Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject England. 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.

Exmoor is now a FA candidate. If anyone has any comments please add them at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Exmoor.— Rod ^talk 12:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Plough at Kelmscott, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Plough at Kelmscott. Montchav (talk) 15:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Description

A project for the county of Essex, England

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1. Chris 05:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Maybe you could try Category:Wikipedians from Essex and also place notices e.g. at Wikipedia:WikiProject England. Simply south (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:EH icon.png has been proposed for deletion on the grounds that it has no non-free use rationale. I have removed Template:di-disputed fair use rationale from the image page (using a slightly bogus argument) so that there can be some central discussion of what to do before the image deletion bots remove it from the 80 or so pages where it is currently included.

Possible solutions are:

• restore the template, allow the deletion to occur, and remove English Heritage from Template:EngPlacesKey
• argue that the image is not copyright
• add a rationale claiming fair use for each including page (User:Naturenet did this but then reverted his own change)
• replace the image by something that is not copyright (as User:Steinsky did to Image:NTE icon.png and Image:FC icon.png)
• remove all icons from lists of places of interest (as previously suggested).

JonH (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

• Just thought you may like to know that Image:EH icon.svg magically appeared c/w GFDL licence :) --WebHamster 00:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If an article is added to a regional project, such as WikiProject Bedfordshire, WikiProject West Midlands or whatever, should it also be added to WikiProject England? (Given that the former are effectively sub-projects of the latter) Thanks. --Jameboy (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally I say yes. Local/regional play an important role in developing localised and specialised articles, whilst mother projects are important for co-ordinating efforts, creating guidelines, maintaining a standard approach and acting as a central hub for national issues. The additional support, assessment and exposure from adding regional and national banners is common elsewhere on Wikipedia and something I think should be encouraged on the grounds aforesaid. It doesn't do any harm. -- Jza84 · (talk) 00:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Think I would agree with Jza84 on this one. Both projects will have a different focus and can add value to an article in different ways. I think the more eyes and input on articles the better. I am assuming that people on a project will be looking at and monitoring their tagged articles not just the project going for numbers! Keith D (talk) 09:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello again team, Stretford is a Featured Article candidate. The nomination page is here. Thought other users might want to know, -- Jza84 · (talk) 21:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys, can I just say that coverage of English history (by period) is quite awful. You're one of Europe's most important countries, this is your language, and you have nothing compared with the coverage given to countries like Poland, Portugal and even Scotland and Ireland. Anyone with any plans to remedy this? Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 00:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Who do you think you are?

What would you guys say to an American history task force of WP:HIST? We don't currently have many people interested in this, so we'd like this project to provide some editors.--Phoenix-wiki 20:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Reginald Maudling has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 05:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternative words for British is a bit of a mess and could use cleanup. -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 17:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Following from an extended discussion at "Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies)" on how people from the United Kingdom should be described ("British", or "English", "[Northern] Irish", "Scottish" or "Welsh"), which did not result in consensus, an essay entitled "Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom" (WP:UKNATIONALS) has been prepared. You're welcome to provide your comments on how it can be improved at the talk page of "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)". — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 16:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I expanded the stub of the Act of Uniformity 1549 into an article for a college project and I would like to be added to the members page. User name is G_Borum. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by G Borum (talk • contribs) 23:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC) --G Borum (talk) 00:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Greater Manchester has been nominated as a good article candidate. If you think you can help, and/or have constructive feedback, please pass your comments at Talk:Greater Manchester. -- Jza84 · (talk) 22:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

After much debate, the editors of the United Kingdom article seem to have settled on 1707 as being the foundation of the state (I note with concern though that this date lacks any external referencing, per official Wikipedia policy WP:VERIFY).

But this article - List of countries by formation dates - claims that the UK was actually founded in 1603 (again, completely unreferenced). Both articles cannot be correct, so which is it? Please come to the party armed with some proper external refs, because I am not sure if we can stomach yet another verbally diarrhetic Talk page splurge with largely consists of ad hominem attacks and statements of totally unsourced opinion. --Mais oui! (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• The Act of Union 1652 (where England claimed to annex Scotland) is the basis for thw 1652 date. But it (obviously) wasn't called the United Kingdom
• The Act of Union 1707, where the two kingdoms were united, created the Kingdom of Great Britain.
• The Act of Union 1801, where the kingdoms of Ireland and Great Britain were united, created the first entity to be called the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Ireland).
• The current United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland came into existence in 1922 when the Irish Free State seceded from the Union.

So the answer is 1922! --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There's a discussion underway at Talk:London as to what is the capital of England. Input welcome. -- Jza84 · (talk) 22:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I have reviewed American Revolution and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have left this message at this WikiProject's talk page so that any interested members can assist in helping the article keep its GA status. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left messages on the talk pages of the main contributors of the article along with other task forces/WikiProjects. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix if multiple editors assist in the workload. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 01:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Since List of English monarchs is relevant to this project, you may like to know that there is a proposal that it should be merged with List of British monarchs. See Talk:List of British monarchs#Merge monarch lists. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Where should I go around here to read up on the ongoing controversy concerning the UK's various child service agencies? Jtrainor (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

There is an article, Waltham, Lincolnshire, that should be added to WikiProject England.

I have just re-wrote most of the article, added references, and organzied the article, but it is still probably considered a stub.

Please look into adding it to your list of articles.

kkarma (talk) 15:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

 Done Project banner added to talk page. -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

William III of England has been nominated for a featured article review because i feel it no longer meets the featured article criteria --Hadseys Chat_Contribs 19:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

Just a note that List of tallest buildings and structures in Salford is up for featured list status here. --Jza84 |  Talk  03:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have done some additions and amendments to the stub article on the Shropshire village of Bayston Hill. I hope I am in the right place for this, but I was just wondering if an editor could cast their eyes over what I have done and suggest any improvements and grade the article. Many thanks 21stCenturyGreenstuff (talk) 01:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A pretty broad question for you --
I have a vague memory that the name "Uffa" refers to something in early British history. I don't remember what.
I find articles on the Web mentioning Uffa's Dyke (seems to be an alternative name for Offa's Dyke) and a mention that "Uffa, the founder of the East Anglian monarchy, constructed a castle or fortress..." ( http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~woolsey/www/norfplac.html )
Uffa redirects to Uffa Fox, boat designer and sailing enthusiast.
Do we need any more articles on "Uffa"? Disambiguation page? Redirects? Thanks. -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 13:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello,

there are currently 24 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Just a note that there are proposals for Essex and Shropshire WikiProjects. --Jza84 |  Talk  16:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

William IV of the United Kingdom has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Chwech 00:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I have created the above maps. I hope you all don't mind that I was WP:BOLD and added them to the relative articles myself. I really don't want to create any edit wars I just want to see what others think and hopefully bring this to a nice consensus on what to use. I hate the idea that other countries seam to be more organized then us with these things, so I hope you think the new one looks professional... I'm actually kinda pleased :-) Please voice your opinion over at Talk:Scotland#Straw_Poll I know I'd personally love to hear your opinions! Thanks -- UKPhoenix79 (talk) 05:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the maps are very good. However, I do not think that the borders to the other constituent countries should be shown otherwise the counties of "England" should be shown as they have similar status to that of Wales and Northern Ireland but do not vote for there parliamentary representatives of the local assemblies.

Arthur Bryant was a historian, particularly of England. I know next to nothing about him (or historiography); I merely read in something about Wotton House that he preceded John Gielgud as resident of a pavilion, with the implication that he was well known. I went to the page about him, which looks very wrong. Comments on the talk page seem to agree, but I can't judge offhand and I don't have the time to check (e.g. by looking him up in the Dictionary of National Biography or whatever the OUP monster is called). Can somebody knowledgable take a look? (Crossposted to Wikiproject History.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, just a note that Navenby is up for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Navenby. Thanks, --Jza84 |  Talk  01:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The article Emery Molyneux is up at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 00:20, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I tagged this article with your project. APK ^{yada yada} 00:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You are invited to discuss recent revisions to Template:Cornwall at the template talk page. A consistent style used throughout England has been removed to a "local style" and I'd welcome input for our team. Thanks, --Jza84 |  Talk  11:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Correction, a style developed by the Cornwall Wikiproject was replaced without proper discussion, and then reverted. DuncanHill (talk) 12:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a POV, not a correction. :S --Jza84 |  Talk  12:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I found mention of an "old armory" and am wondering if this is a reference to a specific building in England or France. The source is focused on England, but the mention of the Louvre requires consideration of a French location. -- SEWilco (talk) 03:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

• "…the additional characteristics more particularly belonging to the Jacobean. In the Louvre and old armory the upper portion is pierced in all the Gothic foliations of the Flamboyant, while the lower portion is decorated with panels carved in all the richest caprices of the cinquecento."

It sounds like an heraldic description.Maybe an old book of heraldic arms. Just a guess.--Harkey Lodger (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting interpretation. "Panels" does have several meanings, and although heraldry is mentioned elsewhere the article's focus is on architecture and interior decoration so they're probably referring to carved panels on walls. I haven't seen the inside of the old Louvre so don't know the appearance of the outer or inside walls. And I'm not having luck finding a 16th or 17th century English "old armory". -- SEWilco (talk) 04:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

At the moment the phrasing is at Elizabethan furniture#Gradual emergence. Don't know how long it will be there; I'm dealing with the shift at the time between room decorations, furniture which resembled architecture, and furniture becoming an accessory within the room. -- SEWilco (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm hoping that title will draw some attention! An old, old debate has re-surfaced with new editors at Talk:England, and refuses to be closed: "Is England a country"? Input welcome at Talk:England. Thanks, --Jza84 |  Talk  23:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Could someone upload the coats of arms of the eight Core Cities to Commons and place the images in the right categories? Thanks. --200.117.223.103 (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you clarify? What is it you seek here? Each city has it's coat of arms on their article. --Jza84 |  Talk  20:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Article on Robert Dudley, 1st Earl of Leicester (favorite of Elizabeth I) has been tagged "This article needs additional citations for verification" since June 2007 (actually has no inline cites). -- Writtenonsand (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Currently, 1494 articles assigned to this project, or 12.6%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 12:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello folks, just a quick note that Blackburn is gearing up for a WP:GAC. It's a great article that User:Beejaypii has worked hard on. Just thought some of you guys might want to take a look at it and help out where need be. Cheers, --Jza84 |  Talk  01:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

As suggested, I've now nominated Blackburn for a WP:GAC. Beejaypii (talk) 09:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I hope ya'll can give us your imput. GoodDay (talk) 21:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello folks,

Just a note that the Greater Manchester WikiProject plans to nominate the main Greater Manchester article for featured article status very soon. Thought some of you guys might want to take a look at the page and help the process along. --Jza84 |  Talk  01:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Needs an article if you have made a Unity City Acdemy one it defo needs making, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.74.211 (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

A poll is talking place on Subdivisions of the United Kingdom and Countries of the United Kingdom. The Merger proposal is here, and is where all the options (merge, redirect to or from etc) can be voted for. --Matt Lewis (talk) 19:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: The new article is "Countries" of the United Kingdom, by the way - not "counties", as it it may first appear.--Matt Lewis (talk) 13:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

William III of England has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. – Ilse@ 10:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Benjamin Mountfort has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

I've made a Related task force section for this, WP:British Isles Terminology task force.

Is anyone able to take a look at the Severn Barrage article. It covers an important and topical issue, but the article is stuffed full of cleanup tags. Attention from those with engineering, environmental, economic or other relevant interests, or those who can give editing help to bring it within the Manual of Style, would be great.— Rod ^talk 13:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Is undergoing a Featured Article review, please feel free to come and help bring this article up to current Featured Article standards! :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Henry Moore has a discussion page at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Henry Moore.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:47, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for not using the official notification before. Henry Moore has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Please see:

• Requested move

Thanks.--Mais oui! (talk) 14:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Can I ask for some help, from the experts in this WikiProject, with the Monarch's Way article. It is a 615 miles (990 km) long-distance footpath in England that approximates the escape route taken by King Charles II in 1651 after being defeated in the Battle of Worcester to Shoreham-by-Sea and passes through the area covered by this WikiProject. The article is a stub at present but some of us are trying to expand it and give details of the route (along the lines of the South West Coast Path which is currently a GA). We are using Talk:Monarch's Way as a communal sandbox for this and if anyone was able to add description, settlements, places of interest etc along the route for their local area this would be really helpful.— Rod ^talk 12:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

George Brown, Baron George-Brown has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The following articles do not cover any pure numeral system where the symbols and notations are clearly defined, instead they cover how numbers are used in the respective languages. I have proposed all of them be moved. Please discuss HERE.

• Names of numbers in English → Numbers in English
• Chinese numerals → Numbers in Chinese
• Japanese numerals → Numbers in Japanese
• Korean numerals → Numbers in Korean
• Welsh numerals → Numbers in Welsh
• Proto-Indo-European numerals → Numbers in Proto-Indo-European

Thank you. --Voidvector (talk) 07:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

It seems Wikipedia:WikiProject British Royalty is largely inactive, so I'm posting this here. I've made a little chart to show progress on articles on the kings and queens of England(/Great Britain/United Kingdom). For simplicity I've left out some of the more disputable ones like Matilda or Jane, and I haven't bothered with the house of Saxe-Coburg. Anyway, is there anywhere this could be posted? Lampman (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Please feel free to post it at WP:COMMONWEALTH. We have a large amount of royalty-friendly editors there. I for one would love to help! --Cameron* 09:33, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

List of English monarchs is being currently under featured list review. Everyone is invited to make comment and/or !vote on the subpage. !Votes are appreciated as featured list review doesn't get all too much traffic. Thank you! Best, --Cameron* 09:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

PS:List of Irish monarchs is also up for FL review any comments there would also be greatly appreciated. --Cameron* 09:39, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject English Royalty formed today. All interested users are welcome to add their name to the participants list and get helping! ;)

Please see this discussion about reorganising the taxonomy of London categories. There is also an impact on 'England' categories. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

There is a proposal going on at "Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 September 15#Category:Criminal law of Wales" over whether "Category:Criminal law of Wales" should be merged into "Category:English criminal law" on the ground that the criminal law of England and Wales has been a unified system since 1542 and the latter is the more common term. The alternative is to rename "Category:English criminal law" to "Category:Criminal law of England and Wales". Your comments are welcome. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 18:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:41, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Squash (drink) has no cites and seems to be mostly a collection of personal observations and opinions. Has been tagged "needs additional citations for verification" since June 2008. Can anybody improve this? -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 03:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Modernist poetry in English has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.Dabomb87 (talk) 22:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I just added an article, William Grey, 13th Baron Grey de Wilton, and greatly expanded another article, William Grey (bishop). I added the first as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/DNB project, and I expanded the second while straightening out the incredible mess of bad William Grey links.

In each case, the article is a barely-wikified version of the text from the nineteenth-century version of the DNB. Each article needs an overhaul to modernize the language, but more importantly each article needs a WP:LEDE section to provide context. The DNB articles assume that the reader has a working knowlege of English history, so context is missing. Since I am almost completely ignorant of the subject, I cannot do an adequate job of this. Please help. -Arch dude (talk) 01:02, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I am surprised that the goals section does not specifically single out England as being an article which needs constant watchlisting and attention if required. I mention this as there has been a history of problems with unsatisfactory edits being made to the article, with POVs being pushed and so on. Can I ask that some members of this project consider taking a more active interest in the article and that it if promoted to a prominent, if not the most prominent position, on the project?  DDStretch  (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Very many England articles are missing geographical coordinates. Finding the latitude and longitude of locations, and entering coordinates into articles is straightforwards, and explained at Wikipedia:Geocoding how-to for WikiProject members. Having coordinates on articles mean that they turn up in GoogleMaps, MultiMap and other such places which link to wikipedia based on geo-coordinates.

It is now possible to get lists of England articles that have no geographical coordinates via Wikipedia:CatScan, for example:

• England articles missing geo-coordinates.
• London articles missing geo-coordinates.

Alternatively, if CatScan is down or very slow, you can find them by looking through Category:United Kingdom articles missing geocoordinate data.

The articles in the lists above are currently marked with {{coord missing}} templates, which need replacing with filled in {{coord}} templates containing their latitude/longitude data (or else have lat&long entered into the infobox).

There are about 11,000 UK articles missing coords - the vast of them in England. I hope you'll consider adding coordinates so as to make England articles more visible on the web. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Can someone with knowledge about IPA please check the whether the IPA spellings given on Northamptonshire are correct or not? It does not sound the same as the one in Northampton. Thank you. --Joshua Issac (talk) 12:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Great Fire of London has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Kuzwa (talk) 05:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I have proposed that Category:People convicted of murder by England and Wales be renamed to Category:People convicted of murder by the United Kingdom, for consistency with Category:Prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment by the United Kingdom, Category:Prisoners sentenced to death by the United Kingdom and Category:Prisoners and detainees of the United Kingdom. Please add any comments you may have to the discussion. DH85868993 (talk) 20:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The Preston article is pretty bad, and in need of some TLC. I made some improvements to the lead and infobox this afternoon, but the rest of the text is pretty bad. For one of England's cities, it's a bit embarrassing.

Anybody willing and able to help with a fixup inline with WP:UKCITIES? Manchester and Blackburn are probably best examples to mimic here. --Jza84 |  Talk  16:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

A number of articles have been nominated for a name change which involves changing the capitalization scheme used. They are:

• Special Protection Area,
• Area of Conservation,
• Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty,
• Site of Special Scientific Interest, and
• Special Area of Conservation

(the links point to the discussion of the requested moves.) Members may wish to comment on the requests both for and against the proposed moves. I'm not sure where else notices could be posted to get as wide a discussion as possible, both for and against the requests), and so would appreciate people identifying appropriate projects and posting similar messages there.  DDStretch  (talk) 08:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Terence Conran is still rather stubby. Anybody interested in working on this? (I will not be doing this myself.) -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 14:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

North Sea is currently undergoing GA review. Any assistance appreciated.SriMesh | talk 00:10, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I have just noticed that today, another three blocks of changes have been proposed for (civil) parishes within the UK. They are Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 28#Subcategories of Category:Civil parishes in Cheshire, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 28#Category:Parishes of the United Kingdom, and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 December 28#Subcategories of Category:Category:Parishes of Wales. Members of this project may wish to comment or express their views, once way or the other, about these changes.  DDStretch  (talk) 17:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Chadderton, a town in Greater Manchester, is currently a good article candidate - just thought I'd make the project aware of this. --Jza84 |  Talk  23:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)