Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Featured article nomination of Exhumation of Richard III

I've nominated Exhumation of Richard III of England for consideration as a featured article candidate, in advance of Richard's reburial on 26 March 2015. If anyone would like to contribute to the review, please feel free to do so at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Exhumation of Richard III of England/archive1. Prioryman (talk) 13:10, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Sleaford peer review

Hello, I am just notifying you that I have just put Sleaford (a market town in Lincolnshire) up for Peer Review here. Any feedback would be great. Many thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC).

Private school articles

I have tagged a number of private school articles (mostly in England) with "advert". Many of them seem to be written to prove how academically superior they are (despite the fact their pass rates are artificially boosted by scholarship), and how many of them get into Oxbridge (which is usually by interview anyway.)

Another common problem in these articles seems to be "recentism" (for want of a better term), and there seems to be a recurring theme of new science blocks being built, and of extensive trips abroad.

The obvious implication is that many of these articles are being doctored by the staff of the schools. The articles end up reading like the official websites for these places, giving only good promotional info on them. While these places have been implicated in various scandals, there's not a whiff of them on most of the pages.-MacRùsgail (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with some of what is said here. A lot of schools generally seem to just be adverts or copied wholesale from their websites. I also fully agree that a lot of them need to be improved dramatically or wiped. However I detect a slight political/social agenda in the tone of the above comments re: scandals and phrasing such as "not a whiff of them," and especially "(despite the fact their pass rates are artificially boosted by scholarship), and how many of them get into Oxbridge (which is usually by interview anyway.)" I feel the above user might have a slight chip on their shoulder about private/public schools masquerading as wanting to improve said articles. Therefore there is a bias in wanting to "improve" said articles.

Though I would like to repeat and emphasize that I do agree with the principle of cleaning a lot of them up. Especially to make them less like adverts and provide genuine history of schools. I tend to find this is true of all schools not just private ones. We need to remember that we should be presenting facts and not opinions and especially never drive things via a political agenda or motivation.

--Higgsbozone (talk) 22:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

GA nomination of Sleaford

Hello, I am just letting everyone here know that I have nominated Sleaford, a market town in Lincolnshire, for Good Article assessment (see WP:GAN#PLACE). Regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 17:33, 4 February 2015 (UTC).

I would be extremely interested being a Sleafordian myself.

--Higgsbozone (talk) 22:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

County Projects

As well as the main project for England there are many county and regional projects, would it make sense to simply treat them as sub projects of England and only tag villages etc for the county projects? ϢereSpielChequers 14:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Personally I tag for both the County project and the England project, often there is little activity on some of the county projects and the England one catches notifications that may otherwise be missed. Keith D (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Only Fools and Horses - FAR

I've put Only Fools and Horses up for review of its featured status at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Only Fools and Horses/archive1. Improvements and comments welcome Bencherlite^Talk 11:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

TfD for Template:Churches in Bristol

There is a template deletion discussion occurring @ Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 February 23#Template:Churches in Bristol which may be of interest to members of WikiProject England. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposal to move Methodism to Child Project

Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Methodism Jerodlycett (talk) 09:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

English Heritage is Changing

Copied following note from template talk:NHLE to make people aware.

EH is splitting into two parts (see this) and the part that looks after listing, etc. is to be called Historic England.

Keith D (talk) 13:29, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Peterborough FAR

I have nominated Peterborough for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Just accepted

The Acting Witan of Mercia from the AfC muddle. Do you reckon it needs some tone tweaking? Is anyone here experienced in such organisations? Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Also, what do you reckon on Draft:Soraya Syed? FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Fletchers Solicitors

Your attention is called to an appeal from a WP:Speedy deletion of the above article. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_May_21#Fletchers_Solicitors. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Rewe listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rewe to be moved to Rewe, Devon. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Forthcoming chemistry editathons

You are invited to attend one or both of two forthcoming editathons:

• 29 July: Burlington House, Piccadilly, London
• 8 August: Catalyst, Widnes, Cheshire

though the focus is chemistry, non-scientists are welcome to attend; there will be plenty for you to do, on articles like biographies and company histories. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

New Model Army

Hi, I was just over at Talk:New Model Army, where I posted a question and request for edits. I would make them myself, but I don't know enough about the subject. I'm cross-posting here because I don't know how well-watched that page is, and it also seems to me that readers here might be interested and/or qualified to help. I hope this is an appropriate venue for this note. Thanks. -GTBacchus^(talk) 16:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Sir Peter George Osborne, 17th Baronet

There is an ongoing RM discussion. Join in to improve consensus. --George Ho (talk) 07:17, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These possible copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is present).--Lucas559 (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

GT nom English Heritage properties in Somerset and FT nom Scheduled monuments in Somerset

Would anyone be willing to review a couple of nominations which are relevant to this project? I nominated English Heritage properties in Somerset as a good topic back in April and it has only received 2 comments, while Scheduled monuments in Somerset has been almost a month without any comments on its featured topic nomination. Any comments would be very welcome.— Rod ^talk 20:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Coat of arms of George Washington

The naming of the article Coat of arms of George Washington is under discussion, see talk:Coat of arms of George Washington. As this coat of arms is one from medieval England, you may be interested -- 67.70.32.20 (talk) 04:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Formal notice: RfC on national flags for Manchester City Football

There is a debate about keeping or removing national flags from "Friendly games" of the Manchester City Football season. As this has the potential to affect many football team's seasonal articles, an RfC has been initiated at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons (Sport season articles and flag use for club nationality). Please add an opinion either way if this is a subject that interests you. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Strete Gate

Hi. Please take note about this Merge-Discussion please. Thank you & Regards. --Gary Dee 10:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for W. H. Auden

W. H. Auden has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MusicAngels (talk) 18:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Bristol at FAC

I have nominated the article Bristol for featured article. Would you be willing to take a look and leave any comments about whether it meets the featured article criteria on the review page at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bristol/archive1?— Rod ^talk 17:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Public art lists

I wrote a blog post and am busy on social media and mailing lists, trying to encourage more people to create or contribute to locality-based lists of public art. Please look out for newbie contributions, assist the editors and tidy up as needed. Please help to publicise this drive, too! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

People from the Elizabethan era

A category discussion about People from the Elizabethan era, please see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Greg Rutherford's identity

Hello WikiProject England people!

Not sure if anyone is interested, but there is currently an rfc on Greg Rutherford's talk page regarding a debate over how he should be introduced in his opening line. While no one is arguing that he is not British, one side says he should be introduced as an "English athlete" in line with the custom of introducing Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish athletes by their constituent nationality; the other side says that he should be called "British", regardless. Citations for "English" include his englandathletics.org profile; citations for "British" include several sources referring to him in the context of GB athletics.

My concern is that this double standard means that essentially the existence of England and English people become censored on Wikipedia by the umbrella term "British", which is not applied to people from other parts of the UK. If anyone has anything they'd like to contribute to the discussion, I'd really appreciate your comments on the Talk: Greg Rutherford page. Thank you in advance. 2A02:C7D:B30A:7500:91D7:2E9B:B31D:BD82 (talk) 17:18, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

• What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
• When? June 2015
• How can you help?

  1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here

  2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)

  3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Problems with names

I've been pointed this way to get some help with a problem re what name to use for a couple of places. Weston Subedge and Aston Subedge are what I have them indexed under on genealogical data simply because that is their 'official' names and all the map and land searches require and return that. The ONS has confirmed that in law that is the correct spelling, but the local variants are being given a bit more prominence since the parish council switched to the 'Weston-Sub-Edge' spelling, while many locals still use 'Weston Sub Edge' and Royal Mail confuse things further by using 'Weston-Subedge' on the PAF data. wikidata will need to link to 'Weston Subedge' in order to monitor statistical data from ONS so in my book that means that the primary name for the entry should be that, with the hyphenated and other versions forwarding to that, unless the Parish Council formally propose a change of name, All the citations are now on the name section of the page and I hope I've reworked that section so it's now more balanced and the can be de-nannied ;) ... Aston Subedge is almost a mirror case but with only the hyphenated version as an alternative. Lsces (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

AfC submissions

See Draft:Stagecoach In Lancashire - Route 109 and Draft:Stagecoach In Lancashire - Route 125. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 18:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

"The Duke of Edinburgh Awards"

The usage of The Duke of Edinburgh Awards is under discussion, see talk:The Duke of Edinburgh Awards -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 23:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Bristol nominations

Hi, I would be grateful if you could comment on two nominations relevant to this wikiproject:

• Bristol is nominated at FAC here (criteria at Wikipedia:Featured article criteria)
• Portal:Bristol is nominated for featured portal here (criteria at Wikipedia:Featured portal criteria)

Any comments would be appreciated.— Rod ^talk 09:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't usually comment on GA or FA nominations, and don't particularly want to be involved in this one. But, I have a general comment about the Bristol article. Almost all the sources appear to be online ones, many taken from press cuttings and websites published in the last few years. There appear to be very few citations taken from books and peer-reviewed academic articles, covering, for example, the city's history. That worries me. A good encyclopedia article should, it seems to me, draw on the best sources available, and many of the best sources are not available online. This isn't intended as any criticism of the article as it stands, or any of the editors whose work has brought it to its current state. But, is it the best-researched article that we can do? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:02, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

There are 28 books (with isbn numbers) included in the list of references. Are you saying it would look more "best-researched" if I separated them out into a bibliography?— Rod ^talk 10:05, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

As I said, I don't want to comment in detail or offer any specific advice, given my lack of experience in GA/FA - I was simply expressing some surprise that there seems to be a preponderance of recent online sources used. It's up to more experienced reviewers than me to advise further. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:10, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

From The Doctor to my son Thomas - featured article candidate

I've nominated the article about the video From The Doctor to my son Thomas for Featured Article consideration.

The article is about a message sent from actor Peter Capaldi in-character in his role as the Doctor on Doctor Who, to console an autistic young boy over grief from the death of his grandmother.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/From The Doctor to my son Thomas/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 01:05, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission

See Draft:Henry de la River. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 03:11, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

• Also, are Grade II listed buildings inherently notable? See Draft:Shrubs Wood. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 19:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

• No, they're not; you need to demonstrate non-trivial coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. To put that in context, there are roughly 500,000 grade II listed buildings in England alone, most of which are singularly non-notable. (Telephone kiosk in Hampstead Garden Suburb, Garden fence in Salisbury, Wall in Suffolk…) ‑ iridescent 20:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure the notability of listed buildings has been discussed previously but I can't find it at present (it is not at Wikipedia:Notability (architecture) and may be in the archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Historic sites) but there have been several AfD discussions where it has been a factor. My memory tells me that Grade I were seen as definitely being notable (in wp terms), Grade II* probably were, but that Grade II would be assessed indvidually. On the Draft:Shrubs Wood you need to turn the link to the nhle listing from an external link into a reference. For a 1930s house to be II* is unusual and further references supporting the claim "unique as a Modernist interpretation of the traditional English country house" would help to demonstrate its notability.— Rod ^talk 20:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject England participants may be good administrators

Participants here often create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful to evaluate potential candidates, and maybe even find out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Requests for Comment

Two RfCs are ongoing at WikiProject Boxing. The first concerns use of Flag icons in professional boxing record tables here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#RfC: Flag icons in professional boxing record tables. The second concerns a proposed MOS for boxing articles Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#MoS:Boxing Final call, in particular whether UK should be added to locations in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Editors are invited to comment. Daicaregos (talk) 14:10, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

John Badcock (writer) - author identity

John Badcock's very brief biography reads:

"John Badcock (fl. 1816–1830) was an English sporting writer, still not identified, who published between 1816 and 1830, under the pseudonyms of Jon Bee and John Hinds. He wrote works on boxing and horse racing. Internal evidence suggests only a connection with Devon or Cornwall," and identifies him as the author of "Slang: A Dictionary of the Turf, the Ring, the Chase."

Google Books however also identifies him as the author of "Domestic Amusements, or Philosophical Recreations." I was reading the last few pages of an original copy of this book (pp. 206-210) on the "Aquatic Tripod, or Tricipede" when I realized that the text was basically an expanded version of an article written in the Edinburgh Courant and republished in the broadsheets Bell's Weekly Messenger (1821/06/03) and the Bristol Mirror (1821/06/02).

Most important, Badcock wrote in "Domestic Amusements" (p. 209):

“That Mr. Kent might have ‘filled these cases with little hollow balls, attached by a chain, and capable of floating the machine in case of accident,' is not improbable. We do not believe the fact, and consider them utterly useless; and moreover feel sincerely sorry to have occasion for making this remark.”

I have researched over 200 contemporary broadsheets, journals, and books on this topic, and I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the "remark" in question was the Edinburgh Courant article. (The writing styles are basically identical.) I have found no other published material that independently makes these comments about "little hollow balls."

If this is correct, John Badcock was a reporter for -- and possibly the editor of -- the Edinburgh Courant in May 1821, some 600 to 650 miles north of Devon and Cornwall. He must have personally interviewed "Mr. Kent" in Edinburgh in order to obtain the very detailed information he published in both the article and "Domestic Amusements," details which appears nowhere else.

(Full disclosure: the "Mr. Kent" referred to by Badcock was actually a Dunfermline machinist named William "Willie" Cant -- one of my great-great grandfathers.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Ashdown (talk • contribs) 22:54, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Request for comments

For info: Talk:Royal_Tunbridge_Wells#RFC --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Verification in Burke's Peerage needed

Does anyone have could someone with access to Burke's Peerage 107th ed (2003) -- or a newer source? If so could you please check the change at Sir John Leslie, 4th Baronet&diff=prev&oldid=698636096. It tastes like vandalism, but IPEditor has gone to the trouble of providing a cite. Thanks ^~~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~~ 11:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

40 London Landmarks - audio-described for blind and partially sighted people

VocalEyes has made a content donation of 40 recordings of audio description, specifically scripted for blind and partially sighted people, but of interest to anyone whose interested in the landmarks themselves. You can find them here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Files_donated_by_VocalEyes Matthewcock (talk) 16:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Portal:Peak District

Hi, I've just created a portal for the Peak District which may be of interest here. Do feel free to enhance it with new or improved articles or by adding to the links. --Bermicourt (talk) 08:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Awaken the Dragon Edit-a-thon/Contest

Hi, can I interest anybody in contributing to a national edit-a-thon/contest for Wales in April, Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon. You can win up to £200 worth of Amazon vouchers and books of your choice for entering the contest. The idea is that Amazon vouchers and books can then be used by people to buy/have discount off more books and produce more articles for wikipedia. The scoreboard will be kept here. However, if contests and prize aren't your cup of tea you're very welcome to participate in the edit-athon throughout the month. Everything will count and be added to a list at the bottom. We have a number of missing listed buildings identified and a core list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon/Core articles. Already we have about 30 people interested but it would be great to see more get involved and producing content and really show what can be achieved in a month.The point of it is getting some of the core articles up to decent status and an overall improvement in quality. So if you generally work on military history or trains or whatever and you spot something which might interest you please consider working on it within the next six weeks! There is also a physical edit-athon at the National Library of Wales on April 22, see this for details. If it's a success there's no reason why a similar thing couldn't be run by somebody here for England or a county of England.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:47, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Trouble finding references? The Wikipedia Library is proud to announce ...

The Wikipedia Library

Alexander Street Press (ASP) is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online: Premium collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. This collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, engineering, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama, and more. For more topics see their website.

There are up to 30 one-year ASP accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to WP:ASP. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 21:16, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon

Asking for people to get involved in producing for this. See the article list at the bottom. If it's a success I'll consider running a similar one for England/other British areas. If you want to see a similar thing happen to England and mass improvement to your content contribute to Wales for a few weeks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:59, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The West Country Challenge

Just to let everybody know, Rodw and myself are planning on hosting the Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country challenge for late July or August. Based on the Awaken the Dragon model which saw nearly 1100 articles improvements and 65 GAs and FAs. If anybody is interested please say so here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:55, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Auto-assessment of article classes

Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.

If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ Rob^Talk 22:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Help with David Harding (financier)

Hi all! Would anyone from this WikiProject be able to help make some updates to the article for David Harding? Harding is the founder of investment management firm Winton Capital Management and has been in the news recently for his funding of the Britain Stronger in Europe campaign but this is not yet reflected in his article. The full request is detailed on the article's Talk page here; key updates include the addition of his role with Britain Stronger in Europe, as well as correcting some existing information in the article. Full disclosure: I am consulting for Harding via Robin Eggar at MBD Communications as part of my work at Beutler Ink and will not make any edits to the article myself due to this COI. Instead, I am seeking uninvolved editors to review and make such changes as they feel are appropriate. Thanks in advance, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Peculiar material in Middleton, Northumberland

Has anyone vetted the second paragraph of the Middleton, Northumberland article? There is no source and it looks like someone has picked up a bad case of Game of Thrones-itis. --Oldontarian (talk) 12:47, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism, now removed - eight weeks late. (You could have done it yourself, of course.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain

[Click on title for link to page] Discussion has reached a standstill and we cannot reach a consensus or a compromise. I would appreciate input from uninvolved editors. Thank you. Gordon410 (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge

Hi there. I've started a new initiative, the Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. It's a long term goal to bring about 10,000 article improvements to the UK and Ireland. Through two contests involving just six or seven weeks of editing so far we've produced over 1500 improvements. Long term if we have more people chipping it and adding articles they've edited independently as well from all areas of the UK then reaching that target is all possible. I think it would be an amazing achievement to see 10,000 article improvements by editors chipping in with whatever area of the British Isles or subject that they work on. If you support this and think you might want to contribute towards this long term please sign up in the Contributors section. No obligations, just post work on anything you feel like whenever you want, though try to avoid basic stubs if possible as we're trying to reduce the overall stub count and improve general comprehension and quality. Thanks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Dead links: National Heritage List for England

Links of the form http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=xxxxxxx (where xxxxxxx is an integer) are being marked as dead by InternetArchiveBot (talk · contribs), for example this edit. I've found that the URL may be altered to the form https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/xxxxxxx retaining the same value for xxxxxxx as with this edit - but is that the correct fix? If it is, should we ask WP:BOTREQ to make the appropriate amendments? --Redrose64 (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm having problems understanding this problem. Using your example edit the link to http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1284140 automatically redirects within the Historic England NHLE list site to https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1284140. Wouldn't it be easier just to tell the bot that the links are not "permanent dead link"?

A better solution would be to convert them to {{NHLE}} templates which gives the appropriate URL and uses Historic England rather than English Heritage which many of the cites still quote. A similar problem happens with PastScape entries. Keith D (talk) 20:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Merge of Leeds and City of Leeds

It has been proposed that the two articles on Leeds, Leeds and City of Leeds, be merged. This has been brought up several times and it has been 6 years since a discussion resulted in retaining the split. Please share your thoughts here. Keith D (talk) 20:51, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Please write Hamsterley Mill

Xx236 (talk) 12:50, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Xx236: Have you suggested this at WT:MILLS? (note to Mjroots (talk · contribs) - you might like to know about this). --Redrose64 (talk) 20:55, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

It looks like a village from the description rather than a mill, may be WP:UKGEO is more appropriate. Keith D (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Grouping/ordering a list of hostels by region

I could use help about grouping/ordering the members of List of youth hostels in England and Wales. The issue is that there's no explicit ordering in the list, although some invisible grouping has apparently been used. I am wondering about using the 9 "Regions of England" to group them, but I don't know if that is a widely used grouping or if there is any good alternative used in any other list of English places. Comments at Talk:List of youth hostels in England and Wales#About ordering. Anyone watching or here would be welcomed. --doncram 20:30, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject England/Archive 4 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

• Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Margaret Thatcher

Please see the discussion at Talk:Margaret Thatcher#Public image of Margaret Thatcher. Comments are much welcome.--Nevé–selbert 15:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This England nominated for Featured article status

I've nominated This England (album) for Featured article status. Project members are invited to participate in the Featured article candidate discussion. Thanks. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 06:55, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Victoria County History template

I propose to to remake {{VCH}}. Please comment here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

400,000 photographs of archaeological objects found by members of the public in England and Wales

In recent weeks, 400,000 images of finds, logged and photographed by the Portable Antiquities Scheme, have been uploaded to Commons.

• Portable Antiquities Scheme sample gallery
• 
  Hand of ancient Roman statue, Leicestershire.
• 
  Roman coin hoard, now at the Roman Baths and Pump House Museum in Bath.
• 
  Roman gold intaglio, 100-200 AD, Essex.
• 
  Pewter ladle or toy, medieval, Lincolnshire.
• 
  Flat axe, bronze age, Lincolnshire.
• 
  Swastika design brooch, Anglo-Saxon 6th-7th century, York.
• 
  Unidentified copper alloy coin, thought to date to 1-296 AD, Hertfordshire.
• 
  Ancient Roman brooch in the shape of a dog, 100-200 AD, Lincolnshire.
• 
  Sunburst rowel (spurs), c.17th century, Cornwall.
• 
  Unusual quarter stater, 50BC-20BC, Surrey.
• 
  Medieval thimble, Norfolk.
• 
  Anti-papist pipe tamper with head of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey, 1678, West Berkshire.

They are now ready for further categorisation on Commons, and use in Wikipedia articles.

Please see this note on Commons and the project page there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:21, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Leciester anon IP Editor

There is at least 1 individual, with I suspect multiple IP, making multi edits to various things Leicester related, almost all of which is completely uncited or different to the sources given. I am not sure where they are getting their data from, or why, but unpicking their work without completely reverting the entire process is obviously a bit controversial. Examples 86.182.95.192, 81.158.231.148, 86.163.229.76 among others. Pre-Christmas I was able to revert most of their efforts, but now feel like I am heading into strange territory. Koncorde (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss separate local government district article for Redditch

I would appreciate some input on Talk:Redditch#Article for town and an article for the district. About half of the area covered by the district is a rural area outside the town, so I believe the two should not be treated as synonymous. — Dukwon (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

English People wiki page

just a question really. In the English People wiki page it says the English are an ethnic group.

Is this correct? I can't see any evidence that the English are an ethnic group.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people

Could this sentence be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmewhyte (talk • contribs) 11:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Subdivisions of England

The article Subdivisions of England has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article says nothing constructive and repeats detail in many other articles

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Dr Greg  talk  00:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

420 Collaboration

You are invited to participate in the upcoming "420 collaboration", which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017! The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject England participants may be particularly interested in the following: Cannabis in the United Kingdom (Category:Cannabis in the United Kingdom. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Archive 4/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject England.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject England, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Draft:One Love Manchester

Project members may be interested in helping to expand Draft:One Love Manchester, the upcoming benefit concert by Ariana Grande, which will take place in Manchester. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:34, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zendik

The article Zendik has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

does not really meet WP:Notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BSOleader (talk) 21:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Reliable source? Template:Rayment, Rayment-hc, Rayment-bt, Rayment-pc etc

A discussion is taking place about whether a series of templates used to generate references to the work of Leigh Rayment fall within Wikipedia's content guideline to use reliable sources, or alternatively whether they should be deprecated and tagged with {{Self-published source}} and/or {{Better source}}.

• {{Rayment}}, used on 2595 pages
• {{Rayment-hc}}, used on 6019 pages
• {{Rayment-bt}}, used on 2184 pages
• {{Rayment-pc}}, used on 6 pages
• {{Rayment-bd}}, used on 23 pages

These templates are used for referencing over 10,000 articles relating to the House of Commons of England, the House of Commons of Ireland, the House of Commons of England, the House of Commons of Great Britain, the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, and the peerages and baronetcies of the islands of Ireland and Great Britain.

Since whatever decision is made will effect so many articles, I am notifying the following WikiProjects of this discussion: WP:WikiProject England, WP:WikiProject Ireland, WikiProject Northern Ireland, WikiProject Scotland, WikiProject United Kingdom, and WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom.

Your comments would be welcome, but please post them at WT:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage#Leigh_Rayment.27s_Peerage_Pages_.282017.29, so that your contribution can be weighed as part of the discussion. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:17, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Recruit new editors for the project?

Hi, just wonder if there is any template or program in the project to recruit newcomers or new editors to join the project? Bobo.03 (talk) 18:00, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

You could use Template:WPE-Invite on the talk pages of people who edit relevant pages, but many people may have more specialist interests and therefore join county projects, UK geography, Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Railways, UK politics etc.— Rod ^talk 18:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I see. I wonder how the project would recruit and welcome new editors to the project? I am a PhD student at the University of Minnesota. We are planning on a study to help projects recruit new editors to contribute. I am not sure if this is something the project would be interested. Bobo.03 (talk) 04:06, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rodw, so I made a set of recommendations for your project. You'll notice that they are split between new editors and experienced editors. I wonder what do you think about it?

Username	Recent Edits within WP England	Recent Edits in Wikipedia	First Edit Date	Most Recent Edit Date
Ninja-King (talk · contribs)	3	3	2017-7-14	2017-7-14
Srosiczk (talk · contribs)	1	1	2017-7-15	2017-7-15
KyleHanneken (talk · contribs)	2	2	2017-7-14	2017-7-14
K1lln0sn0pe (talk · contribs)	4	4	2017-7-16	2017-7-16
Skeene88 (talk · contribs)	176	1662	2016-5-27	2017-7-22
Mr tim111 (talk · contribs)	315	3387	2009-9-5	2017-7-18
TheRedViking (talk · contribs)	272	428	2016-1-24	2017-7-15
Keallu (talk · contribs)	235	3030	2006-9-21	2017-7-22
Stew jones (talk · contribs)	169	12745	2006-10-7	2017-7-13

Bobo.03 (talk) 03:37, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red's new initiative: #1day1woman

		Women in Red is pleased to introduce... A new initiative for worldwide online coverage: #1day1woman
		Create articles on any day of any month Cover women and their works in any field of interest Feel free to add articles in other languages, too Social media hashtag campaign: #1day1woman (To subscribe: Women in Red/English language list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 11:10, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Help Subdividing Category:Parliament of England (pre-1707) MP stubs

Hi all, I do a lot of work with organizing stubs, and the largest stub categories is Category:Parliament of England (pre-1707) MP stubs, which has 2,893 associated pages. My goal is to subdivide this into categories with more manageable amounts of stubs (maybe 200 articles each). Unfortunately, I don't know much about UK/English politics, so I don't have any great ideas about how to subdivide. Does anyone at this wikiproject have any ideas of how to subdivide this, or know a better wikiproject to ask about this?

I would also note that Category:UK MP for England stubs is also an extremely large category, with 1,593 uncategorized pages, so subdivision ideas for that category would welcome as well. This is crossposted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United Kingdom and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom -Furicorn (talk) 07:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I think the large number relates to the long history of the parliament (and possibly the large number of MPs but that is a separate debate). You could divide them geographically by regions, however this may be difficult as some MPs have represented more than one constituency. I would suggest dividing by era (perhaps each hundred years) or by political party (as has been partially done at Category:UK MP for England stubs) - the number representing more than one party is quite small.— Rod ^talk 08:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Unidentified 16th century English Judge

Is it possible to get this portrait added to the 16th-century English judges page as unidentified?

https://www.mutualart.com/Artwork/Portrait-of-a-gentleman/DF500560EA0AA655?utm_source=alert_b&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=al_by_artist&refID=F76E3460C722CCE9DF4BD57FBA26A98D

Katherine Barich (talk) 21:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC) Katherine Barich

Discussion at Gillian Keegan#Photo under wrong licence at commons

You are invited to join the discussion at Gillian Keegan#Photo under wrong licence at commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:18, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on English women during this month please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Help would also be appreciated in drawing up the lists of missing articles. If you think of any missing articles for your project please add them to the lists by continent at Missing articles. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Little John, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 23 October 2017 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_England

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 15:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Recruit new editors to your project?

Happy new year! As you may remember, I've been building a tool to help WikiProjects identify and recruit new editors to join and contribute. See my previous post. I’ve been working it on in the past several months, and collaborated with some WikiProject organizers to make it better. We also wrote a Signpost article to introduce it to the entire Wikipedia community.

Right now, we are ready to make it available to more WikiProjects that need it. If you are interested in trying out our tool, feel free to sign up. Bobo.03 (talk) 19:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Emma Portman, Viscountess Portman article

Hi, all. We need people weighing in at Talk:Emma Portman, Viscountess Portman#Accuracy. It's about when Portman dies and therefore the accuracy of the viscountess title. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Minor edit

Grant4493 (talk) 16:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)In my minor edit I stated that the Cockermouth castle became a mill when machinery was invented. If this is inaccurate let me know.Grant4493 (talk) 16:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Village Pump proposal to delete all Portals

Editors at this project might be interested in the discussion concerning the proposed deletion of all Portals across Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_Ending_the_system_of_portals. Bermicourt (talk) 08:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Multiple reverts for Anglo-Normans

I have recategorised several biography articles from Category:Normans to Category:Anglo-Normans, for example in this edit, based on the following definition - it is the first sentence of the Anglo-Normans article:

The Anglo-Normans were the medieval ruling class in England, composed mainly of a combination of ethnic Anglo-Saxons, Normans and French, following the Norman conquest.

User:Ealdgyth reverted multiple of the recategorisations, for example in this edit. The question is, is the above definition of Anglo-Normans incorrect or is there another problem with the recategorisation that I boldly implemented? Note by the way that the article isn't specific on whether this person was from Norse or from French descent, so categorising as Category:Normans seems more questionable than Category:Anglo-Normans. - Marcocapelle (talk) 11:58, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Anglo-Normans are generally the people who are a generation AFTER the Norman Conquest. They are the people raised in England but of Norman heritage or are from marriages between Normans and English. You can't call someone who was born in Normandy and came over to England with William the Conqueror an Anglo-Norman really. They are Norman. Many of your category changes were making articles that had the first sentence say "so-and-so was a Norman" into the category of Anglo-Normans. That makes no sense. I didn't blanket revert all your changes - but I did correct them. For example: Urse d'Abetot - your two edits changed the category from Category:Normans to Category:Anglo-Normans and added Category:11th-century English people. But Urse's very first sentence says "Urse d'Abetot (c. 1040 – 1108) was a Norman who followed King William I to England" - so your edits make no sense. He can't be a Norman in the first sentence and in categories for Anglo-Normans AND English. Others were similiar - Walkelin says he's Norman in the first sentence. Picot of Cambridge - "Picot of Cambridge (c. 1022–after 1090) was a Norman landowner and Sheriff of Cambridgeshire". Robert de Todeni - "Robert de Todeni was a Norman nobleman who held lands in England...". Ealdgyth - Talk 12:12, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

(1) That is a different definition of Anglo-Normans indeed, because having been raised in England is not a requirement of the Anglo-Normans article. I wonder what this additional requirement is based on.

(2) Of course biographies can be in multiple categories if people move from one country to another. If people lived in England and acquired notability in England they should also be in the category of English people by century regardless where they were born.

- Marcocapelle (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

The definition of an Anglo-Norman is the one that most historians of the period use. And it doesn't conflict with the article on Anglo-Normans - "composed mainly of a combination of ethnic Anglo-Saxons, Normans and French, following the Norman conquest." That pretty much states that its the combination of peoples. I wouldn't object to having Anglo-Norman AND Norman on some of these articles - but removing the very clearly relevant "Norman" category is wrong when the various articles clearly call the people Normans. I suspect the problem is that Anglo-Normans is a subcategory of Normans - which it really isn't. And I'll note that Category:11th-century English people states that the category is for "This page lists English people notable during the 11th century." And the English people article says its about an ethnicity. I'm just going by the category itself. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Category:17th-century British painters has been nominated for discussion

Category:17th-century British painters, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:59, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Opinions needed at Talk:Religion in England

We need opinion from third parties regarding the addition of a pie chart: Here the discussion.--Wddan (talk) 21:14, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:36, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Jane Seymour (actress)#Nationality in lede

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jane Seymour (actress)#Nationality in lede. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 05:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

RfC on election/referendum naming format

An RfC on moving the year from the end to the start of article titles (e.g. South African general election, 2019 to 2019 South African general election) has been reopened for further comment, including on whether a bot could be used move the articles if it closed in favour of the change: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Proposed change to election/referendum naming format. Cheers, Number 57 15:42, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a move discussion

at Talk:Horncastle,_Lincolnshire#Requested_move_19_October_2018. Flooded with them hundreds 15:13, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion notice - Talk:Torridge#Requested_move_13_December_2018

Hey there! I'm Flooded with them hundreds. There is a move discussion at Talk:Torridge#Requested_move_13_December_2018 requiring more participation, please consider commenting/voting in it along with the other discussions in the backlog (Wikipedia:Requested moves#Elapsed listings). Flooded with them hundreds 11:04, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion of "Castles and Fortifications of England and Wales" (ecastles.co.uk) at the reliable sources noticeboard

There is a discussion on the reliability of "Castles and Fortifications of England and Wales" (ecastles.co.uk) at the reliable sources noticeboard. If you are interested, please participate at WP:RSN § ecastles.co.uk. — Newslinger talk 12:53, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Just for the record and for others' convenience, that discussion is now archived here and its conclusion after a few lines (OP plus 3) is that it is not an RS unless/until evidence about the site author changes. Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 11:43, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Cambridge Centre For Alternative Finance

Are there any members of WPENG who might be familiar with this institute? The article states that it's a part of Cambridge Judge Business School so perhaps someone has heard of it. The article was created back in December 2016, but no talk page banners where added so it probably flew under the radar until a recent spate of heavy WP:SPA editing. Much of the article content appears to have been copied and pasted from various websites, and this has been cleaned up by an adminsitrator named Diannaa. Even after the cleanup, however, it's not clear whether the subject is notable enough for a stand-alone article. Lots of sources are cited, but most of them don't seem to pass WP:ORGDEPTH. There also seems to have been some COI and even possible paid editing based upon some recent edit summaries which were left. Anyway, if there's not enough to support a stand-alone article, maybe redirecting to the Judge article and merging some of the content into that article would be a possibility. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:18, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

GA reassessment

Richard III of England, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ——SerialNumber54129 17:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

MC Pitman

I'm wondering if someone from WPENG could take a look at this and assess it for notability. I came across the article becuase someone started a discussion at WP:BLPN#MC Pitman about it. The article has been around for awhile, but has pretty much been unsourced the enitre time. I tried to do a bit of WP:BEFORE, but I'm not finding any WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS which might show how he meets WP:BAND or even WP:BIO. Someone posted on the article's talk page that the subject is Wikipedia notable, but none of those things are really relevant to determining notability and the BBC article mentioned is more of an PR fluff type interview than critical coverage in a reliable source. Anyway, I'd figured I'd check here before starting an AfD just in case some is able to find any WP:NEXIST type of coverage. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox UK place

Template:Infobox UK place has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:43, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Organisation/organization RfC

There is an RfC on whether all Wikipedia categories should use the spelling "organization" (regardless of the respective country) taking place here. Number 57 19:24, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:East Midlands England for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:East Midlands England is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:East Midlands England until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:37, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Charles Dickens for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Charles Dickens is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Charles Dickens until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Bot created articles

I am currently looking at creating articles for civil parishes and lists of listed buildings with a bot, see User:Crouch, Swale/Bot tasks/Civil parishes (current) and User:Crouch, Swale/Bot tasks/Listed buildings. Feedback and suggestions welcome on the sub pages' talk pages, in particular where to get population date for the parish of less than 100. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

What exactly are you planning to do? If you're planning to go through the National Heritage List for England (and its Welsh, Scottish and NI equivalents) and bot-create a stub on every listed building, I'll immediately block the bot as a protective measure. Some UK local authorities hand out listings like pizza leaflets, and there are roughly half a million listed buildings in the UK. Many of them are notable in Wikipedia terms, but many of them are ephemera such as fences, milestones, toilets which are never going to be notable in our terms. Even if you're just planning to create full lists sorted by parish, I can't see the need; very few people have the slightest idea what parish any given location is in, and if anyone is planning to look for a list of every listed building in a given location they're much better off searching the register, which will always be up to date and which isn't going to be an unwatched page liable to vandalism and to going out of date. ‑ Iridescent 17:51, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I was planning on having a list for all the buildings in a given parish in a single article like Listed buildings in Wetheral and List of listed buildings in Southend, Argyll and Bute does. Indeed most listed buildings shouldn't have separate articles but only be included in a list. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Are you planning to use the templates: EH listed building header, EH listed building row and the equivilents for Wales, Scotland & NI? This enables easier integration with the EH lsting (through the ref number) and wikicommons - enabling one click uploading during Wiki Loves Monuments etc.— Rod ^talk 18:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes that makes sense, the bot created articles in Category:Lists of listed buildings in Scotland use {{HS listed building row}}. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Note: Crouch, Swale (talk · contribs) has posted similar messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#Bot created articles and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scotland#Bot created articles. It is not clear where discussion should be held; and so these messages are against WP:MULTI. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:25, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Civil Parishes

There seems to be a user going around again determined to move village pages to the name of the civil parish that they are in? What is the current consensus on this? Last I checked we favoured village names over civil parishes, and civil parishes were generally considered non-notable? Jeni ^(talk) 18:37, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

We usually use the name of the village as the actual title if they have slightly different names such as Aston-on-Trent (name of village) and Aston upon Trent (name of parish) but if the parish name is an alternative name for the village then WP:NATURAL/WP:COMMONNAME might apply. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

And if the parish isn't an alternative name of the village, as is the case at Norton, Worcestershire? Jeni ^(talk) 18:55, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Its is isn't an alternative name then we title/disambiguate normally. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

So, why the requested move? Jeni ^(talk) 19:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Because the CP name is quite possibly an alternative name of the village. Vision of Britain has a quote that starts with "NORTON-BY-KEMPSEY, a village and a parish in Pershore district". Anyway another editor has supported it so it would probably not be appropriate to close and the alternative form of disambiguation also needs to be reviewed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Some parishes enclose two or more villages; some villages are split across two parishes. They are not synonymous. This is why {{Infobox UK place}} provides |civil_parish= for places within a parish, and |civil_parish1= with |civil_parish2= for places in more than one parish. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Yes, for example see Woburn Sands, which straddles two counties as well as two parishes – and famously Belleek, County Fermanagh, which straddles an international boundary! Conversely there is at least one example that I know of where, due to boundary revisions, the CP does not contain the naming village: 'Woughton' in Milton Keynes was divided into Woughton (which retained the CP name but not the village) and Old Woughton (which lost the name but retained the village Woughton on the Green}.

But 'hard cases make bad law'. If there a sound case to put every CP into Wikipedia (which remains to be made before we get too bogged down in the details) then surely it is reasonable to use an automated process that will get 99% of them right and the other 1% can be fixed manually as needed – situation normal. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:21, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

2019_Cricket_World_Cup Mistake in opening ceremony section

I am currently looking at the /2019_Cricket_World_Cup wiki page and the opening ceremony section is completely snubbing two participants from Afghanistan. All-rounder Mirwais Ashraf and famous singer Ariana Sayed participated and finished 3rd. Please someone fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulimankhail (talk • contribs) 07:22, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

New Albion article

Hello WikiProject England editors. I have much edited on the article, New Albion, and I believe it should be a part of WikiProject England. Never having been active with your project, I do not wish to presume to add it to your project. I do, however, suggest it for inclusion. I also do so in the hope that if you do include it, a Project editor might examine it for GA status. I nominated it for GA status several days ago, so it is a recent addition to the nominations. I do believe it is worthy of such a designation, and having looked at many of the best articles, I believe it meets standards higher than GA. Do please peruse the article. Most kind regards.Hu Nhu (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

User adding things that a village doesn't contain to an article

Hi all, serial disruptive user Gareth Griffith-Jones is insisting on adding a list of things that a village doesn't have in Loudwater, Hertfordshire despite not being able to reference it (of course you can't) - can anyone provide their input? Jeni ^(talk) 17:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

As Loudwater, Rickmansworth, has never had a church, nor any retail establishment such as a shop or pub, can Loudwater be described as a village when, in fact, it is a private housing estate established in the 1930s? Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 09:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

If indeed Loudwater is a "private housing estate" it may be better to explain that in the article, or if you dont want to edit the article then provide some sources on the talk page. Saying that something doesnt have something doesnt appear to be particularly helpfull. If you have some reliable sources then the article could do with the some work to resolve the difference between Loudwater House/Loudwater Farm and the "village" to make the article more coherent. Whatever you do please do not edit war but use use the talk page. MilborneOne (talk) 13:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, MilborneOne, for your suggestions. Anyone who knows the estate, as I do significantly, would agree that there is no support for claiming it as a village.
I am beginning to feel that the other person in the room will revert any of my editing anywhere on Wikipedia—we have a history that goes back years. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 14:49, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

We have lots of reasons why things are not included but as long as you have a reliable source these things can be discussed on the related talk page if you have been reverted. If you need help or to get a wider view then go to the related project. MilborneOne (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Gareth Griffith-Jones (contribs) (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Can the various editors edit warring over a phrase in this heading please STOP, or you may risk blocks. I also note that there is no discussion on the talk page of the issues brought here. That would be the first place to discuss things, and should be tried first before going to noticeboards/wikiprojects. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree. I believe the accusation serial disruptive user in the first paragraph is uncivil and unwarranted, and should be deleted per Wikipedia policy WP:AVOIDYOU. By the way, I have fixed the disputed content in the Loudwater article by providing references, so hopefully ending this discussion. Tony Holkham (Talk)

Nomination of Portal:William Shakespeare for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:William Shakespeare is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:William Shakespeare until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:14, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Dorset for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Dorset is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Dorset until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:51, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move

An editor has requested that {{subst:linked|Anglo-Scottish border}} be moved to {{subst:#if:|{{subst:linked|{{{2}}}}}|another page}}{{subst:#switch: project |user | USER = . Since you had some involvement with 'Anglo-Scottish border', you |#default = , which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You}} are invited to participate in [[{{subst:#if:|{{subst:#if:|#{{{section}}}|}}|{{subst:#if:|Talk:Anglo-Scottish border#{{{section}}}|{{subst:TALKPAGENAME:Anglo-Scottish border}}}}}}|the move discussion]]. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Notability

There are comments at Talk:1992 Grand Prix (snooker) that may be of interest. Otr500 (talk) 13:44, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject History needs people

Hi everyone. I am the new coordinator for WikiProject History. we need people there!! right now the project seems to be semi-inactive. I am going to various WikiProjects whose topics overlap with ours, to request volunteers.

• If you have any experience at all with standard WikiProject processes such as quality assessment, article help, asking questions, feel free to come by and get involved.

• and if you have NO Experience, but just want to come by and get involved, feel free to do so!!!

• For anyone who wants to get involved, please come by and add your name at our talk page, at our talk page section: WikiProject History needs you!!!!

• Alternately, if you have any interest at all, feel free to reply right here, on this talk page. please ping me when you do so, by typing {{ping|sm8900}} in your reply.

we welcome your input. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Three related Articles for Deletion

There are three AfDs on topics that editors here may be interested in: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methodist Churches in Leicester, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Baptist churches in Leicester, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Congregational Churches in Leicester. — MarkH₂₁^talk 20:46, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon

Hi. The Wikipedia:The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon is planned for March 2020, a contest/editathon to eliminate as many stubs as possible from all 134 counties. Amazon vouchers/book prizes are planned for most articles destubbed from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and Northern Ireland and whoever destubs articles from the most counties out of the 134. Sign up on page if interested in participating, hope this will prove to be good fun and productive, we have over 44,000 stubs! Even if "contests" aren't your thing, think of it as motivation to improve our content! Hope to see a lot of articles improved as part of this, there is a £50 prize for most England articles destubbed!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:22, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Template and project duplication

I observed that Category talk:Crime in Gloucestershire is tagged with the templates of both WikiProject England and WikiProject Gloucestershire. This seems a bit daft, as Gloucestershire is a county of - and a topical subset of - England.

Has the project ever considered inviting projects covering regions of or counties in England to become "workgroups" or sub-projects, and share your template, a route taken by WP:BIOGRAPHY; or by having your template indicate that a page is in the scope of another project like WP:BEATLES?

Examples

{{WikiProject Biography}}, a biography about a musician which is within the scope of the musician work-group:

{{WikiProject Biography|class=B | living = no | musician-work-group = yes }}

{{WikiProject The Beatles}}, an article about an album, no need to have a WP Albums template too:

{{WikiProject The Beatles|class=GA |importance= Top |album= yes |album-importance=Mid }}

Another option is that I might start a campaign to have Gloucestershire join Wales - we have plenty of sheep, and they have free prescriptions :) --kingboyk (talk) 02:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Notification of discussion on deleting all local government subdivision articles

There is currently a discussion going on at WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom regarding a proposal to delete all articles on individual local government subdivisions. Please feel free to participate in this discussion. Sparkle1 (talk) 19:43, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Featured article review

I have nominated Cædmon for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. buidhe 21:23, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

England or UK?

Perhaps readers of this page will have a view on this. Talk:2020_Forbury_Gardens_stabbings#England_or_UK? --2604:2000:E010:1100:7103:4EB4:D27F:3D0D (talk) 19:09, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Moorgate, Norfolk

Please add a reference.Xx236 (talk) 12:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Who is the (second) biggest?

Hello, Birmingham claims to be the second largest urban area while Manchester claims to be the second most populous urban area in the UK. Regarding the area, in the infoboxes Manchester says, Urban 630.3 km2 (243.4 sq mi), and Birmingham says, Urban 231.2 sq mi (598.9 km2). Population: Manchester, Urban 2,705,000, and Birmingham, Urban 2,897,303. So that makes Manchester the second largest in area, and Birmingham the second largest in population? ~ R.T.G 15:03, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Hardys has been nominated for deletion

Category:Hardys has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bermicourt (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Merge proposal for Anna's Walk to Thornham, Norfolk

I've proposed to merge Anna's Walk to Thornham, Norfolk. Interested editors are invited to weigh in at Talk:Thornham, Norfolk#Merger proposal. Schazjmd (talk) 23:37, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

RE: Debate on creating a Chris Mullin disambiguation page (now it automatically leads to the basketball player)

Right now, the Chris Mullin page automatically leads to the basketball player - at the same time, there is a Chris Mullin (politician) - the one who led the fight to release the Birmingham Six and vote A Very British Coup (which was adapted to a TV series).

I've started a discussion on the talk page there, requesting to rename the basketball player page to Chris Mullin (basketball), and make the Chris Mullin page a disambiguation page with equal representation to both of them.

Arguments raised against my proposal:

• The basketball player has more views.

My main argument for the move:

• The basketball player gets most of his views from the US, while outside the US he's hardly known, and in Britain itself the politician-author Chris Mullin is much better known.

I invite you guys to take part in the discussion.

The link: Talk:Chris Mullin#Requested move 22 August_2020.

Thank you! Maxim.il89 (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Featured article review for Restoration Spectacular

I have nominated Restoration Spectacular for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Beland (talk) 00:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Alvaston parish church

Could somebody please look at Draft:Alvaston parish church. It's a draft that's going nowhere for lack of sources. If somebody could find some good sources, that would save it from the dust bin. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:12, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Metropolitan counties

@Dan100: has edited the Metropolitan county article to say that metropolitan counties no longer exist. My understanding is that the metropolitan councils were abolished in 1986 but the counties continue to exist. I've already reverted once, but my reversion was undone and I'd like someone else to look at this please. -- Dr Greg  talk  10:45, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about the move of an article in scope of this project

There is a discussion whether or not Thomas(ine) Hall should be moved to Thomasine Hall. Since the article is part of this project, some members may be interested in the discussion. Gehenna1510 (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Gilwell Park for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I have nominated East End of London for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKay (talk) 15:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Parishes RFC

See User talk:Crouch, Swale/England#RFC. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

New RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England/Parishes RfC. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

See proposal below for writing criteria for any Civil Parish article. And note a section on Civil Parish Boundaries / Civil Parish Council (or both combined) is never going to offend the majority at all, we don't propose changing that.- Adam37 Talk 10:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Help a newer user?

Hi! I was wondering if anyone would be interested in taking some new users under their wing. I'm pinging them here (@Piete Brooks and J V Neal:). They're working on a draft of a park in England, Draft:St Matthew's Piece. They seem to be quite eager and the park offhand does look like it's probably notable, it just needs more work to help it better fit Wikipedia's style guidelines. Parks aren't really in my area of interest, so I wanted to reach out here and in another area or two that could also fit their topic. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:32, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Kind, so I've addressed the style problems. Others will be able to give time as to what the park currently has, especially if they live in or regularly visit Cambridge.- Adam37 Talk 15:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Simple rules to be written for whether Notability policy is met in having a Civil Parish as an article (follow-on from RFC above)

Following on from suggestion of another editor, at the above discussion. Can we please outline, in no more than 3 brief bullet points what criteria, perhaps looking at WP:UKVILLAGES and WP:Notability for inspiration, you all think are best for whether it is right to write an article on a civil parish.

My attempt:

1. The civil parish must have its own website. It must have found substantial media presence in a quite broad range of topics within the last 5 years: typically this will be Planning recommendations, influencing District/County Policy, broader issue campaigning, Events, (or, finally, minor community initiatives); and
2. The parish boundaries must take in more than 10% of any WP:Notable settlement outside commonly called something else; or 25% for interior small settlements/multi-home farmsteads (some people call them hamlets) (based on population); and
3. This is (1) again, maybe.I do not see them as true Geographic Features as they are weak, campaign-esque emulations of a settlement, though often, but less so than the ecclesiastical "counterparts", they mirror the local medieval to 19th century unit of actual government (vestry) reflecting the then dominant land ownerships (manors + rectories) (in all but the very rare urban cases). Thus assess inherent WP:NOTABILITY in Organisational terms: Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Significant_coverage.- Adam37 Talk 10:44, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

• I don't think notability is a problem with civil parishes. WP:GEOLAND says that legally recognized places are typically presumed notable even if the population is very low so there's no need to apply a notability guideline to civil parishes if every other municipality is treated as notable (even if some of the smaller ones don't have their own council). Most of the smaller ones that don't have their own council/website etc are old ones (named after village) that will have plenty of coverage or started out as townships or extra-parochial areas that when such units were detracted in general the places became separate civil parishes instead of staying in the parish they were in and most of these have coverage in A Vision of Britain and Key to English Place-names anyway. With the 2nd point WP:NOPAGE might occasionally apply but otherwise there's unlikely to be an issue per above. With the 3rd point they are administrative territories rather than physical geographical features but that doesn't make them more like an organization anymore than a country, county or district. As I've already said we should not have articles for "X Parish Council" and such information would be included in the parish article its self. Similarly those as noted that are grouped parishes won't have separate articles for the "grouped" parish's name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:56, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
• I agree with Crouch, Swale and won't repeat. What I will add is that the CP articles provide a natural home for limited-notability hamlets, villages, Urban districts, schools and the like (but not frequently altered Borough/City/County electoral wards), which should be documented and given their own section in an article but don't justify their own (even if thrust into the limelight by some WP:RECENT event that will be forgotten in ten years outside a ten-mile radius). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

  Yes that's a good principal, anything that fails notability is normally merged into its parish unless a more specific article exists, a school in a village would be merged with the village not the village's parish for example. A lot of the MK parishes have sections about other places in the parish and rural parishes mention the hamlets it contains that usually redirect to it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

  Imagine if you will a sort of relic of old local government, essentially impotent, devoid of all funds, usually dwarfed by the church donations in its ecclesiastical counterpart, coupled with lack of national coverage, indeed only covering a minority of the population - then tell me later you think counties and districts (which have no independent "settlement" status except for cities) are analogous. I mean really!! Why upset the apple cart. Why innovate by going backwards. Tell me.- Adam37 Talk 13:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

  Because if that is what you imagine, you need to try again. The only link that a modern civil parish has with an ecclesiastical parish is the name: they are rarely coterminous. Maybe if you start your imagination running from Community Council or a French or Italian Commune, you might see how this first layer is not "government" but representation, providing a channel for communities to express their view on matters that will affect them directly. I am not (and never have been) a parish councillor, so if I know that much why (before you made this silly proposal) not bother to find out first what PCs are about? --John Maynard Friedman (talk)

  To say parishes play no important role in local government is a bit sweeping. Some of the larger parish councils (most of which have been created in recent years), are quite substantial operations with annual budgets in the £millions, running numerous local facilities. Take Shrewsbury Town Council for example, which runs horticultural services for the town, numerous small parks, sports pitches, recreation grounds, allotments and highway verges, and manages the provision of the town's market, community facilities, bus shelters, street lighting and public toilets [1]. G-13114 (talk) 19:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

  This is true, there are varying degrees of devolution, with rural parishes that (need to) do very little and urban parishes that do a great deal.

  As far as notability is concerned, if the Victoria History of the Counties of England considers it appropriate to have an article for every CP that existed at the time, why would we not do the same? WP:Wikipedia is not on paper, there are no space constraints. Hypertext means that rather than have a single long rambling WP:TLDR article that tries to be all things to all men and women, we can have tightly focused articles that have onward links to further detail for those who need it. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

  My mother was a parish councillor for many years, and was Chairman for a time. I shall ask her what the broad remit of the parish council (PC) was; but until that happens, I shall try and recall some of the matters that were discussed. I can say with confidence that all planning applications relating to land or structures within the parish were referred to the PC by the district council (DC) planning department. The PC could not reject or amend these, but when returning the application to the DC they could state an opinion, which the DC would take into account when considering their decision to grant unchanged, grant conditionally, or reject. Also within the PC's purview were verges, hedges, fences, street lighting, etc. - the PC would request the DC's maintenance department to take care of the matter. The PC could also be involved if two neighbours had a disagreement over, say, an overhanging tree. One thing the PC did not get involved in was church matters, don't believe everything that you may have seen in The Vicar of Dibley. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a dedicated article on the subject. G-13114 (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

City articles

Why for instance does Bristol or does Birmingham have no separate article for Bristol (City) and Birmingham (City) i.e. covered by its council; please try to be more logical.- Adam37 Talk 13:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Why indeed? They certainly should! We have three valid articles in Milton Keynes, Borough of Milton Keynes and Milton Keynes Council: all the more reason for bigger cities to make the same distinction. I picked MK because I live here but many UAs have the same three articles (except maybe combining the Borough and its Council in some cases, depending on size). --John Maynard Friedman (talk)

Because the district has the same name as the city and there isn't a clear distinction between them anyway, see WP:UKDISTRICTS. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:03, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

One thing I am sure of is this: when I read the Bristol article, w a y down my list of things I want to read about is the political balance on the city council. I suspect that I am not unusual in that, nor am I alone in being irritated by having to plough through the chaff to find the wheat. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Well with that I'd agree. However stop conflating ecclesiastical with civil – I was merely pointing out how the civil counterparts began, and they have been steadily eroded since, and yes I have kept the minutes of 4 parish councils under watch. So I'm not talking a load of baloney.- Adam37 Talk 20:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Assume good faith

Adam37 I invite you to apologise for the personal attacks in your edit note. It is not acceptable to refer to fellow editors' responses as "daftness" or the editors themselves as "idiots". --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:27, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

I do take that back. I do think you can see the disharmony it creates. People look for no redundancy. The point has been made by countless policies here. Especially in an encyclopedia. It is not nice to society at large: having to keep track of unduly subtle distinctions because of people's propensity to reach for the pen, at all times.- Adam37 Talk 16:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

I didn't propose this proposal be made. I have read a quite representative sample of all of the actions of some such councils over many years - many fall far short of other community interest groups; and they are not a blanket system. They can be limited to a section per each settlement, much like wards. There are some generous exceptions I propose, to help people understand why we haven't bothered smothering this elegant work with articles as you (all of you, by implication) counter-propose.- Adam37 Talk 16:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

I didn't suggest that you take it back, I invited you to recognise and apologise for your WP:NPA violation. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

That's no fewer than 3 extremely en vogue norman verbs, all the fad in administrativese. No I won't use any.- Adam37 Talk 20:36, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Chew Valley for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:26, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Old GA nomination

Hi members, if anyone interested please have a look at this GA nomination Sidney Hill currently listed for review. It was submitted for GA on 30 May 2020. Thank you — Amkgp 💬 06:41, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 : please review quality and importance rating

A great deal of work has gone into expanding, cleaning up and citing Calendar (New Style) Act 1750, so may I suggest that its classifications according to this wikiproject merit review. It is clearly no longer start class, though I suspect its importance in English history is still low. Of course I don't expect this WP to pre-empt the GA process (unless of course someone would be kind enough to get two for the price of one and do the GA review: if not, then any suggestions or corrections that can be actioned while it is in the GAN queue would be most welcome). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Notification of a proposal to merge Wardens of the Coast with Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports

Hi,

This comment is a notification that I have started a discussion about the possibility of merging the article Wardens of the Coast with Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, which are both articles within the scope of this WikiProject. Please feel free to join in.

Thank you, DesertPipeline (talk) 08:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Chew Valley Lake for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:11, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Frontline Church‎‎

This is a large multi-campus church in Liverpool that is affiliated with the local charity Imagine If. I can't find any significant non-local coverage, so I slapped a "notability" template on it.

The primary author is someone affiliated with the church, as is a paid editor who has recently started editing it.

If the topic is notable, it needs some major help. If the topic is NOT notable, then it should probably be deleted or merged with some other suitable topic.

More discussion on the talk page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:35, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Order of St Patrick

I have nominated Order of St Patrick for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Anna Laetitia Barbauld Featured article review

I have nominated Anna Laetitia Barbauld for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Attack on HMS Invincible up for deletion

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Attack on HMS Invincible (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Revisiting the Falklands/Malvinas war. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Doctor Who missing episodes for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 02:01, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Not findable red links ", London"

two red links to , London, also , Wirral. Maybe someone know how they can be corrected?--Estopedist1 (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

In which article/s? Tony Holkham (Talk) 22:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Eldest sons of barons has been nominated for discussion

Category:Eldest sons of barons has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ✗plicit 10:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Oldham FAR

I have nominated Oldham for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:08, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Links between English and Frisian peoples and languages

Editors here may wish to join the discussion at Talk:English people about the links (or not) between the English and Frisian peoples and languages which has arisen in the wake of multiple deletions and, in some cases, reversions and re-reversions of links between these topics, so a consensus would be helpful. Other articles affected include: Frisians, Saterland Frisians and Faroe Islanders. There may be more. Cheers. Bermicourt (talk) 13:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Purplebricks operations request

Hi WikiProject England! Is anyone here able to help with a quick edit request? I've posted a request to the Purplebricks Talk page asking about adding an Operations section to provide a summary about the company's organisation and financials, and have also asked about adding a photo to the page. I work for Purplebricks and have a conflict of interest, so I'm asking for other editors to review and add the photo and draft if they approve. Grateful for any help. Thanks, RT at Purplebricks (talk) 08:35, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Regions of England

A discussion has been started at Talk:South West England#Future of the Page? on the extent to which the articles on the regions of England need to be revised, given that they are currently only used by the UK government for statistical purposes. This is probably an issue that needs to be addressed on an England-wide basis, though the editor who has started the discussion (and edited the article) seems to have a particular interest in Cornwall. Thoughts? Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

The regions have both historical identities and their own characters in terms of landscape, dialect, and cuisine (and probably other attributes), leaving aside whatever the government of the day may be doing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

English cuisine

An IP editor is repeatedly deleting materials in this article. Help resolving the issue would be appreciated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

RFC invitation

You're invited to an RFC at WP:YEARS. -- GoodDay (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

B/built-up A/areas

See a move request at Talk:Accrington/Rossendale built-up area which is an attempt at standardisation. PamD 22:26, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Granola bar "Tracker"

I'm trying to find sources for Tracker (granola bar), which hasn't been sourced since it's inception in 2007. I found a very brief mention of it, but the worst thing that's throwing off my searching is that "tracker" is so generic, and "Mars, Tracker" is bringing up A LOT of false positives (surprise). The article says it's sold in UK, Ireland, and Switzerland, so maybe someone here's heard of this confection and can point me in the right direction? Cheers, Estheim (talk) 04:37, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

@Estheim: This is more of a WikiProject Food and drink matter. Anyway, I have a box of them right here. Mars Wrigley Confectionery UK Ltd. http://www.marschocolatedrinksandtreats.com/ --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Gillingham F.C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 02:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated England national rugby union team for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Bumbubookworm (talk) 22:01, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Wimbledon articles: Large move request to move Gentlemen's" → "Men's", "Ladies'" → "Women's

A move request at Talk:The Championships, Wimbledon is taking place to move any Wimbledon article titles that contain Gentlemen's and Ladies' to Men's and Women's. The Australian, French, and US Championships all use Men's and Women's but Wimbledon has always used Gentlemen's and Ladies'. Since this is a listed concerned WikiProject, you are being informed of the discussion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Chadderton

I have nominated Chadderton for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 03:58, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

RFC at WP:WALES

An RFC is taking place at WP:WALES, concerning the incumbent section of Year in Wales articles. Input there, would be appreciated. 13:52, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Arsenal F.C. Featured article review

I have nominated Arsenal F.C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Italian War of 1521–1526 Featured article review

I have nominated Italian War of 1521–1526 for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:27, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Featured Article Save Award for Italian War of 1521–1526

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Italian War of 1521–1526/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped save this featured article from demotion. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:33, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Baby Queen article

The article on Baby Queen has been expanded by more than 2000 words in the last few weeks, would anyone be able to give feedback / update it from stub class? Lornaliq (talk) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

FAR for George Fox

I have nominated George Fox for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 21:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Green children of Woolpit

I have nominated Green children of Woolpit for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 22:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Knights Templar

I have nominated Knights Templar for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 04:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Barwick-in-Elmet#Requested move 16 March 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Barwick-in-Elmet#Requested move 16 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 07:03, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Stretford

I have nominated Stretford for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 11:40, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Order of the Bath Featured article review

I have nominated Order of the Bath for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Sarah Trimmer

I have nominated Sarah Trimmer for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 13:59, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Paid for edits

Apparently the National Trust is paying someone to "improve" the articles on various NT properties. Is this not in contravention of Wikipedia policy? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:48, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

WP:PE and WP:COI refer. If you know which articles and which editor(s), it's worth notifying them on their talk page(s). Tony Holkham (Talk) 10:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

will do Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

A Song for Simeon Featured article review

I have nominated A Song for Simeon for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:30, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Suburb notability

Hello there! I wonder if any of the good folks here could help me understand the notability criteria for suburbs. I know NPLACE states "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable" but I also see many articles for suburbs are redirected. I'm interested in creating some articles for English suburbs but I'm unsure how to find out if they're notable. Thanks in advance for any advice anyone can give me! MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

St. Mary's Church, Lichfield/ Lichfield Museum

Hello! The articles stated in the title of this especially "Lichfield Museum" are out of date and irrelevant. I am a local resident and both these articles discuss how at present the building known as "St. Mary's Church" in Lichfield currently contains the Lichfield Museum. Since December 2018 this has been inaccurate, Lichfield Library and "The Hub at St. Mary's" are now contained there, I wish to redo both articles and update them with present information, please join the discussion on whether it is worth changing the articles as they are ranked as "Low" importance articles. Redwidow97 (talk) 11:45, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

It's definitely worth updating the article if you've spotted an inaccuracy. Can you find a source to back up what you're saying? If so, go ahead and update! MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 09:47, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Correct inaccuracies in Dunelm founder page

Editors here may be familiar with Bill Adderley as the founder of Dunelm Group: the Wikipedia page about him unfortunately confuses him with his son, William Lester Adderley (Sir Will Adderley), and I'm looking for help to fix this issue as it is causing quite a lot of confusion online.

As an employee of WA Capital Group, Sir Will Adderley's investment company, I have requested some edits to the Bill Adderley page on behalf of Sir Will. The specific edits include correcting the name at the start of the page, removing the "Sir" from above the infobox, and adding sources and clarifying the information about Sir Will on the page. I've provided links and references in my request on the Talk page. Alex at WA Capital Group (talk) 11:04, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

New NHS Integrated Care Systems

Hi! As you may be aware, clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) have been replaced by integrated care systems (ICSs) as of 1 July 2022. Basically, this means that the people making the big decisions about where NHS money is spent has fundamentally changed. It's a big and confusing change, but an important one.

There is a page on ICSs: (Integrated_care_system)

But I think it needs some improvement. It's still written in future tense in some parts and doesn't do a great job explaining the new structures, or make use of the info written by NHS England about them. I don't have the capacity to sort it all myself, so I'm flagging it here in the hope that someone can pick it up. Thank you! Djelibey (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Norwich City F.C.

I have nominated Norwich City F.C. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 13:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

New Bradford montage

There is a discussion about the leadimage at Talk:Bradford#the_new_Bradford_montage, your input is welcomeBeautifulscarlet (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article Review for Greater Manchester

User:Buidhe has nominated Greater Manchester for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

OSM mapping tool for lists of Listed buildings, Sites of special scientific interest, etc.

This is the WikiProject over lists of listed buildings, of sites of special scientific interest, etc., in England, yes?

I want to suggest use of now-available tool, in any Good articles or Featured Lists or Featured Topics whose topics include sublists of places such as these, which have coordinates.

It should be well-known, already, that {{GeoGroup}} provides a link to an OpenStreetMap showing locations of all coordinates given in an article.

Now, however, it is possible to create a similar link covering all the coordinates given in articles within a category. Often, a "List of lists" type article, covering historic sites, or stadiums, or other places, may be improved by a map showing all the locations in all of its sublists.

For example, to the Grade I listed buildings in Somerset, a Good Article and part of a Featured Topic, I just added: "Click here to see an interactive OpenStreetMap with locations of all Grade I listed buildings, Somerset-wide, for which coordinates are included in the list-articles linked below." This will currently be accurate, if and only if all Grade I listed buildings of Somerset, and no other places, are covered in members of Category:Lists_of_Grade_I_listed_buildings_in_Somerset.

Questions, comments welcome at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Historic_sites#OSM_mapping_of_all_historic_sites'_coordinates_across_multiple_list-articles,_e.g._historic_sites_in_a_country_or_region.

I hope this tip may be helpful. --Doncram (talk) 17:47, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Also, for any list-article like English country houses with changed use which does not report coordinates for the items it lists, if there are coordinates in its subordinate articles in "Category:English country houses with changed use", then an OSM map link in the main list-article can provide what an {{GeoGroup}} would provide if coordinates were directly included. --Doncram (talk) 17:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Informing of move request at 'Ceremonial Counties of England'

Hello! I have opened a move discussion at Talk:Ceremonial counties of England#Requested move 6 October 2022 which some of you may be interested in participating in. Thank you. A.D.Hope (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles about Leicestershire parks are copy-pasted from the description on the Leicestershire Country Parks website

I was fixing some references and noticed that almost the entire article for multiple articles was just copy pasted from the official description on the Leicestershire Country Parks website.

Some articles I saw this in:

• Jubilee Wood
• Bagworth Heath Woods

I'm not sure what the copyright is on a description from an official UK local government website as I do not live in the UK. RPI2026F1 (talk) 01:16, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

FAR for Shaw and Crompton

I have nominated Shaw and Crompton for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 18:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Dartington Morris Men#Requested move 9 November 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dartington Morris Men#Requested move 9 November 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:49, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

John Harbord, 8th Baron Suffield has an RFC

John Harbord, 8th Baron Suffield has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Good article review for Stowe Gardens?

Hello all, I wondered if any editors here were Good article reviewers and might be kind enough to take a look at the article for Stowe Gardens? It's part of a freelance project I undertook for the National Trust and it would be great to be able to report back to them on it before the New Year. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

GAR notice

University of Oxford has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

GAR for Isles of Scilly

Isles of Scilly has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for East Riding of Yorkshire

East Riding of Yorkshire has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for James Milner

James Milner has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Eddie Izzard

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Eddie Izzard#Requested move 15 March 2023 , which is within the scope of this WikiProject. The topic of the discussion is on moving the article due to Izzard's recent name change. Note, I'm making this notification manually as the RM doesn't seem to have been added to the alert list by the bot. Sideswipe9th (talk) 19:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

XX is a city in YY, England?

I don't want to get into a silly edit war, especially as I suspect there's some sockpuppetry at play, but can someone reassure me I'm correct that York should start "York is a city in North Yorkshire, England..." as an IP who looks suspiciously like an experienced editor is repeatedly changing it to "York is a city in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom..." e.g. this edit (diff). I swear I've even read it as a "standard" in one of the various Wikiproject style guides. I'm not going to go 3RR with this person but equally I'd rather not see articles overtaken by those with some weird agenda. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

We should be using England rather than UK. Though York should probably be "York is a city in the City of York, England. Keith D (talk) 01:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Discussion of ceremonial counties

WikiProject England may be interested in the discussion currently taking place here about the use of ceremonial counties in articles about English locations. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

England, Scotland, etc. vs UK in concert articles

There is a discussion regarding the use of England, Scotland, etc. versus UK in lists of concert locations. Please add any comments at WT:WikiProject Concerts#England, Scotland, etc. vs UK. Thanks. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Henry Moore

I have nominated Henry Moore for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 15:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Somerset

I have nominated Somerset for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:58, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Edward III of England Featured article review

I have nominated Edward III of England for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Iron Maiden

Iron Maiden has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:33, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Shrewsbury

Shrewsbury has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Notification of merger discussion: County Durham and County Palatine of Durham

Hello! There is a discussion taking place at County Durham about merging County Palatine of Durham into the article and splitting the history content of both articles into History of County Durham. Please contribute if you'd like to. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Leicester City F.C.

Leicester City F.C. has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Edmund Andros

Edmund Andros has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:25, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Canterbury

Canterbury has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Patrick Anson, 5th Earl of Lichfield#Requested move 4 June 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Patrick Anson, 5th Earl of Lichfield#Requested move 4 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 12:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Use of "the three kingdoms" as a term outside of the 1639-1651 wars

Hello WPEngland, I noticed Jacobitism has a rather prominent section describing various movements "in the three kingdoms", referring to England, Scotland, and Ireland together, and I wanted to ask around on the project pages to see if such a use of the title is actually backed up outside of the context of Charles I of England and the Wars of the Three Kingdoms.

Three Kingdoms (disambiguation) seems inconclusive on the subject and in general this style of terminology seems like it shouldn't be employed without something in the text to back it up, as titling a section "in the three kingdoms" rather than "in the British Isles" or "in England, Scotland, and Ireland" implies it to be an established term the reader can already be presumed to be familiar with. Orchastrattor (talk) 17:18, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Notification of merger discussion: Somerset Council and Somerset County Council

There is a merge discussion taking place at Talk:Somerset Council about whether to merge Somerset Council into Somerset County Council, which participants here may be interested in. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Discussion: Infobox English county

Hello! There's currently a discussion happening at WikiProject UK geography#Ceremonial county infoboxes about updating Template:Infobox English county, which members of this project may be interested in. Thank you A.D.Hope (talk) 16:27, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Merger discussion: Metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties

There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Metropolitan_and_non-metropolitan_counties_of_England#Merger_proposal about merging Metropolitan county and Non-metropolitan county into Metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties of England, or merging the latter into the two former articles. Please participate if you'd like. A.D.Hope (talk) 14:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Request for peer review of Victorian era

I've been working on the article about the Victorian era a great deal this year and have recently got it to good article status. I'm hopping to get it to featured article status over the next few months which would be my first featured article. What kind of changes do you think would be needed to get their?

Link to peer review page: Wikipedia:Peer review/Victorian era/archive1 Llewee (talk) 14:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Photos of cricket grounds in England

Hi all. Just over from the cricket project. I was wondering if any members of this project would be willing to take photos of these cricket grounds in England requiring photographs? Barnstars as tokens of thanks, of course ;) StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 13:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Birmingham

Birmingham has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

County templates

There is a discussion going about the inclusion criteria for settlements in Template:County. The discussion is at Template talk:County#Inclusion criteria for Major settlements section. The Banner talk 12:43, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

North Yorkshire infobox images

Hello! Last month there was a discussion at North Yorkshire about which images to include in its infobox. This has not yet produced a result, and as a result the infobox is still unstable. I've restarted the discussion in an attempt to reach a conclusion, and any contributions are appreciated. Thank you. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon

Hello WikiProject England:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

Grnrchst (talk) 14:01, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:William IV#Requested move 14 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:William IV#Requested move 14 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – MaterialWorks 17:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Unincorporated association page: not for England

The page Unincorporated association is tagged for this project. It is not really an England topic: the article is written from a whole-UK point of view, but also touches on other common law jurisdictions (aka the former British Empire).

If others agree suitable, could someone remove it from the list? OnceATeacher (talk) 17:53, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Edward I of England#Requested move 5 November 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Edward I of England#Requested move 5 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Polyamorph (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Matthew Brettingham

I have nominated Matthew Brettingham for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 20:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Foals (band) a British or English band?

Hello there. I have started a discussion for the article Foals (band) on their origin, and there is a bit of edit warring from an IP regarding the lead section on whether the band is British or if they are English. I have started a discussion on the article's talk page for this thread: Talk:Foals (band)#British or English?. I would like to see some discussion to see if a consensus could be reached on whether they are British or English. The categories say they are an English band, but IP (who refuses to communicate in talk discussion) persists that it is a British band via their edit summaries. So far, there's been no communication from the IP and users I have pinged. Also, adding this to other related WikiProject talk pages for their input. HorrorLover555 (talk) 05:09, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that East Sussex, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Proposal: remove the ethnicity section from the county infobox

I have opened a discussion at Template talk:Infobox English county#Proposal: remove the ethnicity section, to which editors of this WikiProject may wish to contribute. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Featured article review for Richard Hakluyt

I have nominated Richard Hakluyt for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 17:52, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Population figures for English ceremonial counties

Would members please participate in a task force to update the figures in Template:English cerem counties, which feeds many other articles. The ceremonial county figures don't come from Wikidata, they have to be generated manually by adding the figures for the constituent local authorities. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:01, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Tameside

Tameside has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 21:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Madness (band)

Madness (band) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 01:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Kingdom of Great Britain#Requested move 26 December 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Kingdom of Great Britain#Requested move 26 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Polyamorph (talk) 08:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

RfC at Montacute House

Hello! I've opened an RfC at Talk:Montacute House on the placement and size of the images in the article, please join in if you would like. Thank you, A.D.Hope (talk) 11:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Horden & Peterlee RFC#Requested move 5 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Horden & Peterlee RFC#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:21, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Anglican Diocese of Manchester#Requested move 5 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Anglican Diocese of Manchester#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:06, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1400)#Requested move 9 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1400)#Requested move 9 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:48, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Haldane Stewart#Requested move 11 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Haldane Stewart#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion on Iron Maiden

There is a discussion regarding two matters, if Iron Maiden is either an English or British band, and if the mention of Ghost receiving a nomination for their cover of Iron Maiden's "The Phantom of the Opera" should be included or not in the History section. The discussion can be found at Talk:Iron Maiden#Mention of Ghost's song cover getting a Grammy. HorrorLover555 (talk) 20:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Giovanni Reyna#Requested move 2 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Giovanni Reyna#Requested move 2 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Nationality labels

In the middle of a discussion on my talk page with SchroCat regarding the labeling of a BLP subject as British or English. Do not expect the two of us to come to an agreement on this on our own, so further input would be appreciated. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Hi WikiProject England. Notifying you of a proposal to reverse an undiscussed split that overlaps with this project. Please see Talk:List of Nuttall mountains in England and Wales#Merge proposal. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

RfC on Cornish flag

An RfC has been opened at Talk:Cornwall about ncluding the Cornish flag in the article infobox. Please contribute if you would like to do so. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

FA review

I have nominated Edward I of England for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Jim Killock (talk) 21:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for South West Coast Path

South West Coast Path has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Cannons (house)

Cannons (house) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Edward V of England#Requested move 29 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Edward V of England#Requested move 29 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)