User talk:Peter I. Vardy/Archive 22

Wikipedia Takes Chester

Hi Peter, I'm hoping you might be able to help me. I'm planning a photography contest in Chester ("Wikipedia Takes Chester") to launch the Wiki Loves Monuments competition you've already heard about. I've drawn up a draft target list, which (I think) includes all the Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings in the city, along with those Grade IIs that have articles. Could I send you a link to a Google Document so you can tell me if I've missed anything obvious, and if there's anything else you think should be included. The contest itself will be on 7 September; would you be interested in taking part ad/or sitting on the judging panel? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:38, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello Harry, and thanks for getting in touch. I am of course interested in high quality photos of Chester (and Cheshire). Certainly send me the link. But I'm not sure that I want to take part in the contest or to be a judge, but I shall certainly be interested in following the progress of the competition and its outcome. Incidentally, did you get to the Chester meet-up? If so, how did it go? I asked for a report elsewhere, but have received nothing (yet). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Peter. I did (in the end, and only after getting stuck at Stockport and then Crewe!) get to the Chester meetup. It was a nice meetup and several of us went for a walk round the city, and I took a few photos for Commons, but we didn't manage to attract anybody new. We might have more meetups there in future, depending on how complicated we can make the rotation before we overwhelm Bazonka! There's a meetup in Manchester on the 25th if you can make it. I tried to email you the link, but it looks like you haven't ticked the box in your preferences; perhaps you could email me (Special:EmailUser/HJ Mitchell or hjmitchell at ymail dot com? Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:52, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

The plan (unless anyone disagrees) is to have one North West meetup a month. Manchester every other month, and then alternating between Liverpool and Chester in between: M,L,M,C,M,L,M,C etc. Bazonka (talk) 20:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Listed buildings

Hi Peter, at the moment I'm setting up lists of Grade I and II* listed buildings by county (and where the lists are too long by district). I was about to set up the Grade II* lists for Cheshire when I took a look at Category:Lists of listed buildings in Cheshire. Given that you've broken down the lists by settlement, do you think it would be worthwhile having lists by district? Cheshire is one of the counties where there are too many listed buildings to fit into one list since we're using templates. Nev1 (talk) 14:01, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Deciding how to break down lists of listed buildings is not easy, and is not helped by the different types of administrative divisions in UK. I have been watching how you have been doing it in GM by district. At the same time I have been creating (1) lists of all grades for civil parishes in Cheshire (there are now over 100 of these), and (2) lists for Grade II buildings in Liverpool by postal district (these had been started by someone else and abandoned, so I remodelled and filled them) - these have been done up to L15. IMO it is reasonable to continue with these. But what to do about Grade II* in Cheshire? The admin districts (with numbers) are Halton (17), Warrington (18), Cheshire West and Chester (178) and Cheshire East (184). I really have no idea how to split the last two; in themselves they are too large, civil parishes are too small. If you look at Civil parishes in Cheshire there is a column for former local authority. These would be manageable, but hardly valid to use now (?). Not much help, I'm afraid.

I notice you are using templates rather than tables. I am not very computer-literate, but have managed to learn how to compile tables, which seem to give good results. Templates look horribly complicated to me, and do not seem to provide any advantage (of which I am aware). What is the advantage? Ought I to use them? Or can I carry on producing what seems to me to be a perfectly adequate outcome. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Quite how to navigate within the lists always puzzled me, which is part of the reason I never really ventured beyond GM. Metropolitan boroughs worked well enough there, but in other places the distribution is so uneven as to be almost useless. The Cheshire lists essentially unique in their number, diversity, coverage, and quality. They certainly don't need the templates I have been using. The idea behind the template is that it allows people to use the lists to travel to Commons where they can upload pictures for Wiki Loves Monuments. For the majority of lists, this means articles which have essentially lain dormant for years are brought up to date and when only a list of names was present before a bit more information is added.

Obviously, in Cheshire neither of those two advantages apply (but it helped the GM list where I found a couple of sites that are no longer Grade I, but the list did originally use Images of England). So the main thing for the Cheshire lists would be allowing people to participate in Wiki Loves Monuments, which depending on your mileage might not be a strong reason, but I think a month-long event aimed at illustrating Wikipedia articles is worthwhile. I think you should carry on what you're doing as not every list needs the templates. I think the county (or at least district level) should be enough, and given how much time you've put into those lists I wouldn't ask you to remodel them. But if I put something together in a sandbox for the various Cheshire districts, would you consider taking a look and telling me what you think? The lists with 150+ sites in may be unwieldy to navigate, but we'll see. Nev1 (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. That's quite a relief. Having learnt (in time) how to plan and complete lists as tables, I rather like the outcome. I think they look good, and provide some basic information for people to explore further if they wish. IRO the templates, I do not like the size of the text, or some of the info given (why have columns for the LEN and the date of listing? Hardly important, and easily obtained by clicking on the NHLE link, which I always give). If you think it useful to have a template for Cheshire districts, fine, but I would not like you to use your time that could be better spent elsewhere. (There are something like 330 civil parishes plus the unparished districts such as Warrington, Runcorn, Widnes.) I confess that I have not taken any particular interest in Wiki Loves Monuments.

I hope people are moving away from IoE, which as you know is fixed in time, whereas the NHLE is changed daily if necessary. In my work on Cheshire parishes and Liverpool postal districts I have found a number of items in the NHLE which no longer exist (demolished, etc). I have informed EH about these, and they are in the process of delisting them and removing them from the NHLE (they are also keen to hear of errors, typos, etc, which they also correct). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The new lists link to the NHLE website. A few of the lists do still include IoE as a reference, but NHLE will always be there. Wiki Loves Monuments isn't for everyone, and I've rather got caught up in it all. I'm optimistic that we can get some good images to illustrate articles, and that better illustrations will draw in readers. It might perhaps even editors, when picking an article I do like one with good images available; for instance Parrot of Doom has shown me MacLellan's Castle which has potential. And it would be nice to show off some of our heritage. In the process of setting up the lists a few typos have been found, so we can at least give some useful feedback to English Heritage.

If it's ok with you, I'll work on the Cheshire lists in my sandbox (iron out the typos etc) and see if we can work from there. The work of setting up the lists is almost done. It's all been a bit hectic. Nev1 (talk) 16:33, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Nev. I look forward with interest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Well if nothing else, we've found out that St Mary's Church is now Grade II listed instead of Grade II*.

I have had a go at setting up the lists and working out some structure at User:Nev1/Grade I listed buildings in Cheshire and User:Nev1/Grade II* listed buildings in Cheshire. The lists for Warrington and Halton were short enough that their Grade I and Grade II* buildings could comfortably be combined within one page for each unitary authority: User:Nev1/Grade I and II* listed buildings in Halton (borough) and User:Nev1/Grade I and II* listed buildings in Warrington.

Cheshire East and Cheshire West and Chester are trickier since they're much longer. The Grade I lists are chunky but manageable, while Grade II* could maybe be split somehow, with a heading somewhere. I've added text and references from the existing lists, so the Cheshire East one will be a sizable chunk of that once I've integrated the information from the various lists at Category:Listed buildings in Cheshire West and Chester. What do you think of the format of the lists? Nev1 (talk) 22:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Those templates look basically OK. It's a mighty task you have taken on, so, good luck. There is of course some duplication with the already existing lists, but I do not see any conflict, and each has its own purpose. St Mary's, Hale, must have been my own mistake, so thanks for spotting it (it's correctly given as Grade II in the article). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I've had a go at populating the Cheshire West lists from the category I linked above. That's all done. With a healthy dose of see also links, I think the lists should complement each other rather than. It looks to me like most of the buildings with their location given as "Cheshire West and Chester" are in Chester, so I might be able to split the tables up and make them a bit more manageable. They might all be part of Chester depending how you define it (is Upton by Chester a part of the city for instance). They need categories, bibliographies, and introductions first, but I'm aiming to put the articles in main space tomorrow, does that sound reasonable to you? Nev1 (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I was also able to make a slight change to the Kingsley list, where Crewood Hall was given as II*. Nev1 (talk) 15:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I have no objection to your moving the templates into main space. A few queries and comments:

• Splitting into the city of Chester and the rest of the authority seems sensible.
• Upton by Chester, as a suburb of the city should, I think, be regarded as part of it for this purpose.
• Crewood Hall is contradictory; it says Grade II at the top and II* in the description. I'll ask EH which is correct.
• Do you have to copy the details individually, or is there some sort of automated process?
• It's a pity the notes column is so narrow - it looks kinda silly.
• As you have the LEN linking to the NHLE page, the link to the page in refs is superfluous. Getting rid of it would save much space in the References section.

Good luck! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Excellent I think adding a section for Chester should help with navigation. Good spot with Crewood Hall, I missed the mention of the Grade II* in the description. Copying the details was done manually rather than automatically, but if you nudge me when a new list is done I'll happily copy the material to the other list. I'm happy to remove the footnotes linking to NHLE as they idea is the LEN would act as a reference. I'll make sure the bibliographies are in place and move the lists today. Nev1 (talk) 12:33, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Tabley House

Hi Peter. Yes, you're quite right, it's not totally clear when the house started to be used for elderly care services. But this source suggests that it was at least as early as 9 April 2009. In fact, it looks like the report from that date was the first one. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

for the DYK review of Joseph Nunan - I think I've addressed the problems you found. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Astonishing

1,400 articles is an astonishing number to have created Peter. And some say there's nothing left to write about. Eric Corbett 18:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

And that doesn't include the stubs! But most of them are short, and a lot are lists. You know I am not good at dealing with the complexities of GAs, and especially FAs. There's plenty more to write about: hundreds of notable churches, listed buildings, more architects, for a start. (And for some, not me, episodes of soap operas ...!) I guess it takes all sorts, and at least we have the satisfaction of leaving something behind – which is better than watching TV or reading detective novels. And I have discovered so many more interesting facts, it's a sort of ongoing education. Cheers, and thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:53, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Leaving something behind is indeed the attraction, although unlike you I've done quite a bit on pop culture such as Poppy Meadow, which may a surprise to some. And in fact I've come across a number of articles – William Cragh springs to mind – I became aware of only because I'd just watched a TV programme on him, which reminds me that Thomas de Cantilupe still needs some work. My view on GA/FA is that it allows you to draw a line under an article and move on to something else with a clear conscience. Eric Corbett 19:16, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it takes all sorts, and that's part of the beauty of it. I'm more of a butterfly that flits from one thing to another; hence the high "score". --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I flit about as well. I got involved in the FAR of Simon Byrne, a 19th-century bare-knuckle fighter, for instance. It struck me then how few of those early boxers had articles, never mind decent ones, so I recently created one on Ned Painter. I don't have any great aspirations for it, but at least it's there now. Eric Corbett 21:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC

There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, TTT, but I don't have anything worthwhile to contribute, --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Brainpick

Hi Peter, I'm working on an Anglican church article in Fremantle. The church that was built in the 1880s was designed by the architect "W Smith of London". Google and I find this very tricky to search for. Do you have any suspects in mind? Victuallers (talk) 07:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

With a name like that you're bound to have problems! In this NHLE page I found a W. Bassett-Smith, a church architect working at the appropriate time. You will find a bit about him here. That source refers to an address at the Adelphi, London, and ref 4 in your article records W. Smith, architect, of Adelphi, London. That's the closest I can get. By the way, I much prefer the Church infobox to the Religious building one you are using; I find it gives fields that are much more useful for churches, and also colours them by denomination. Good luck. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Church of Holy Trinity and St George, Kendal

Alex Shih^Talk 12:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Cheshire listed buildings

Hi Peter. Just spotted that a new building was listed yesterday in your area of interest, which will need to fit somewhere in Category:Lists of listed buildings in Cheshire: Red Lodge, Manor Farm Road, Norton WA7 1TD. Not sure which list it would go in, and I must log off now because it's gone 9am and I should be working! Cheers, Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 08:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I've added it to one of the Runcorn lists (and deleted a delisted item). How did you find out about it? And it was only listed yesterday! I've asked EH if they could provide a monthly e-letter with details of new listings, delistings and grade changes, but that has borne no fruit. The only advice they gave was to go to the advanced search page, click on the Designation Date link, and put in the relevant dates. Guess I should do that every month, but it's a clumsy way of going about it. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

That's how I do it, but I do it every day! Every morning I check a few websites after I get to work, because I always have about 20 minutes of free time. Among others, I check The London Gazette for any new registrations/deregistrations of places of worship, then I go to the Advanced Search on NHLE, plug in yesterday's and today's dates, and search. This should find everything listed "yesterday". Obviously you'll often draw a blank, but I'd say there will be at least one new listing about half the time. This morning I was "rewarded" with six, although two were Parks and Gardens listings. I agree it is a bit clunky, and it would be great if EH issued a regular update of changes or even had a simple one-click process to show them on the website. But I suppose I have got into the habit of doing it, so it seems like second nature! Obviously I'm particularly interested in church listings and Sussex-related listings, but it's always interesting seeing whatever is new. In the last few months there has been a spate of listings of signalboxes, including many in my area, which is particularly interesting for me as a rail enthusiast. (EH really need to do something about delistings as well: although they are now available to search via the old Heritage Gateway – as are details of failed submissions for listed status – the search mechanism there is horrendous!) Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 10:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The weather forecast was for drizzle and cloud today; in the event it was sunny so I took a photo of Red Lodge. I realised when I saw it that I had heard of it before, but only vaguely. I certainly don't remember seeing it before - and ours is a small town! I rather like it, as a nice example of Tudor Revival architecture. Thanks again. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:07, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Old Crypt, Chester may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• desc= Numbers 15 And 15a Row The Old Crypt, Chester|accessdate= 31 August 2013|separator=,|ps=}}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Rings of bells

Hi

I just want to say that I'm really impressed with the articles you're adding and editing about churches - but there's just one small thing that you might want to change in the template that you use for interiors. Rings of bells are generally known as that, at least on first mention - so when you first mention the bells at a church and say 'The ring is of (x) bells' to my eye it reads a little wrong. There's a good example of what I think is the idiomatic use in the definition of 'augment' on the Central Council of Church Bell Ringers' Glossary (http://cccbr.org.uk/bellrestoration/pubs/a-glossary-of-bellringing-terms.pdf) - although rather bizarrely, the glossary doesn't define 'a ring of bells' itself!

My feeling is that referring in the first instance to 'the ring' looks wrong because by no means all churches (not even all CofE churches) have rings of bells. It's not like the altar or the font, that you would expect to find in almost every church.

Keep up the good work...

Grblundell (talk) 08:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. As I am no expert on bells, I welcome your advice, and will try to remember in future to describe the ring as you suggest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

List of ecclesiastical works by E. G. Paley

• "Most of the churches and chapels were built for separate congregations". I'm not sure I understand what that's trying to say. Eric Corbett 10:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Mmmm. What I am trying to say is that most of the churches and chapels were for congregations out in the world, while a few were for institutions, in this list for a school and a hospital. I guess you can find a better way of saying that.

Remembering our discussion following the promotion of my last FL, when we talked about the increasing requirements, I had a look at my first FL Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area), and spent almost a full day in amending references, adding material for accessibility, getting rid of excess emboldening, etc.; and I still have not added the alt text. Certainly the requirements have become tougher, but I have to admit that they reasonable - just more work! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

• "The church provided seating for 600 people." How many does it provide seating for now?

• "Originating as St Peter's Church, this was a new Roman Catholic church that contains 600 seats." The tense switch between "this was a new ... that contains" is rather jarring. If you're saying it contains 600 seats now, rather that it contained 600 seats when it was built, it would be better not to tag the number of seats on to the end of the sentence.

• "St Mary's was a new church". All churches were once new.

• "All Saints was a new church".

• "St Paul's was a new church". ... and lots of others.

OK, I've been through the whole article now and I'm done. Extraordinary to think that 150 years ago you could build yourself a church for £590. Eric Corbett 16:22, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks once again for your expertise and advice. On the points above:

• I've no idea of the present seating number. But it doesn't matter because the list is about what Paley did, not (on the whole) details of what happened later; except of course for one of his churches becoming a cathedral.
• Dealt with
• Re new churches: Paley sometimes altered churches, and sometimes built new churches from scratch. Again this is about what Paley did, not about the church in general. I tried to make the point about new churches and church alterations in the second paragraph of the lead. In the context of the list, a new church is one newly built by Paley; do I have to spell that out on every instance?. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

  Maybe we could come up with a different form of words, as the churches are no longer new? Eric Corbett 20:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

  For instance, instead of "All Saints was a new church in the style of about 1300" we could have "Paley designed the church in the style of about 1300"? To be brutally honest I think the word "new" is being abused here. But I'm not an FLC reviewer, so I may be way off base. Eric Corbett 20:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I've slept on it; and had an idea. That is, to place a symbol in the Name column after the name of the church where it is a new design by Paley. I've added a few to show what it looks like. Then I could add this to the key with an explanation, and adjust the text to get rid of some offending "new"s. What do you think? I am keen to show, at a glance, how much work Paley did in the design of new churches, as well as his work on existing ones, and this seems a way of achieving it. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:01, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

That seems to work. Eric Corbett 10:54, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I made the changes, altered the Key, and amended the text appropriately. How's it looking? --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:05, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Looks good, I think it's ready to go now. Eric Corbett 16:27, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Nominated. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St Michael's Church, Garston

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Paley @ FLC

Hi Peter. I'm back from holiday now, so I'll try to take a look and review your FLC over the weekend. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 12:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St Ambrose's Church, Speke

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Mersey Match Factory

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 22:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

I am from Cheshire so your contributions are a boost for knowledge of the area. Thank you! Olowe2011 (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks. Your message arrived just at teatime in the UK. It's good to hear from an ex-pat - and to get praise from a lawyer! Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
  • No problem, You just reminded me about the pleasures of a good tea. I'm going to make one now (Five sugars!) Happy editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olowe2011 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Church double dedication

Hi again. I am prepping my next church article which has twin dedication, and I would appreciate advice on the article title. There seems to be various ways of doing this: SS Peter and Paul's Church, Ravendale / Ss Peter and Paul's Church, Axenshaw / St Peter and St Paul's Church, Westcot. Any of these preferable or would you adopt other naming formats ? Many thanks, Acabashi (talk) 23:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I am not aware of any "rule" about this, but the UK church articles seem to (almost) always use "St" rather than "SS" or"Ss". Some use the format Church of St Peter and St Paul, xxxxx. And Americans use "St." My personal preference is for your last option, but in the end it's your choice. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. My preference too, as 'SS' and 'Ss' (which I have seen) can be difficult to work out for the church-uninitiated reader. I think this is another instance where church guidelines would be useful. Acabashi (talk) 23:58, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Nelson Monument, Liverpool

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

St Mark's, Swindon

St Mark's, Swindon, this church, location of a Britten premiere, is a red link or here under a different name, can you help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

The red link appears to be correct - I cannot find an article on WP about the church. This link confirms it was the site of the première. The church website is here; it remarks on the church's musical tradition but I cannot find a mention of Britten or his works. Details on the architecture of the church are here. Hope that helps (a bit). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:59, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. Would you write a stub on the church, you are so much more familiar with the topic? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Why a stub when the church is worthy of an article? Here it is at St Mark's Church, Swindon. When I was nominating it at DYK, another editor beat me to it, but I added a much more interesting hook (?) as an ALT here. Thanks for your inspiration. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Liverpool Cenotaph

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St Mark's Church, Swindon

Gatoclass (talk) 10:22, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St John's Church, Lytham

Gatoclass (talk) 09:37, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK

Hi Peter, I looked at your India Buildings which looks like another of your nice article. What I think needs to be raised on DYK talk is the idea of removing unreferenced material (which is policy) and then replacing it (which is great) and then showing this as good work at DYK (I would support this). However the latter I think is a change to normal DYK rules. Thankfully you have declared what has happened. I know that we are happy to delete copyvio text but removing unreferenced stuff before a 5x expansion is novel to me. Is there a precedent for this? If not then think it should be discussed at DYK talk to get a tick for this idea as I suspect this may happen more. AND it might encourage people to redo some established (but unsourced) articles. Best wishes Victuallers (talk) 11:09, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I thought the nomination might be a bit risky, but that it should fit the rules. I was also keen for the article to receive some extra exposure, partly because it is such an interesting building, and partly because its grade had recently been promoted. I have followed your suggestion; my query is here. We shall see! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Peter. I think you're OK with this one according to the rules, because the unreferenced stuff appears to have been taken from here, and so is a copyvio. I've said this at the DYK talk page as well. I noticed this interesting building being upgraded to II* when I did my regular check of NHLE a couple of weeks ago; I'm a great admirer of that architectural style. I must have walked past (or even through) it at some point on one of my occasional visits to Liverpool, but I haven't been for several years so I can't say for certain! Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 14:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Hassocks, for finding the source. I was pretty sure it was copyvio, but couldn't say so without the source. i'll remove it from the talk page. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:47, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St James' Church, Church Kirk

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:38, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

	The St Michael's and All Angels' Gong
	Congratulations on a well-written church article! Amandajm (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Amanda. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St James' Church, Great Ormside

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for India Buildings

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Re: Cheshire portal link

I don't honestly know how much it's wise to add it; I know I've seen a lot of frustration about such links being added to biographies and other peripherally related subjects, and I don't want to annoy anyone. For a first pass, I was thinking of just adding it to the majority of non-biographies linked in the portal with existing "See also" and/or "External links", and seeing whether or not that had any noticeable effect on the portal traffic. I'd think it might well be worth adding to all "touristy" articles, as readers are likely to find other things of interest in the portal. The other thing I was thinking of doing was adding it to a few high-traffic articles, though those are mostly biographies or other only peripherally project-related topics. What do you think?

PS Hugely impressed with your progress with the listed buildings by CP -- amazing work! Espresso Addict (talk) 23:42, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of St George's Church, Thornton Hough

Hello! Your submission of St George's Church, Thornton Hough at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bcp67 (talk) 12:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Found an issue with the hook, where a link points to a dab page - can you have a look? Thanks. --Bcp67 (talk) 12:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorting of churches

The last time this was discussed, here, there wasn't much support for the idea that churches should be sorted by location rather than name of the church. Do you know of any more recent discussion?--Mhockey (talk) 23:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

No I'm not aware of any discussion. Sorting churches by "Saint", etc may work for some categories, but IMO it does not work for lists only of churches. For example look at Category:Grade I listed churches, Category:Grade II listed churches and Category:Grade II* listed churches. If they were sorted in this way the great majority would be under "Saint", which IMO would not be particularly useful; sorted by location in this sort of example makes more sense to me. Even in a subcat such as Category:Grade I listed churches in Somerset, it seems to me to work better to sort on location rather than on dedication. Maybe sorting by dedication is OK in a mixed category, but IMO for a churches-only category sorting by location is much more useful. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion now moved to Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Sort keys - churches, for wider participation.--Mhockey (talk) 23:13, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Arnold Thornely

The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary's Church, Hopesay

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Christ Church, Higher Bebington

Gatoclass (talk) 16:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for All Saints Church, Thornton Hough

Gatoclass (talk) 08:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St George's Church, Thornton Hough

The DYK project (nominate) 16:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Salvin

I've added the Royal Chapel of All Saints to your list of Anthony Salvin alternations. Do you have any further resources on it? The chapel seems quite obscure. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the addition. Sorry, but I have nothing more to contribute; all new to me. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Christ Church, Port Sunlight

The DYK project (nominate) 08:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 16:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Runcorn signal box

Orlady (talk) 04:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Listed buildings in Congleton

Have you the energy to expand the blurb for this and take it to DYK? It seems a shame not to capitalise on such a large amount of work, and the silk industry might be of interest to those who didn't previously know about it. (Though I'm smarting from having to downgrade Nantwich from having the most listed buildings outside Chester!) Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. With the impending activities of the festive season, I fear that I shall not have the time to do the necessary within the required number of days. But if you would like to have a go and share the credit, that's fine by me. Sorry about overtaking Nantwich (only just), but at least there are more are Grades I and II* in Nantwich, if that's a consolation. Sorry I missed the Cheshire Portal tag - rather tired when I got round to uploading it. And best wishes to you and the Portal over the Christmas season. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

No more Wikipedia action for me now until 27th Dec (probably!), so just to wish you a happy Christmas and plenty more listed building, church etc. article-writing into 2014! Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 15:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your very kind message. I hope you have a very happy (and storm-free) Christmas. I too will be inactive for a short while. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Equestrian Statue of Viscount Combermere

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Listed buildings in Crewe

I noticed your new article earlier and my attention was caught by the mention of Ruskin Road School. That place has a strange naming history; I attended it myself when it was called Crewe County Grammar School for Boys, and now it can't seem able to decide what it's called. Ruskin Sports College, Ruskin Road Community High School, or some combination of the two. It also prompted me to look again at the Queens Park article, which is in a pretty dreadful state. As is the park itself apparently. Eric Corbett 21:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Fascinating! And thanks for the link. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled by your change to the Gulf War link. The NHLE entry seems to say clearly that there's a Gulf War Memorial as well as a Boer War Memorial. Eric Corbett 22:12, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

So there is. I'm afraid that I'd only used the NHLE article on the Boer War memorial, not the one on the park itself. Anyway, there are both, and the Boer War one is listed (so more important?). And the whole article needs a proper re-write rather than a bit of a meddle from me. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

It really does need to be completely rewritten, I agree. Eric Corbett 23:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Chester War Memorial

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

It's a pleasure!

The War Memorial article is a good addition.

I got some books printed from Pedia Press for Christmas, including one on Cathedral of England. My Bro-in-law was delighted to see a number of the pictures that he had taken of Chester Cathedral in print.

Amandajm (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Boer War Memorial, Crewe; Crewe War Memorial

Hello! Your submission of Boer War Memorial, Crewe; Crewe War Memorial at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! CeeGee 10:58, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Listed buildings in Crewe

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Church of Our Lady Star of the Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Our Lady Star of the Sea Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Deliberate link in a hatnote to a disambig page. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Statue of Richard Grosvenor, Second Marquess of Westminster

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Boer War Memorial, Crewe

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Crewe War Memorial

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Cholmondeley Castle

I think Cholmondeley Castle looks excellent Peter. If you nominate it at GAN I'll do the review. Eric Corbett 14:46, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Gosh; thanks; done. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:55, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry for butting in but this question is for my own information in future as well. Should it be "listed/designated as Grade ..." or "listed/designated at Grade ..." Both variations are used - maybe it doesn't matter though? It's a great article and really interesting! I wasn't sure where the best place to ask my question was, (here or Eric's talk) so chose the slightly lower profile option to try not to make too much of a fool of myself! SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:10, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

• No problem; and thanks for taking an interest in the article. I think it depends whether you use the word "a" or not, and on what follows. So I say either "designated as a Grade II* listed building" or "designated at Grade II*". I think that's OK, but Eric will let us know if it is not! --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

• I tend not to use either, and simply say "was designated a Grade II* listed building". Eric Corbett 13:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Great, my thanks to both of you! I see what you mean and can understand those options. I'm about to immerse myself in a lovely pre-publication fiction book that's just been delivered, so won't be around so much for a couple of days - I look forward to seeing the article sporting a very attractive green icon once I've finished indulging myself! SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:04, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cholmondeley Castle

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cholmondeley Castle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 16:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry I haven't been able to spend more time this on this Peter, but I've been tied with an FA review of my own. Hopefully by the end of the week. Eric Corbett 23:46, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Statue of John Laird at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Memorial to John Whitaker

Hello! Your submission of Memorial to John Whitaker at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 01:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Macclesfield War Memorial

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

fixed

Hi Peter I fixed this as per your request cheers Victuallers (talk) 15:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cholmondeley Castle

The article Cholmondeley Castle you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cholmondeley Castle for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 22:21, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Memorial to John Whitaker

Harrias ^talk 08:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cholmondeley Castle

The article Cholmondeley Castle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cholmondeley Castle for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eric Corbett -- Eric Corbett (talk) 11:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St John's Church, Egremont

Thanks from the wiki and the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 08:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Obelisk Commemorating Roger Barnston

Thanks from the wiki and the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 08:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Grand Entrance to Birkenhead Park

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Monument to Captain John Francis Egerton

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Queen Victoria Monument, Birkenhead

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Kenneth Horne (writer) at DYK

Thanks for reviewing! Just a quick note, as you mentioned the image: it's currently used under the doctrine of fair use, which the non-free content policy permits (for limited use). I'm negotiating a CC release with Horne's heirs right now, but it's not so pressing that I'd ask for the DYK to be held back. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:37, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Delaware Breakwater Range Rear Light

I've corrected the problems in the article and the hook; I was working on too many articles at once all around the same time period, and after a while the dates start to run together. Mangoe (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Cited per your request. Mangoe (talk) 16:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Manor Church Centre, Egremont

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:13, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Church of St Mary, Chartham

Dear Mr Vardy, I wonder if you could help with a problem I have with the above, that I have just created. I have pinched your church template, rather as I pinched your architects' list template for List of buildings by William Burges, for which many thanks. But I've no idea how to get the red dot into the appropriate position on the map. If you were able to look at the page, you'd see it at the very top, in the middle of the page. Is it something to do with the SJ number? If you were able to help, I'd be most grateful. Thanks and regards. KJP1 (talk) 10:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks so much. It is interesting and I was there for a funeral this week so thought I'd create the page. Newman's Kent has a little more detail, which I'll use shortly. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 11:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Also pinging @KJP1: and @Gareth E Kegg:. We have a new house article in The Tower House, Lubenham. Can either of you find more on it and expand it. Peter, in the British History Online source there's quite a bit of info on the All Saints church in Lubenham. I was wondering if you'd be interested in creating it?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:53, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have any more on the house. The church looks complex, and maybe interesting, but it's not on my short list just now. Cheers. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Monument to the Mersey Tunnel

Orlady (talk) 16:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Boer War Memorial, Winsford

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gaskell Memorial Tower and King's Coffee House

Orlady (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Statue of Ludwig Mond

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Statue of Sir John Tomlinson Brunner

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Hildeburgh's Church, Hoylake

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Port Sunlight War Memorial

Allen3 ^talk 17:42, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Statue of John Laird

Allen3 ^talk 18:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Birkenhead War Memorial

Allen3 ^talk 18:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Statue of Queen Victoria, St Helens

Materialscientist (talk) 03:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bluecap Memorial

Orlady (talk) 04:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

St. Nicholas Church, Berden

Hi, any chance you could expand this? I stubbed it after creating Berden Hall.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but not at present. Tied up elsewhere. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 19:17, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Added stuff and pics to this - needs an article reassessment. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 12:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

That's an impressive expansion! I've assessed it as class B. Are you going to take it GAC? And have you a hook for DYK? Congratulations. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I'm not sure - I don't know how to do those things yet. Acabashi (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

For help with a DYK nomination, suggest you ask Dr. Blofeld who is an expert in this. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the East of England know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on February 28, 2014. You can view the TFL blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured list/February 28, 2014. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors Giants2008 (talk · contribs), Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) or SchroCat (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. Thanks! © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 22:08, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

One hundred and three churches are preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in the East of England. The churches range in age from St Nicholas' Church, Feltwell (pictured), which contains fabric from the Saxon era, to the newest church, St Michael the Archangel's Church, Booton, which was built in the later part of the 19th century. The main architectural styles represented are Norman and English Gothic. There is one church in Georgian style (Old All Saints Church, Great Steeping) and one in Palladian style (St Andrew's Church, Gunton). The newest six churches are Gothic Revival in style. All the churches have been designated by English Heritage as listed buildings. In some cases, only part of the church has been conserved. For example, All Saints Church, Newton Green has been divided at the chancel, which continues to be used for worship although the rest of the church is maintained by the Trust.

DYK nomination of Lifeboat Memorial, Southport, Monumental Obelisk, Southport, Lifeboat Monument, St Annes, Lifeboat Memorial, Lytham

Hello! Your submission of Lifeboat Memorial, Southport, Monumental Obelisk, Southport, Lifeboat Monument, St Annes, Lifeboat Memorial, Lytham at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Drmies (talk) 04:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Lifeboat Memorial, Southport

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:47, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Church of St Cuthbert by the Forest

slakr^\ talk / 09:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Daresbury (Mersey flat)

Thanks for improving the Wiki on Good Friday Victuallers (talk) 09:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Southport War Memorial

Thanks for improving the Wiki on Good Friday Victuallers (talk) 09:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Mary's Church, Preston

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 14:54, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Sort keys - churches

If you wish to change consensus, please propose it on the relevant talk page. There is no consensus for your view that churches should be sorted differently from other articles. See the last discussion here. Thanks.--Mhockey (talk) 21:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

It's not a category for churches, but for buildings. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Preston Central Methodist Church

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:02, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Arkwright House, Preston

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:32, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury

Thank you for reviewing Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury for DYK however, an IP overrode you with a question symbol. Could you please re-add the green tick? Thank you. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Thurland castle

Hi Peter, I had a question about Thurland Castle. The reference to Brian "Stainless Knight" is attributed to the poem by Walter Raleigh. Yet, I have yet to find the poem. The closest I can find a reference to that knight is in the Marmion by Walter Scott. Is there such a poem by Walter Raleigh? If so, where might it be found? Thanks ever so much. "76.171.204.92 (talk) 02:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)" Amschaal (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing my attention to this. The passage to which you refer was inserted, without citation, in already referenced section that did not include this information (an unacceptable WP procedure). I have edited the article to request the addition of references for the offending passages. In order for you to get an answer to your query, I suggest you contact the relevant editor directly. You will find details and a link if you click on the "View history" tab, then contact the editor who made the changes in January 2013. You might also ask him/her to provide appropriate citations in the article. Good luck; I hope you find the information you want. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply and actions. I have reached out. --Amschaal (talk) 01:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Thomas' Church, Preston

The DYK project (nominate) 11:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for City Church, Preston

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for St Joseph's Church, Preston

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

St Michael's Church, Tremain

In March 2012 you created the article on St Michael's Church, Tremain and added this church to Friends of Friendless Churches.

As I have noted in Talk:Friends of Friendless Churches, this church is not listed in the Friends of Friendless Churches website, although you cited their January 2012 newsletter. Do you have any idea what has happened? Do you still have the newsletter? Verbcatcher (talk) 23:52, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

I have confirmed it is in the newsletter, but not on the website (and Tremain is not included in their list in the annual report of the year ending 31 March 2013). Anyway I've sent an e-mail to the director of FFC (see Talk:Friends of Friendless Churches). Thanks for your interest. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Emmanuel Church, Preston

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust

I'm trying to write an article on the Spitalfields Historic Buildings Trust. I thought you might be able to give me some guidance, as you seem to have done similar work.

My draft article is in User:Verbcatcher/sandbox.

My difficulties are:

• I cannot find a website for the trust.
• I cannot find a list of the buildings that they have restored. One source said it was over 60, and I have only identified four, none of which are in Spitalfields.
• Their policy appears to be to buy buildings, restore them and then sell them, like a benign property developer. I cannot find a reliable reference to confirm this.

Have you any suggestions for finding more material? Should I post the article as it is, or as a stub without the (very incomplete) list of buildings?

Thanks in advance. Verbcatcher (talk) 00:55, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying - I was out all day yesterday. It appears that there is no website. I suggest you e-mail them directly and ask if they could provide you with a full list of the properties with which they have been involved, or how you can obtain such a list. The address is on here. There's no reason why you should not publish what you have more or less as it is, or you may prefer to wait until you have a more comprehensive list. From the Charities Commission website it appears that they have been quite active. Good luck with the rest of the article. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:46, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Listed buildings in Nether Alderley

In your new article "Listed buildings in Nether Alderley", in the entry "Cross Farmhouse", there's an improperly formatted wikilink. I didn't know if you wanted to link to this article: "Timber framing". In any case, it's generating a high-priority error #10 "Square brackets with no correct end". --LukasMatt (talk) 08:55, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

A typo, now hopefully corrected. Thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:33, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 20:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hearty congratulatons, Peter. An incredible achievement - especially when one considers that may of your "edits" are complete (and perfectly formed) new articles. That number looks even bigger without any commas. (.. a large proportion of my own edits are commas!) Martinevans123 (talk) 09:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Martin. Although I must confess that a very high proportion of the edits result from my own typos and whoopsies. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Fishergate Baptist Church

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)