So... all my Heritage Gateway links seem to be dead. :( --BelovedFreak 22:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So do mine :-( --J3Mrs (talk) 22:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They are. Heritage Gateway is still "there" but is now part of The National Heritage List for England here (you can also reach this from the Heritage Gateway home page). It's early days yet, but I've discovered that the HG site now includes scheduled monuments as well as listed buildings. I guess that's an advantage. BUT all the reference numbers have changed! HG now uses a 7-digit list entry number rather than the (now obsolete I guess) 5 or 6-digit UID (whatever that means). "All" you have to do is to substitute the LEN for the UID in the URL and the link works again. My time is limited this weekend because we are on grandparent duties, and I do not know if there's a simple way of doing this, other than manually. Incidentally, Listed Buildings Online has gone too; it takes you to the new home page of the National Heritage List. For me, this comes on top of the Churches Conservation Trust changing its website. That meant hundreds of URLs having to be changed: this means thousands, unless someone can find a way of automising it. The expert in these matters is Hassocks (see above). He is away for the weekend, but I think he will be watching this page and see it when he returns (I was about to send him a message when I discovered yours). If you want to see how it works, have a look at Halton Castle, where the castle is a Grade I listed building and a scheduled monument, and the attached Castle Hotel is Grade II*. I've altered all the URLs and it works OK (until they change again). So that's where we seem to "be at", as they say. Oh joy! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is so cruel. But you are so helpful. :-) --J3Mrs (talk) 10:47, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh.. I didn't see the conversation above before I started this. Do we know if the new list is complete? If so, I'm not loving the useability of it, as I can't seem to find lots of building that should be there. Ah well, time to start changing numbers over I guess! --BelovedFreak 16:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or not, as Poulton-le-Fylde doesn't seem to exist any more. Grr... --BelovedFreak 16:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the list is complete and up to date. Both Hassocks and I have found buildings listed in 2009 that do not appear on the old HG (or of course on IoE). I sympathise with your difficulty about PlF; all I could find was an ice house at Singleton Hall. But everything seems to be on the interactive map (if you can work out how to use it — I've just started). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've not tried the map yet, that's the next thing. I found all the P-l-F buildings in the end, they're just very well hidden! They don't seem to have been attached to a parish as such, and the only way in the end was to get the list for the whole of Wyre and pick them out. I also found an extra one for Fleetwood listed just this March, so I've stopped grumbling! :) --BelovedFreak 20:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
←Blimey – I go away for a few days and English Heritage unleash havoc! Can I turn round and get the next plane back to Dublin?... (It was a very nice weekend thanks: a friend's 30th birthday.) My summary of the points and questions raised here:
Yes, the "new" (National Heritage List for England) list is completely up to date and continuously updated: as well as the 2009-listed buildings Peter mentioned, I found a building (St Mary the Virgin Church, Buxted) that was newly listed in February 2011 (link). (Oh, I've just spotted that BelovedFreak mentioned this as well, above.)
Some listing descriptions, especially of buildings listed in the last 30 years, are seemingly being updated and substantially expanded – very useful.
All remaining "Grade A/B/C" anomalies (where Anglican churches listed in the 1940s and 1950s retained their old superseded letter gradings) seem to have been removed.
The search facility, as BelovedFreak has found, is a bit odd. You have to hunt around a bit for district and parish names – Brighton is listed under "The City of Brighton and Hove", sorting between Thanet and Thurrock ... mad! At the parish level, they have messed up, frankly: there seems to be no way of searching for subdivisions of districts/boroughs which are not parished. Looking at the article for Wyre, the district in which Poulton-le-Fylde is situated, I see that Fleetwood, PlF and Thornton-Cleveleys are unparished urban areas; searching for them in the Parish box gets you nowhere. Searching for any of the places listed under the "Parish Councils" heading is successful, though. This will make it difficult to compile or check definitive lists of listed buildings in unparished towns which are not coterminous with a borough or district. (I found the same problem with Horsham town, which is again an unparished area of Horsham district.)
I am finding the interactive map very useful, although the zooming and panning sometimes goes haywire.
I have inserted a reference to the new website in
here
); maybe somebody who knows how to code templates could put together something similar for us to use, whereby we can just plug in the LEN and get a nicely formatted reference?...
You can search by the old IoE/Heritage Gateway ref number, which could be useful to double-check any changes you make or to compare old and new list descriptions in cases where they have been updated.
I'll give this some more thought in the next few days, now I am "back in circulation". The priority should be, I suppose, to update all Featured content to avoid potential appearances at
WP:FLRC. My preferred technique for bulk creation of refs is to use a spreadsheet, copying and pasting data as far as possible and simply keying in the ID numbers and other unique data, and tidying the data using a text editor such as Notepad. For this task, copying and pasting the wikitext into Notepad and doing a series of "Find-and-Replace" manoeuvres may also work, saving a lot of time. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 21:14, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks, Hassocks. It's good to have you back. Thanks for all your comments above. I too have been away since Wednesday, looking after grandsons at the other end of the country. Fortunately I had internet access (and a bit of time) to deal with the edge of the problem. Now I am about to go out (again) to chair a meeting. More time later I hope. In the meantime, all I've done is merely to substitute the "old" number with the "new" number; it certainly works as an immediate solution. I like your replacement format; but I'm not clever enough to do that spreadsheet thing. My own plan (provisional at the moment) is to carry on with some "proper" Wiki work, and in the gaps between do some of the boring updating of numbers. Let's hope people "out there" have a rest from change for a while.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 07:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting points. I've been busy too and not had a chance to look any more at the new list yet, but I'm impressed by some of the new details. I agree that a template for referencing would be useful.--BelovedFreak 16:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Church of St Mary the Virgin, Fordwich
nominate
) 00:03, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St John the Baptist's Church, Mongewell
nominate
) 06:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St Mary's Church, Newnham Murren
nominate
) 06:03, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Old Church of St Mary the Virgin, Preston Candover
nominate
) 12:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Lyceum Theatre (Crewe)
nominate
) 18:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for All Saints Church, Waldershare
nominate
) 18:03, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Church of St John the Baptist, Upper Eldon
Have any of these, or baldachins, riddel posts, altar-curtains, etc, been mentioned in your articles? If so, or if they come up in the future, please let me know or add to the article or talk page. Also pictures to the Commons cat. I still have stuff to add here, & will probably do altar curtains separately in a bit. Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
These are a bit exotic for the churches I have been writing about. The only baldachin I can find on a quick look is in the
Church of St John Maddermarket. I will try to remember to be on the lookout. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks - I'm not sure that is actually one, though the term is often used loosely - the canopy over the pulpit would be better called that imo. You don't happen to have books with names & dates for the ones at Derby & Peterborough Cathedrals, by any chance? Oddly enough "baldachin" was originally cloth from Bagdhad I discover. Johnbod (talk) 16:57, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! January (talk) 11:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
DYK for St Mary's Church, Hartley Wintney
nominate
) 18:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St Peter's Church, Sandwich
nominate
) 06:03, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St Lawrence's Church, Broughton
nominate
) 12:05, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St Michael and All Angels' Church, Thornton
nominate
) 12:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
DYK for St Mary's Church, Hartwell
nominate
) 06:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Covehithe
Thanks for that ref - I knew I'd seen it somewhere vaguely but couldn't find the page. Top quality work with places like this and Ellough by the way. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the note. I was planning to do the early C19 church in Chichester, but User:Hassocks5489 got there first, and I haven't got any other redlinked churches in mind - I did notice that you've been filling in the gaps at high speed. I've been going off at tangents, among other things working up articles for some of the churches' architects (currently one of the John Johnsons, whose church at Kings Cross, as you may remember, migrated to Wanstead). Do contact me if you want any refs from my Pevsners. BTW, I hadn't realised that you'd also done lists of Commissioners' churches. The Atkinsons of York are also on my list of targets. Best wishes. --GuillaumeTell 16:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
St Wilfrid @ Church Norton
Hi Peter. I've got most of the relevant material together, so I'll make a start tonight as I have a free evening. Hope to finish by tomorrow evening. I was going to write it last week, but got sidetracked by churches in St Leonards-on-Sea! Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 16:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redundant churches in dioceses?
Hi there, I've just been categorising a few churches, and have a quick question: are only active churches considered part of a diocese? --BelovedFreak 22:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a definitive answer, but I can give a rambling one. Redundant churches are not parish churches, and so are not part of the formal diocesan structure (archdeaconry, deanery, parish). All churches, active or redundant, exist within a parish (but so does your house). Some churches have been converted into other uses (in Chester one is an information centre, another is an educational centre, and one is now the Guildhall), and some are now active but used by other denominations. So clearly these are not part of the Anglican diocesan structure. Most of the churches vested with the Churches Conservation Trust are still consecrated and hold occasional religious services; but is that enough to say they are a formal part of a diocese? Not IMO. My rule of thumb in categorisation is to include the active churches, and exclude the redundant ones. It makes sense to me. What do you think? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that makes sense, and I agree. While I was waiting to see what you thought, I've just been adding ones I can determine are active to the diocese categories. --BelovedFreak 10:04, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for St Paul's Church, Hooton
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Have you come across anything on the Custom of Cheshire in your reading, the right of the earls of Chester to behead any malefactors apprehended in the county at Chester Castle?
I read something very recently, an Anglo-Saxon or Norman law that allowed landowners to dish out summary justice on people found up to no good on their land. I can't recall what it was called, though. Parrotof Doom 22:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you all know 1066 and All That, where it is definitively stated that "infangthief is damgudthing". Just passing through. --GuillaumeTell 00:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah so that's where I read it. Parrotof Doom 11:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find anything in my very limited personal library, and a search of Ormerod didn't find the phrase (although I don't think the search facility works well on my copy of the disc). I did find the following links (which you may already have found), [2][3][4][5]. Good luck with your decapitations. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I only stumbled across it yesterday, so I haven't done much in the way of research yet. But I think there's enough for a little article.
I'd be interested to see the original source as I think "Custom of Chester" may not be a defined term. Is there anything more specific than Roll 3 Edw. II? Comparing Halifax with Cheshire is also problematic as Cheshire was a
From memory Southampton also had a similar law. But remember that the lord of the manor of Wakefield, which was about 600 square miles including Halifax, was the Earl of Surrey, one of the most powerful men in post-conquest England. I'm quite convinced that Halifax is unusual only in that it was the last place in England to abandon the custom of infangtheof.
Hi Peter, thanks for the heads up on Netley Abbey being the featured article on the front page. You were right about the vandals, it's started already! I shall keep an eye on it over the course of today and revert anything particularly egregious, then tomorrow I'll revert everything. Soph (talk) 10:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
HTB
Yes, you're right, but they haven't wrecked the article. I see that they are engaging in a) church planting and b) updating Wikipedia articles (but not currently to excess so far as I can see). In my church-going days, I used to frequent Low churches rather than High churches, so in theory I ought to be in sympathy with them, but evangelicalism is beyond my compass. On the other hand, if they have the money to renovate (without messing up) important churches like St Luke's, more power to their elbow. (And let's not forget that Saturday is the day of the Rapture!) Joking apart, what I'm now wondering is why the CCT is disposing of churches. Presumably somewhere they must have the power to do so, but it's a bit worrying, don't you think? Best. --GuillaumeTell 18:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure, really. I guess that if Christian communities want to take redundant churches back into active use (and care for their fabric etc) that could/should be a "good thing". For CCT that will save them (and us) loads of money. And presumably, as virtually all of the churches are listed, EH will be involved in any structural alterations. I am watching the Liverpool development with interest, as I drive past the church every time I venture into the city (quite often because the organ recitals in the Anglican Cathedral are fantastic). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ormerod
Hi Peter, Greetings. I do have a citation for Ormerod but am not sure how to cite it as the reference section and Bibliography is rather different from what I'm familiar with.:-(
The reference is from the book I am currently using for Damhouse, *Tonge, John & Sylvia (2002), Astley Hall Damhouse, John and Sylvia Tonge,
Page 13.
Could I ask you for a little help? He was quite important in the History of Tyldesley and my book has a drawing of Damhouse by his wife, Sarah.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Dunnit. It's the ONB ref that's confusing — I can never get the template for that to work. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. You know I still get confused if something is unfamiliar even after all this time.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:30, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not
Sorry about the delay in responding; only arrived home late last night from a few days in the torrid heat of Geneva! Not sure that I can help. There a number of Tattons named Robert. Ormerod (iii:608) mentions this one briefly, but with no details, other than that the house was "toughly defended by the smallest garrison for most probably upwards of a year, with occasional intervals before it was taken"; but no more details about his derring-do. Nothing about any Tatton in the ODNB. The only reference to this time in de Figueiredo and Treuherz's Cheshire Country Houses is to an inventory taken of the house in 1643 after it was captured by the Parliamentarians. Don't think this is of much use to you. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I checked the ODNB and was surprised to find no Tattons. I might see what I can do with Robert for starters.
Yes. I shall follow the progress of the article with interest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:27, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Faint heart never won fair lady, so I've nominated it at GAN; we'll see what happens. I think this qualifies as a Cheshire article? At any rate it's less gruesome than my
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry
and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Nice work!
Froggerlaura (talk) 19:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Peter! I was lucky photography-wise because one of my work colleagues, who also happens to be in charge of keeping the CCT church at Tortington looking presentable, kindly offered to drive me around the rural parts of the district photographing more than 20 of the hard-to-get-to churches (such as Binsted and Madehurst): I can't drive and normally rely on public transport and/or walking. I don't know if you've seen this series of reports/guides on the English Heritage website: the places of worship selection criteria guide is likely to be of particular interest (it even namechecks Paley and Austin). I might write a short paragraph about the criteria and put it in the various "List of places of worship in ..." lists. Anyway, I will be on wikibreak from Friday for 2 weeks (on a Baltic cruise), but plenty more church articles are brewing in sandboxes awaiting completion when I get back! Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in South East England
Is the title right? Shouldn't it be "Southeast England"?
Yes it should, but there's problem of consistency in the title because a FL in the series (by another editor) is already accepted with the title
List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in South West England
Anyway, here are the votes from the Manchester jury:
Lead
Isn't the final paragraph just repeating what's already been said in the second paragraph?
Yes; deleted.
St Peter and St Paul (old) Albury
"The nave may date from the Saxon era". Called it "Anglo-Saxon" in the previous entry, is there a difference?
No; amended.
"During the 19th century the Albury Park estate was owned by the banker Henry Drummond". What has the estate to do with (old) Albury?
Attempted to clarify the text.
All Saints Little Somborne
"The church incorporates a Saxon pilaster strip ...". Same here; when I see "Saxon" I think of the Saxons, not the Anglo-Saxons.
When it comes to architecture, sources usually just say "Saxon", but I guess "Anglo-Saxon" is more accurate, and that is the title of the relevant WP article. Amended.
St Mary Ashley
"The chancel was added later in the 12th century ...". Later than what?
The previous column says "Early 12th century" and "later" follows from this. I think I'll leave this unchanged.
St Benedict Paddlesworth
"A gallery was added in the 19th century and it was restored twice during the 20th century." What was restored, the gallery or the church?
Many thanks, once again. I'll look through it again and then face the music. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
E. G. Paley churches
Hi, I noticed you've been doing some work on List of ecclesiastical works by E. G. Paley - another potential FL? I'd be hapy to help out with some of the church articles, especially any that are left from Lancashire: North. I have an incubated article on St Peter's in Burnley, by the way, that I'm just waiting until I get home to my books in a few days so that I can finish if off, so don't start that one if you haven't already! BelovedFreak 19:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the message. Not sure about this as a FL; it's difficult to get enough source material to make an adequate lead. We'll see. Confession: I've just uploaded an article on another Lancashire church — St Paul's Church, Brookhouse. But feel free, of course, to improve anything I've done (although we do seem to have adopted different referencing styles). At a glance, crying out for an article is St Helen's in Churchtown (the "cathedral" of North Lancashire?). In any case, I was thinking of moving on to the List of ecclesiastical works by Paley and Austin, which was, I think, the most important period in this architectural practice. Maybe I'll start on some of the churches outside Lancashire, and see how it goes. No strong feelings, anyway. Keep in touch. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've been meaning to do St Helen's for ages. I actually started it last year (I have a bad habit of starting drafts and forgetting about them!) when I was just starting on these architectural articles, but was struggling with making sense of the sources a bit. Hopefully now I can go back to it and understand it all a bit better! Luckily there are still plenty to go around... I might add to some of the ones you've started, but I'm quite happy to carry on whatever referenceing style they start with.--BelovedFreak 20:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for List of sections of Chester city walls and associated structures
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
With many thanks from Cheshire for that. Yes there are some Cheshire country houses still without articles. The category Houses in Cheshire does contain 80 items, which is not bad, but some of them are buildings in Chester, or works of John Douglas. I think all the Grade I houses are covered, but I'll add at least the Grade II* houses, like Handforth Hall, to my to-do list. You've probably spotted that I have mainly been writing articles on conserved churches. Those are now complete (List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Southeast England is at FLC), and I've since been dabbling in the works of the Sharpe, Paley and Austin architectural practice of Lancaster. Also I've done a bit on the Chester city walls (see above) and I've started work on Liverpool parks and open spaces. By the way would you be willing to copyedit the Chester city walls list? Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take a look at the Chester walls list, probably later.
I might go through Figueiredo and Treuherz's book later and see what else is missing, and maybe knock a few more stubs myself. Anyway, I've been though your list and there's just a couple of things I'm unclear about or which don't seem right:
Bridgegate
"Formerly the site of the gatehouse at the southern entrance to the medieval, ...". There's obviously a word missing there.
Recorder's Steps
"The stairway consists of two flights of 12 and 15 steps respectively ...". There's an inherent ambiguity here I think; is it two flights of steps each of 12 and 15 steps (i.e., 54 steps in total), or two flights of steps one of 12 steps and the other of 15 steps?
So not much there to worry about really. Good luck at FLC.
Thanks for that. I'm messing about myself with de Figueiredo and Treuherz, so we'll have to make sure we're not duplicating anything. At present I'm looking at Alderley Old Hall. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave it to you then, as you've got a better idea about this kind of article than I have. I was bristling anyway when I read about the dismal conditions the servants lived in, which once again reminds me that I really must make an effort to finish off
Fine; I'm just doing short stubs at present, with lots of opportunity for future expansion. Feel free if you ever get the urge! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But there's no credit for expanding articles, only for creating them. ;-)
Yes there is; when you get them to FA. These stubs are rubbish; but at least it's a beginning. ;-) --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if either of you could solve a little mystery. Dunham Massey has a long grass walk, the northern part of which appears to be cut in two by the Bridgewater Canal. Is this so, or did some bored farmer just chop some trees in that copse down, to make it appear that his field was a bit posh? Also in that little copse is some kind of monument, or cenotaph, but unusually there are no piccies of it on Geograph. I'm going to go have a look what it is. Anyone know? Parrotof Doom 19:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was just following the conversation above, really. The little monument I refer to is visible on Bing Maps, if you look on the bird's eye view. It looks like a cenotaph, but isn't accessible by the public Parrotof Doom 19:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It could be the obelisk to the racehorse mentioned
Playing about, practice, and making mistakes, I guess. It's actually quite good when you get used to it. In this case I knew that the hall was in the parish of Nether Alderley, so I went into Advanced Search, clicked on Location then just put Nether Alderley in the parish field; one of the easier ones, really. If you know the parish, that's the easiest. Sometimes Other/Building name will do it. If you have the Images of England ref. number, put it in Reference Number/Old record number. Otherwise play around; you can usually get there, one way or another. Now if you want a difficult site to search, try the Historic Wales Portal here; that's a real grown-up challenge! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There's also the map search if you know roughly where it is on a map, or using google with the site: function. I still find the site pretty user unfriendly though.--BelovedFreak 21:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS Don't be tempted to use the Images of England site any more. It's 10+ years out of date, stuck in 2000; it has not been and will not be updated; it's obsolete. On the new National Heritage List site, I've found new listings since 2000, revised Grades, and updated descriptions. Enjoy. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:57, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's perhaps still useful for its photographs though?
It is, but they're copyright and you can't use them (and not all items have a photo). You can usually find equivalents on Geograph, and you can add them to articles; the same for some Flickr pics. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 07:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, there is that. Looking at your city walls list again I just noticed that there's no grade column, even though the coloured key remains in place. That can't be right, surely?
Yes, you're right. So I've deleted the Key, and incorporated the info into the lead. What do you think of the move to merge the list with the rather-poor-at-present Chester city walls article? IMO there is room for both, provided the article can be much improved. Comments are here. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've just seen it and commented. I'm against a merge.
Certainly IMO Start is correct; so it's now been "assessed by Cheshire". Rightly or wrongly, having now written articles across a wide spectrum of projects, I tend to assess the class myself as I write them. If "they" don't like it, they can always reassess themselves (and sometimes do — usually no big deal so far as I'm concerned). I don't usually assess the importance because I have no idea how the different projects measure this (usually by ignoring it).
In respect of the Cheshire houses, I'm rather enjoying myself. I guess it's worthwhile, it's certainly interesting, and it's easier than going for GAs, etc. But until I arrived at Part Two of Figueirdo and Treuherz I didn't realise how many notable country houses there are in the county. Plenty to do; I'm already in those beginning with "B". --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The number of houses in part two of Figueiredo came as a bit of a surprise to me. Tell you what, to help you out I'll do all those beginning with X, Y, and Z; can't say fairer that that. I'm beginning to remember why it was I got involved in this project, which I'd rather lost sight of, the hope that if people knew more about their environment and its history they'd perhaps start to have more respect for it. When I feel like a break from the Tatton family (which rather surprisingly I'm starting to get into) I might have a go at backfilling one or two of your Cheshire country house articles and see where we can take them. I'd really like to do something with some of the many poor settlement articles as well, but the constant stream of notable soap stars and footballers who once spent in a night in the town becomes very wearing. To say nothing of the "Mrs Merton once said in a TV show that she came from Heaton Norris" nonsense, or the constant arguments about historical county boundaries; "Altrincham is in Cheshire ... No it isn't, it's in Greater Manchester ... No it's in Cheshire because I live in Altrincham and I should know ...".
Thanks; any help with Cheshire is welcomed (it sometimes feels a bit lonely out here). Although I should have thought that Cheshire houses are, for you, a bit lacking in controversy! I've more or less given up on settlement articles; too much work for me in the laziness of retirement. Incidentally, in correspondence with J3Mrs I revisited the article on
William Charles Cotton, and I wonder if it is worth facing the anxieties of GAN with it. what do you think? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
I'll probably focus on the ones that are haunted. ;-) As for William Charles Cotton I think that could be pretty easily buffed up to get through GAN, particularly if the lead was expanded a bit. I've only had a quick shuffty so far, but I'll go through in more detail later if you like, got to pop out for the rest of the afternoon. The ending isn't quite right though, as it looks like you're expressing your own opinion about Cotton's life and work in saying "... the comment that while he was there 'he had occasional periods of effectiveness' seems unfair"; looks like it's you saying that it "seems unfair".
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
For your fantastic achievements with the Lists of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust — Rodtalk 09:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Rod; that's very find (I did not know there was such an award!). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:22, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nor did I until someone gave it to me a few weeks ago. You probably qualify for the FA one as well.— Rodtalk 09:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations and very well done! I know an immense amount of work has gone into those lists. I was going to look for an appropriate barnstarry type thing but Rod has beaten me to it! Why don't you give yourself a break and, I don't know... write about every notable house in Cheshire or something? :) --BelovedFreak 10:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually been good fun, and remarkably interesting. As for Cheshire houses, I'll have to think about that!! Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the comment by Belovedfreak is made with the tongue in the cheek. She has spotted that I have been churning out (mainly) stubs on notable Cheshire houses. It had been brought to my attention that there was no article on a rather fine Grade II* listed house. So, having spent a lot of time away from home (ie not in Cheshire), I decided to write at least a stub on every house in the standard book on the subject. And then I found there are more than I expected. But when I get through them, there will at least be something to work on for the future. And it's a change from lists.
, which IMO is near FL standard; but this has been messed up by the merge tag (which I have opposed). And now Cheshire has been divided into Cheshire West and Chester, and Cheshire East. I guess we can sort all that out one day!
In respect of your earlier message, I have had a look inside my treasure chest, and despite being involved in only two FAs, I have already been awarded a FA barnstar (not earned yet IMO). There's lots to do. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:42, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have the lists of listed buildings etc in hand. I can't offer to help much as although I drive round Chester on the A55 to pick up my son from Bangor University, I know nothing about the area.
I think the medals (eg
Template:FA-Barnstar (which I haven't got & didn't know existed till now).— Rodtalk 14:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply
]
They're all just bling. Well done on finishing off those church lists Peter.
Hi Peter, in this edit, [6] you provided some figures which I have taken the liberty of adding to the article. Can you tell me where the figures are from so I can reference it please?--J3Mrs (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The source is The National Heritage List for England. I don't know if you've discovered this. It only started this year but is THE authoritative source for listed buildings, registered parks and gardens, scheduled monuments and more. Its beauty is that it is kept up to date. It effectively (though without photos) replaces Images of England, which is stuck in 2000, has not been updated, and will not be updated. I have found on the new List buildings listed after 2000, grades changed, Grades A, B, C updated, etc. The Advanced Search facility is not the easiest to use, but with practice it gets easier. Particularly if you know the parish, you're away! To specifically answer your question, go into Advanced Search, click Location, on the drop-down menu for county click Lancashire. Then click Grade. The drop-down menu there gives you the opportunity to select all Grades, or the one you want. For citations I use the following, and fill in the gaps: {{Citation |url= |title= |year=2011 |work=The National Heritage List for England |publisher=[[English Heritage]] |accessdate= }} This has been happily accepted at FLC. But just be patient with the searching; you'll get there and find lots more information. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:12, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Peter, most helpful as usual. It is the most awful site, I absolutely loathe it. I can find most of the info I want on Listed Buildings Online, it is far more user friendly but I realise as a commercial site not good enough for here!--J3Mrs (talk) 09:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Persevere; I rather like it now. And I'm not sure that LBO is kept up to date. I was assured by English Heritage that the NHL is updated daily. If you want a difficult site try Historic Wales! Now that IS a challenge! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Cheshire
Awesome. Actually I've recently created lists on Hotels and Golf courses in the UK and was considering creating a List of country houses in the United Kingdom or something much like List of monastic houses in Bedfordshire. Anything which ends in Hall or Manor! Perhaps you could make a list of all the Cheshire houses in your book and I can built on what you have. Of course building a full list will take a long time but it would be good to have a comprehensive list I think. As the list becomes fuller it can perhaps be split by county, depends on how many there are.
I'm actually much less equipped than you are on British architecture. However I have two very important tips to assist you in your quest for compiling information and wider reading.
a] Search for the house/church in google books. You'll often find snippets which can be used or if lucky full book pages about them. Access a page in the search and copy the url link
b] Paste the URL into http://reftag.appspot.com/ And load. Often you'll have to enter the page number of the snippet. It will make the citation for you. Ihave book ref maker programmed into my browser as I use it on most articles I work on. If you would like this for easy access to make google book refs to add to what you have I'll happily let you know how to program it in your monobook.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Hi Peter. I'll have a proper look in a couple of hours (have just glanced at the article and the DYK submission so far). I'm inclined to agree with Bencherlite's observation about seeking more independent sources. A Google search returns some potentially interesting stories/articles. Anyway, I'll supply a more detailed comment a bit later. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 18:19, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
New category
Aside from the standard Houses in Cheshire please add the new Category:Country houses in England to any Cheshire house you start. Sometime I intend to ceate as a full a list of country houses in the UK as possible. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:38, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you for the helpful comment regarding my DYK submission. I have replied at the relevant DYK page as requested. Cheers! Deserter1 16:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for Puddington Old Hall
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
