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Halton Lea Gate. Regards, FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 20:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crowhurst Park. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot ( talk) (for Mr. Z-man) 05:04, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Plymouth#Requested_move_at_22:14.2C_23_February_2014_.28UTC.29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.121.43 ( talk) 22:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster ( talk) 20:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC).
Discussion started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities#Weather_box on the use of Template:Weather box in articles. SilkTork ✔Tea time 16:10, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
An editor has been manually merging categories for comprehensive schools in England up into Secondary schools, without discussion. Please see the nomination to reinstate these at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 2#Category:Comprehensive schools in London. – Fayenatic L ondon 15:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Could somebody take a critical look at Ascension Parish Burial Ground? A rather disruptive IP-hopper is getting really annoying in his editing. Help needed to bring this article up to standard. The Banner talk 12:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in Europe may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 18:47, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (
talk)
09:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I have a suggestion for streamlining pages and making them more accessible. I've noticed that "English" and "British" have separate category pages, for example: "English women writers" and "British women writers" are separate categories, with different lists. Can these pages be merged? 71.119.37.82 ( talk) 13:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Mansion House - Hurstpierpoint. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 16:39, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey All, just wanted to let everyone know, that we have about 15 more slots available for access to British Newspaper Archive through WP:The Wikipedia Library. If you would like access, apply at WP:BNA. Sadads ( talk) 14:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Sir Richard Threston. FoCuSandLeArN ( talk) 18:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Can someone take a look at Prehistoric Norfolk ? There's 6 different kinds of references going on here, and references and content running into each other, several separate references sections in the middle of content sections. It's rather a mess, and has been since atleast 2009. -- 65.94.171.126 ( talk) 11:25, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
There are current discussions about the title of these articles at Talk:National Character Area, Talk:Natural Areas of England and Talk:Local Nature Reserve which may be of interest. Bermicourt ( talk) 13:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
If community councils in England are notable, could someone approve Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Myland Community Council? If they aren't, could this AfC submission me merged into the appropriate article? Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 16:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
The usage of English rose ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is under discussion, see talk:English rose (personal description) -- 65.94.169.222 ( talk) 06:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Other articles that maybe worth a look are May Queen (with a suggested split of article as mentioned at Talk:May_Queen#Oldest) and Bulldog (with a suggested reference to British Bulldog as at Talk:Bulldog#British_bulldog). Gregkaye ( talk) 09:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion may be of interest to this wikiproject. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics#Local_Election_Results_.28Particularly_in_Wales.29 Gaijin42 ( talk) 16:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Template:Lang-en-emodeng ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.169.222 ( talk) 08:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
On the main page, paragraph 4, we read: "The kingdom of England (which included Wales). . ."
Now, how did that happen? When one nation comes to "include" another, it seems some explanation is needed!
Likewise, "In 1800, Great Britain was united with Ireland" makes it sound as if it was by mutual consent; a glance at Irish history tells us it was not so!
We mustn't let our natural pride in our nation blind us to the realities of our relationships with other nations. For our own well-being more than for our neighbours', we need to be honest. Hoffoholi ( talk) 12:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Church of England dioceses to go up on the main page, and some concerns have been raised here, specifically with respect to sourcing. Any help you are able to provide in finding additional sourcing for the information in the list would be greatly appreciated. Neelix ( talk) 18:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Following is a list of sculptures, monuments and memorials without Wikipedia articles. User:Ham and I have put this list together and we believe the links below reflect the most appropriate article titles based on naming conventions. I have been creating many articles for London artworks since my recent visit to the city, but I welcome other editors to please assist with the creation of these articles to help improve the encyclopedia.
All help welcome! ---- Another Believer ( Talk) 23:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
There are quite a few parishes with names duplicated within the same district or UA. There is a discussion here suggesting a change to UK:PLACE. Views welcome.-- Mhockey ( talk) 20:29, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the usage of "Anglo-Nubian" is up for discussion, see Talk:Anglo-Nubian -- 65.94.171.225 ( talk) 05:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Contributors to this WikiProject are invited to comment at Talk:English settlement in Nicaragua about the nature and purpose of that article. I cannot determine what the article's purpose is, and whether it might be merged or redirected to Mosquito Coast. Cnilep ( talk) 00:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
I just found a short article about Compendium Competorum and thought I'd add a reference to it, but have been unable to verify this subject exists let alone finding sources for it. (There are no results returned in either Google Books or Google Scholar once Wikipedia-derived sources are excluded.) I thought I'd bring it to the attention of this project, as it may have better luck finding offline sources. Mind matrix 16:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
This article from the Observer points out that it will be the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta next year (15 June 2015) and suggests there will be various TV and radio programmes (and books etc) to coincide with the significant date. I note this article regularly gets 150,000+ page views per month and this is likely to increase. Would it be worth trying to get a collaboration going to get it to at least GA or even FA standard before the anniversary?— Rod talk 18:47, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I've nominated Exhumation of Richard III of England for consideration as a Good Article in advance of his reburial next March, which will attract a huge amount of interest. The article is in good shape and is quite comprehensive, so I'm sure it will be a good GA candidate. I'd be grateful for any help with the GA review. Prioryman ( talk) 18:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Vivien Leigh for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej ( talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
20th January 2015 is the 750th anniversary of the first English Parliament. [10] However the article De Montfort's Parliament is not eligible for Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/January 20 because it's tagged with refimprove. Does anyone have the references at hand and knowledge to clean this up?
The BBC [11] are planning a "Democracy Day" of live events, discussions and debate, produced in partnership with the Speaker’s Office of the House of Commons, including broadcasts from inside Westminster. Whizz40 ( talk) 23:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
WP:GA article From The Doctor to my son Thomas had a couple quote boxes at time of promotion to GA quality.
Now there's a discussion about use of those quote boxes.
Please see discussion, at Talk:From_The_Doctor_to_my_son_Thomas#Quote_boxes.
Thank you,