User talk:Peter I. Vardy/Archive 23

DYK for St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham

Allen3 ^talk 13:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham

Peter, although the nomination was promoted to the main page, as you can see above, it was then pulled after less than an hour due to problems with the hook. Please stop by the nomination template and propose a new hook when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Surely just adding the two words "in England", at the appropriate place, would solve this (if the source(s) allow)? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to have come to this too late to do anything about the issue with the hook, Peter, but I have added a further ref for the "first peal of bells" claim, from the excellent book Historical notes on English Catholic Missions which is viewable online in various formats. The book may be useful for other articles you are/have been writing about RC churches in the northwest. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 11:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hahaha. Well done, Hassocks. How ironic. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hassocks, you are as brilliant as ever. Many thanks, --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Listed buildings in Shavington cum Gresty

You keep quietly plugging away, one of WP's unsung heroes. Maybe when I grow up I'll learn to be more like you and less like me. Or perhaps WP needs both of us, who knows. ;-) Eric Corbett 20:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Good to hear from you. At the risk of this becoming a mutual admiration club, I continue to be impressed by all the good work you do up there at and around the featured level. I did not enjoy my experience at the last FLC and so have been rather hiding away doing simple things quietly (with the occasional DYK for a bit of excitement). I know I "should" work away at getting GAs and FAs, but I am too lazy to cope with the hassle it causes me. There's still plenty to do down here, and I am rather enjoying the "plugging away". You learn and discover so much of interest in the process. And just maybe something worthwhile will be left for posterity. Of course there's room for both of us. Keep up with all the brilliant things you do. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I recall that we've had a similar discussion in the context of the Cheshire project, whether it's better to attack a broad range of articles or to focus on a few. I don't know what the answer is, all I know is that I'm focused on the few, in the hope that they will inspire others to do a similar job on the rest. Eric Corbett 22:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for All Saints Church, Scholar Green

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Mellor's Gardens

The DYK project (nominate) 00:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Hough Hole House

The DYK project (nominate) 00:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham

Hi! You may be interested to know that Hassocks5489 has found a 1907 online citation for the bells - see Ref 10. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:34, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Wow! Well done. That is fascinating - though I'd love to trace that back further. It's good enough for WP and citation #10 is fine in my opinion, but the first-to-ring story could still be apocryphal - i.e. one of those things that you can never trace back to the source. If a Catholic bishop had said it in a public speech in 1845 I would be more likely to believe it. The persecution of Catholics was enshrined in English law (e.g. they weren't allowed to inherit land/money) until about 1821 if I remember rightly. The Gordon riots of 1780 went right past my 4 x gt grandfather's inn/coffee-house (The Bell, since demolished) in Warwick Lane near St Pauls, and he never married the mother of his children (who may have been Catholic), and his considerable legacy eventually went to his grandchildren in 1821 because his children had married protestants. His will was secret and his common-law-wife was buried unnamed, outside London. By the time he wrote his secret will in 1795, his son, named Thomas Trippet, was disabled. That stuff is recorded in documents in Chancery. The next bit is just speculation. Dickens sometimes hung out at a pub in Aldgate where my 2 x gt grandfather drank, and my 2 x gt grandfather liked talking. When Dickens wrote Barnaby Rudge, he called one of his characters Thomas Tappertit, and that character gets injured in the Gordon riots. There is probably no connection really, but I'm just explaining the reason why the English Catholic experience is of interest to me. The thing is, I understand that persecution of Catholics was (at least in law) relaxed in 1821 and Puseyism started to build up from 1828. So how was it that Catholic churches waited 24 years until 1845 to ring their bells? So maybe you can see why although I know very little of the matter, I would find it interesting to get to the bottom of this story. The Kelly citation is dated 1907 - could it be a reflection of an oral history, I wonder? --Storye book (talk) 15:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Wow, how fascinating! A real (well, very probable) Dickens connection! As a further note re The Willows (covered in that Singelton ref) there was a very interesting back-story to the whole new church foundation in the form of a big financial dispute. It's not really relevant to the church article, but I can supply the details if required. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah yes, you can hear echoes of a recent struggle in the after-dinner speeches in the 1845 news article about the consecration. I had guessed it was the grand transubstantiation question - but it was good old mammon, haha. Plus ca change. Yes, I'd be interested to hear the money story. When I was in Canterbury we got daily reports of current goings-on in the Synod. I was young and innocent then, and was surprised to discover that they never seemed to be discussing spiritual or even pastoral matters. It always seemed to be internecine squabbles a competition as to who could be most uncharitable to whom ... You'd think they'd never read 1 Corinthians 13; 12 + 13, bless 'em. --Storye book (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I'll copy here. But I do hope Peter doesn't mind us cluttering up his page like this. By the way the consecration ceremony was a very grand affair - lasting from 7 am until noon, after which there was Mass and on the next day, the feast of St George, the formal opening with four bishops and a host of clergy - about 200 were brought by special train from Preston. There was lots of music, a sermon by Scottish Bishop Murdock and then a huge meal. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

From Singleton (1983) p.32:

"But Father Sherburne’s greatest work for the Willows was the building in 1845 of the magnificent new church of St. John the Evangelist, said to cost upwards of £10,000, a large sum at that time. It is obvious that the Catholics of the Kirkham district could never have raised this amount but the money was forthcoming from another source."

"We have already seen that before coming to the Willows Father Sherburne was at Blackburn. While there he was introduced by his brother to a wealthy Catholic squire William Heatley of Brindle Lodge whose deceased brother had been a priest and who himself had been educated for a time at Douai. They became close friends and often visited each other even after Father Sherburne came to the Willows. During his lifetime William Heatley, a bachelor, made many bequests to Catholic causes and when he died in 1840 it was found that he had left the bulk of his fortune to Father Sherburne for Catholic charitable purposes./ But the squire’s two nieces and their husbands contested the will on the grounds that their uncle was of weak mind and had been unduly influenced. The case went to the courts and to avoid scandal Father Sherburne gave up all claims to the lodge itself and handed over a substantial sum of money. This, however, did not satisfy the contestants who eventually left the church. [Ref: See D. Milburn, History of Ushaw College, p. 216 and the Willows archives, LRO RCKi.)"

• Thank you. I think this will indeed be of interest to those researching subject matter associated with this church. Fascinating. --Storye book (talk) 09:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• Should the cost be added? It really is an enormous sum (e.g. compare to the £3,350 for the Anglican Christ Church in Wesham). Singleton is careful to say "said to cost". Martinevans123 (talk) 09:36, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• I add the building costs, where available, to all "my" articles about buildings. The buildings infobox includes a space for costs. It is useful to compare them; a little mission chapel with bell gable was not much, but a big town parish church with tower and 8 bells was massively more. Sometimes one item, e.g. a big stained glass east window, accounts for a big slice of the cost, and that's always of interest. --Storye book (talk) 10:19, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• I guess a better (i.e. firmer) source would be advisable here? (Good job no-one proposed it as a DKY hook, haha.) Martinevans123 (talk) 10:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• I think that if a reliable authority says "said to cost" then we can safely quote his exact words in the article and cite it. Those costs are always estimates anyway, as there are so many extras, gifts and so on. There is the question of whether you count only what the church authorities paid out, or do you include gifts from the congregation and town bigwigs? How do you value all the semi-voluntary work that went into it, e.g. hand-made hassocks and altar cloths where only the materials were charged for? It's as long as a piece of string. I think "said to cost" is a more honest estimate than most. "My" architect William Swinden Barber used to design all the interior, right down to drawings of choir stall, font etc., then he would contract an artisan to do the work and a rich benefactor (probably after some persuasion) might pay for e.g. just the font. So do we count that in, although it is part of the architect's design? And so on. --Storye book (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• Barber seems to have been wonderfully eccentric - one look at that picture in his article kind of gives the game away. By the way, Singleton tells us that Father Sherburne’s housekeeper donated £400 herself. £10,000 is equivalent to £840,000 today. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• That's the interesting thing about Barber. I think his appearance may have been always a little eccentric (e.g. pre-raphaelite beard later on) but he was basically a very reliable, hard-working, even plodding, church architect who delivered the goods. I have a strong suspicion that he made it easier to churn out all those churches by playing to his own strengths, e.g. I'm pretty sure he couldn't do spires on his own, once he left his partnership with Mallinson, so it was towers and more towers. Pugin, on the other hand, was more glittering. His son was not bad either - I'm a Friend of Gorton Monastery which was designed by the son. --Storye book (talk) 11:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, Eddie Welby was quite glittery, wasn't he. People say I'm a Friend of Dorothy, but it's just a rumour. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Use of photographs

Hi again. I have opened a discussion of my use of my uploaded Commons photographs to augment architectural text detail in churches here. I didn't want to carry on with this kind of stuff if I'm running onto sticky ground. As you have an interest in church articles, I thought therefore you might have a point of view to offer. This discussion is promoted entirely by me, not by any criticisms - there have been none. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 15:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St John the Evangelist's Church, Kirkham

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Capesthorne Hall

Giving this a read now. Offhand I think the lead is too long given the article length. @Crisco 1492: might offer a second opinion. I think it needs to be made more concise and some details removed. Not sure also what a " double pile plan" is and "There are extensive earthworks on the site of the hall, but what these represent is more difficult to interpret." is vague and unreferenced. Generally looks pretty good, although in parts some of the shorter snappier sentences might be merged and it given a minor copyedit. I'd pass it as a GA if you nommed it, those things aside.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

• Agree with the doctor re: lead length. The article total is 16312 characters, with 2936 of those in the lead. A bit too detailed, I'd say. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Many thanks to both. I'll give it a prune.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:48, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Some pruning done. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

If you GA nom it I'm happy to review it. It would of course be good if Eric could take a look at it sometime when he returns to full editing and might help prepare it for FA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:14, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Judging by our previous discussions I don't think Peter has any aspirations towards FA for this article, but I'll be taking a look anyway. Eric Corbett 21:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I can't see much wrong with it now and would pass it as it is.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:40, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree, seems to be a pretty easy decision to make. Eric Corbett 12:16, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks to you both. It's nominated. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Review done, just awaiting your response now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

All good now I think. Hope I didn't put you off nomming again! Honestly, a lot of your articles I've looked at would pass GA very easily and I'm sure if I reviewed a lot of your material on some I'd barely find a fault with it. Would be happy to review for you again. Arley Hall at first glance would pass fairly easily.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Capesthorne Hall

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Capesthorne Hall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 14:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Capesthorne Hall

The article Capesthorne Hall you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Capesthorne Hall for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Capesthorne Hall

Gatoclass (talk) 04:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Flass

Hi Peter, I hope you're well- you may remember I reviewed Edward Graham Paley a few years ago. Anyway, I'm not sure if this will interest you, but I've just knocked up an article on Flass, a country house in Cumbria with a rather interesting history, and I thought of you. The trouble is that I don't really have any knowledge of architecture, so I was wondering if you could help me translate the English Heritage's description of the property into something more human readable, if that's something you'd be in a better position for than me! Any other changes you feel the article needs would also be welcome! J Milburn (talk) 16:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Yes I remember your review well, with thanks. I am no expert on architecture, just picked up a few bits and pieces by writing many (too many?) articles on architectural subjects. The recent NHLE descriptions are very good; older ones like this one vary from good to awful - this one is about mid-way. I'm not sure how much detail you would like. I also have the relevant "Pevsner", which gives its usual quizzical description. (NHLE says "Palladian"; Pevsner says "Italianate" - I suppose the former fits within the latter (?).) Anyway over the weekend I'll try to knock something up in a sandbox. You can then use whatever you choose from it for the article. Incidentally have you come across the {{NHLE |num= |desc= |accessdate= |separator=,|ps=}} template? It's elegant, easy to use, and has become a bit of a standard for articles on listed buildings. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Great stuff- I'll adjust my reference to use the template, and I look forward to seeing what you can produce. J Milburn (talk) 14:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's thoroughly appreciated. I've moved it into the article pretty much wholesale. I don't think I'm going to aim for GAC, as more information would be needed, and I just don't have access to enough sources at this time. That said, I think the article can sit quite comfortably in its current state- I've nominated it a DYK, so hopefully it'll get a little mainpage exposure. Thanks again- if there's ever anything I can do for you, do let me know. J Milburn (talk) 16:15, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, agree, not enough info for a GA unless better and more comprehensive sources are available. An interesting building, and a fascinating history of its repeated use for illegal drugs! I had planned to do more work on the Sharpe-Paley-Austin practice, but was rather put off by an uncomfortable review at FLC. So working on listed buildings in Cheshire at present. Would like to do more in Lancashire-Cumbria in the future. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I've never nominated anything at FLC, but I have seen some things there which don't strike me as ideal. I'll keep my eyes open for anything more of yours at GAC. J Milburn (talk) 10:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - and thanks for the attribution at DYK. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:59, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Englesea Brook Chapel and Museum

thanks for your recent edit of Englesea Brook Chapel and Museum

:) Saurav Lamshal (talk) 17:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

British Newspapers Archive

Hey Peter, I saw you recent Good article Capesthorne Hall. Well done! Looking at the rest of the contributions, I thought you might be interested in one of the subscriptions to British Newspaper Archive via The Wikipedia Library. Its a great database and we still have a few more accounts available. If you are interested, go ahead and sign up at WP:BNA. Cheers, Sadads (talk) 12:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the information and invitation. Could be invaluable. Have applied. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Peter, you don't have the user emails enabled. We need to be able to contact you via email to give you access. Please either enable the email function, or send me an email directly so I can send you more information, Sadads (talk) 20:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Flass

Gatoclass (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Designated by English Heritage

Hi Peter, While reviewing Norcliffe Chapel for DYK I put a note on the talk page and I thought I should explain/get your opinion. You have used " designated by English Heritage as a Grade II listed building." and I've used exactly that form of words myself - this has been challenged elsewhere (I can't remember where) with the argument that English Heritage doesn't have the power to designate anything as a listed building of whatever grade - only the Secretary of State does. You and I both know that English Heritage actually does the work in researching and preparing the information, submitting it to the minister and, if successful, creating the statutory record of the decision. They also have the ability to make "minor amendments" - which are not clearly defined and takes months (as I've learnt in relation to a water tower/dovecote at Lytes Cary and the number of arches at Bathampton Toll Bridge). I just wondered if you thought we should still use "designated by English Heritage" or whether another form of words might be better - I have taken to just saying "designated as a Grade II listed building". Does this need wider debate?— Rod ^talk 12:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Rod, you are absolutely right, and I have been guilty of using this form of words as a sort of short cut. I suppose the correct (pedantic) description would be something like "designated by the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990". Not only clumsy, this would have to be changed every time the government alters the title of the Secretary of State's department. IMO just to say "designated as a Grade X listed building" seems a bit sparse and lacking in information. How about "designated as a Grade X listed building and recorded in the National Heritage List for England? This, suitably modified, could also be used for scheduled monuments, etc.

Regarding your other comments, minor amendments means such things as typos, rather than errors in descriptions (or worse). I send a list of these most weeks to minoramendmentstothelist@english-heritage.org.uk. I have found numerous errors in the placing of markers in the maps, and I send these to Jeff.Primm@english-heritage.org.uk. Both recipients are grateful to receive corrections, and they respond appropriately. I also send errors in descriptions to the latter, who sends them on to the relevant department but, as you say, even with evidence such as Streetview, it takes time to get the list corrected. And the same applies to demolished buildings (unbelievably). At least corrections can be made to the list (they cannot on IoE), and that is something. A major problem is that many of the descriptions were made years (decades) ago, and any errors, or later changes to a building, are not recorded. The descriptions in more recent designations are very good, but to bring all descriptions up to this standard would be an insuperable task with the resources available to EH. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:31, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

The "minor" amendments I've done with them included this entry which used to say a 20th C water tower was an 18th C dovecote and this and this for the bridge (there used to have to be 2 entries when a bridge crossed the parish boundary - but this is no longer the case) where one said 7 arches and the other said 8. I agree full naming of the ministers title would be inappropriate but I like your "designated as a Grade X listed building and recorded in the National Heritage List for England".— Rod ^talk 13:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Do we need to go anywhere for "consensus", or shall we go for it and see what happens? I think this formula should be acceptable to most. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I would say "go for it". You probably write more listed building articles than anyone else so I'd suggest using it until someone objects. I will start using it but not starting many new ones at present - mostly trying to get some more up to GA see User:Rodw#Personal to do list (help welcome) & awaiting the lists of scheduled ancient monuments which may come with this years WLM in the UK.— Rod ^talk 14:02, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

That seems unnecessarily verbose to me. What about the rather less wordy "is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a Grade X listed building"? Eric Corbett 15:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I do think that the work "designated" offers rather more weight and "importance" to listing, rather than merely saying it is "recorded". What do others think? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:46, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Then you could always say "is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a designated Grade X listed building". Eric Corbett 15:57, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Being a bit of a pedant here (which isn't normally like me) but the text of the act seems to only apply the term "designation" to conservation areas & uses "list", "listed" or "listing" for individual buildings. Perhaps Listed building needs a a bit of a tidy up as well?— Rod ^talk 16:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

But EH seems to favour the word, Have a look at this. I should still like to include it, somehow, maybe using Eric's latest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't object to the use of the term, just trying to be as accurate as possible.— Rod ^talk 17:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Lostock Gralam Enquiry

Hi Peter,

My name's Teri and I work for a firm of solicitors who are making enquiries regarding factories within Lostock Gralam. I noticed from the Lostock Gralam page that you were involved in it's publication and was hoping you'd be willing to help me with these investigations?

Kind Regards

213.218.203.110 (talk) 15:30, 18 July 2014 (UTC)Teri

My involvement in this article has been minimal and I am unable to help you. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Englesea Brook Chapel and Museum

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

All Saints' Church, Runcorn

I've finally managed to look through the article now. I know you'd be disappointed if I didn't find anything to complain about, so here goes:

Lead

• "... it was replaced by a new church designed by Anthony Salvin in 1847–49". Salvin didn't design it in 1847–49 as this is suggesting, that's when it was built. Perhaps better to say something like "replaced in 1849 by a new church designed by Anthony Salvin"? (I'm not too keen on that "by ... by" there, but we can worry about that later.)

• I've reworded it, and got rid of the second "by". But does it read OK now? PIV

  Looks fine now. Eric Corbett 17:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

• "All Saints is an active Anglican parish church in the diocese of Chester, arranging services on Sundays and home groups during the week, in addition to weddings and funerals. It also runs a community project." I just don't understand what that's trying to tell me. The church arranges services? I've got no idea what a "home group" is, "a community project" is just about as vague as vague can get.

• I was criticised in a previous GAN, saying that a church, unless it is redundant, is a living organism of people, and that one must include info about that; hence the Present day section. As the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article, I have included some of this info in it. Unfortunately, in this case, the church's website is also "just about as vague as vague can get", so what more can I do? I should prefer to keep this in the lead, together with the Present day section, and see what the reviewer says. PIV

  Info about the present day is fine, I just don't know what a "home group" is for instance. But if there's nothing more you can say then there's nothing more to say. Eric Corbett 17:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

History

• "A major item of the church furniture was a magnificent pre-Reformation rood screen.". Magnificent is one of those words to avoid unless it's a direct quotation.

• It is a direct quotation, so I've added quotes, and an additional reference. PIV

• "At some time the dedication of the church was changed to St Bartholomew and later to All Saints." Do we know what the dedication was changed from?

• St Bertelin - see third sentence of this parapgraph. Do I need to repeat it? PIV

  I see that the first church was dedicated to St Bertelin, but that was replaced by the medieval structure, which could plausibly have been dedicated to someone else. Eric Corbett 17:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

• "In 1801 the church was too small for the congregation ...". So that happened all of a sudden in 1801? Why?

• Expanded with a quote and ref. PIV

• "... orders were given that the bells should not be rung". By whom were the orders given? Who were the orders given to?

• Ditto. PIV

• ""... concluded that the church could not be repaired permanently". Nothing can be repaired permanently. Could we not say something like "beyond repair"?

• That's what the source says, but I agree with your suggestion. PIV

Interior

• "Also from the old church are a holy table from the late 17th century". I have no idea what a holy table might be.

• I've gone to a better source, and expanded this with a quote (and some more info). PIV

• "The oldest dated memorial is to two women who died in 1672". I'm uncertain whether that's telling me that there are other undated memorials that could possibly be older or that this memorial dates to 1672.

• Agree. "dated" deleted. PIV

Present day

• Same problem with arranging services, home groups and so as the lead.

• See comment above. PIV

Eric Corbett 22:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Thanks for the copyediting and a most helpful review; my comments above. I've looked through your edits and have some queries, all relating to citations.

• You have changed "Citation" to "citation". Why? Template:Citation uses "Citation". and does it matter anyway?

  Just for consistency, as there was a mixture of {{Citation}} and {{citation}}. Besides, {{citation}} requires one less key stroke, which is a bonus for lazy so-and-sos like me. :-) Eric Corbett 17:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for changing the "publisher" field to "via" in the BNA citations - I'd missed that.
• But the recommended citation template for BNA refs at Wikipedia:BNA does include an "accessdate" fields, so should not that be included?

  The accessdate is only really appropriate for web-only sources, but with BNA you're accessing their database, so no, I don't think it should be included. For instance, if the BNA service were ever to be withdrawn you wouldn't be able to find copies of the pages in archive.org for instance, as they're generated dynamically. Besides, the real source is the newspaper, not BNA. Eric Corbett 17:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Again many thanks for the trouble you have taken over this. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Just a quick note to say I have finished the GA review and put it on hold pending minor improvements. (Normally a bot does this, but it seems to be down at the moment). It's at Talk:All Saints' Church, Runcorn/GA1. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:55, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Norcliffe Chapel

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of All Saints' Church, Runcorn

The article All Saints' Church, Runcorn you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:All Saints' Church, Runcorn for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 18:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Peter's Church, Parr

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Wincham

Hi Peter. Yes this article is a mess. I was trying to de-orphan Listed buildings in Wincham which consisted of the table I copied and pasted into the article, and then I redirected. I didn't see the point for such a small article to have its listed buildings in a separate article. If you want to improve this article go right ahead. Someone else created it and I just added that table. The article could use your help. Hope this helps. Gbawden (talk) 08:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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. CorenSearchBot (talk) 10:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

• The hell? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Tyldesley Church

You know I never look at categories. I do however like my subscription to the British Newspaper Archive provided by Wikipedia:BNA. Far too interesting. Hope you're well. J3Mrs (talk) 11:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

No worry; just getting rid of a bit of red text! I too have found some useful material on BNA - but I struggle a bit in getting the search facility to focus as much as I would like. But it's a privilege to have free access to such a valuable facility. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/St Alban's Church, Billinge, St Mary's Church, Billinge at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 11:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:57, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Bolesworth Castle

Dear Peter I hope you don't mind the direct contact - I see you have removed my amendments to the Wikipedia entry for Bolesworth Castle, dismissing them as unreferenced and peacock... I am the Estate Manager at Bolesworth and find the current Wikipedia entry inaccurate - hence I wanted to make a couple of subtle changes which are minor, but important to the Barbour family, by whom I am directly employed.

Anyway - happy to have an exchange of e-mails if you wish - I should like to explain more about the proposed changes 'offline' and hopefully you would agree the changes are tidying up the odd inaccuracy and making the entry more valid.

My contact details can be found on the Bolesworth website

Many thanks

Matthew Morris MRICS FAAV

84.92.88.6 (talk) 16:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Matthew. I am not surprised at your concern. The "problem" is that material in Wikipedia (WP) has to be verifiable, with citations from a reliable published source. It also has to be "neutral". As your contribution was not referenced, there was no way in which it could be verified. One's own knowledge and observations may well be accurate, but that is not adequate for WP unless it can be confirmed from a reliable and published source. The article on Bolesworth Castle is very poor as it stands; my only contributions have been to add details of the listed buildings associated with it. I will send an e-mail to the estate office so that you can contact me directly. I do have a copy of Cheshire Country Houses by de Figueiredo and Trueherz, so there is no reason (other than time) why I should not have a go at improving the article from that source; and I also have the up to date Pevsner.

Best wishes, --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gerald Westbury

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for All Saints' Church, Runcorn

Thanks from the Wiki and I for your contribution Victuallers (talk) 11:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Stanford Cade

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Chester

Do you not have Twitter Peter I. Vardy? Do you not know that when you type in "Chester" in to a Twitter search, that "ShitChester" is one of the first results?

He is a matter of local, and possibly national/global importance on there.

In fact, he should be verified.

Clearly you are part of the Illuminati of Wikipedia by removing him - so that means you must get him verified on Twitter and restore said page.

Thanks. 2.99.26.184 (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

To be sufficiently notable to be on Wikipedia you have, I guess, to satisfy different requirements than those required for Twitter. You can find the requirements for Wikipedia in the article on Wikipedia:Notability (people). If the subject under debate satisfies these conditions, write a properly cited article about him on Wikipedia, and when you have done that it will be OK for including him in the Notable people section in the article on Chester. I guess there is a difference between a social medium and an encyclopaedia. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside

Hello! Your submission of St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Teemu08 (talk) 21:36, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

St John's Church, Manchester

Hi, any chance you could review this one for GA? You might not have done a review before but can you look through your past reviews and have a go?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Dr B, but I am not happy doing GA reviews, and anyway I have plenty to do at present on articles and lists. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:21, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for William Owen (architect)

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Luke's Church, Formby

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Nicholas' Church, Whiston

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Peter's Church, Formby

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Maxwell and Tuke

Did some tweaks on article. Good to go! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 13:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Editor par excellence

	Anates tuas in acie instrue
	You have your ducks in a row. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

That's an unusual one! Thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

My own creation. With experienced editors like you, you probably get bored . . . Not just the same old trinkets. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:19, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Helen's Church, St Helens, Merseyside

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Aidan's Church, Billinge

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary's Church, Billinge

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Listed buildings in Port Sunlight

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Listed buildings in Bootle, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pantile and Anta. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

St Mary's Church, Windermere

I've just changed the caption to your photograph of St. Mary's, Windermere so that it reads "...from the south-west". Since you both took and captioned the photo that may seem rather a cheek, but having compared your photo with a rather inferior one I took recently (here) I'm pretty sure I'm right. A south-west position also squares with the position of the shadows, given that your photo was apparently taken at 12.20 pm. Just thought I'd let you know. --Antiquary (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay in responding; just arrived back from a holiday. You are, of course correct - my error. Actually, not my photo; I just downloaded it from Geograph! Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Maxwell and Tuke

There is some static about the hookiness of the hook at Template:Did you know nominations/Maxwell and Tuke. What about adding something about Blackpool Tower: "Britain's tallest building, and second in the world to the Eiffel Tower." 7&6=thirteen (☎) 09:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I think we are promoted, passed and past that. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 10:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Prep area 4] 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about my absence from the discussion. My excuse is that I have just returned from a fortnight's cruise on the Rhine and Moselle! But it all seems to have progressed well in my absence - so thanks to all who have participated. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I had to tend to it, but all's well that ends well. Hope your cruise went well. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:10, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

We also need to tend to the two tower articles, and make sure that the facts are straight. They were not the second (or whatever) tallest buildings in the world. I'm up to my ass in alligators right now, so I can't work on it. I would suggest that you mention the wrong set of facts in a Note, and put in the actual facts. We are contradicting a lot of received wisdom here, so it would be good to put it straight and direct, explaining it all. Please take care of it, as I just can't do it today. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:13, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Holy Trinity Church, Southport

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Southport Arts Centre

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Southport Town Hall

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Atkinson Art Gallery and Library

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St George's Church, Southport

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St James' Church, Birkdale

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Nicolae Colan

I appreciate the prompt review. I believe I've now done what's required. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:48, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

You have. Now ticked as OK. Thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary's Church, Presbytery and Convent, Little Crosby

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Luke's Church, Great Crosby

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Ince Blundell Hall

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:02, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ince Blundell Hall

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ince Blundell Hall you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

As I remembered I have another article to work on over the weekend I've done the review today Talk:Ince Blundell Hall/GA1 if you'd care to respond. Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ince Blundell Hall

The article Ince Blundell Hall you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ince Blundell Hall for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Peter I. Vardy. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 16:50, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral

It's a nice article Peter, and would make a nice GA. I only have one small observation, which is that the capitalisation of "Parsons' window" and so on in the Nave aisles section looks very odd to me. If "Parsons'" is capitalised then why isn't "window"? Presumably the name of the window isn't "Parsons'"? Eric Corbett 23:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

"The southeast transept contains the tomb of the 17th Earl of Derby, chairman of the first committee responsible for the building of the cathedral. What has that got to do with the stained glass? Eric Corbett 23:35, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again for the copyediting and comments. I have removed the sentence about the Earl. The capitalisation is done as in the source, but I take your point, and have also capitalised the "Windows". It's nominated. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:37, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Carl Johannes Edwards

Hello! Your submission of Carl Johannes Edwards at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Yoninah (talk) 11:36, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Review done, awaiting your response, cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral

The article Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Church of the Holy Family, Ince Blundell

Mike V • Talk 19:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Stained glass in Liverpool Cathedral

Mike V • Talk 07:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for John William Brown (artist)

Mike V • Talk 08:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Dawpool (house)

Hello! Your submission of Dawpool (house) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Seattle (talk) 23:32, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Carl Johannes Edwards

Harrias ^talk 12:02, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Nicholas' Church, Wallasey

Harrias ^talk 12:01, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gayton Hall, Wirral

Harrias ^talk 00:02, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Poulton Hall

Harrias ^talk 00:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)