Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kent/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

• Article Improvement - Please read/edit the separate Article Improvement subpage.

Update the main towns.

Here is my suggestion for a task. Getting all the Kent towns up to "B" standard. The ultimate goal would be Featured articles, but one step at a time. There is a category Category:Towns in Kent from which I produced the table below. If we agree, then we can put this on the main page.

• Delete any Non-Towns from the table, add any that have been missed.
• Update the table with the current state of the articles.
• Create our own Kent rating template.
• Add template to town talk pages (Hopefully attracting people to this project).
• Assess non-rated articles.
• Re-assess UK geography articles.
• Once we have a list of things to do, we start editing. (After further discussion on standards).

Category:Towns in Kent

Town	Active	Rating	Assessor	Assessment Date	Infobox	Next Requirement
Ashford, Kent	Yes	Start	UK Geography	24 Aug 06	Yes	Create "People from..." paragraph and move list of people to a new page
Broadstairs	No	Start	UK Geography		Yes
Canterbury	No	Start	UK Geography		Yes
Chatham, Kent	No	Start	UK Geography		Yes
Whitstable

Active = Judging by the history, are there people currently trying to improve the article.
Rating, Assessor, Date = Articles current rating as per Wikipedia Quality Scale, who assessed the page and date, to keep track of progress.
Infobox = Does the article have the town infobox.

Are there any more columns that would be useful? MortimerCat 01:59, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Table and idea looks good. What will appear in the date column? Do you think we need a column for who is actively working on a page? and whether a assessment/reassessment has been requested? Olive Oil 17:39, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

My intention was to put an assessment date, so we can reassess after six months maybe. A assessment flag would be good or maybe just put REQUEST in the date column? Not sure about the current editor column. If someone stakes a claim that may discourage other editors. How about a "This article needs" column, where we put in requests for photographs, or someone to write about local politics?

I have put a table onto the main page, and I will be filling in the details shortly. I am only putting in the columns that show how we can get involved. The status will be my own quick assessment based on Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements using the grades of Wikipedia Quality Scale. This will give us an idea of the current state, and maybe we can come up with official grading rules later. MortimerCat 22:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Rochester appears to be missing- but Canterbury (a city) is there !?

Updated, welcome aboard - Olive Oil -_ŢάĽɮ - 15:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Our own Kent rating standards

Our own ratings would be good for more active people but we shouldn't rate our own writing, a third party viewpoint would be better. I think an overview of the article would be better guidance as to where to work next - i.e Basic (e.g only 1 paragraph) - Formatted (e.g article sections) - Started (ready for the first level of rating), perhaps we could agree standards. Olive Oil 20:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that we do not rate our own articles and have a simplistic guide instead. Earlier, I noticed Wikipedia:WikiProject Devon were adding their project box to lots of articles. I first thought about a twinning arrangement, we review their articles, they review ours. That led me to something I have mentioned before - Wikipedia:WikiProject_England. This would be really useful if it was to be an active meeting place for all the county projects. MortimerCat 01:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The template

I have created a template, borrowed from Devon.

To use, just add {{WikiProject Kent }} to the talk page of any Kent based article. Later reviewers, whoever they may be, can fill in suggestions.

I think adding the template is good but we should make suggestions, rather than just the blank template, or perhaps we should suggest looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography#Resources and guidelines Olive Oil 08:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Kent Portal selected pictures.

I have made the selected picture on the Portal:Kent change automatically each week. I now need help in creating the list of choices. Please visit Portal talk:Kent/Pictures to help out. MortimerCat 01:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Are we going to vote for the pictures? or do we just need 53 to use? can we have text with each of the pictures (if so perhaps the nominators should write a sentence)? Olive Oil 08:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

This no longer applies, we have a random picture system now. MortimerCat 19:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I think from looking at reviews of other portals we need to credit the photos, below the picture but above any text i.e

Credit: website text, User:Name ?

<small><center>Credit: [http://www.blah-blah.jpg website text], [[User:Name ?]]</center></small>

- Olive Oil -_ŢάĽɮ - 02:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The few random portals I just looked at do not credit photos. Beside, are not all the photos we would use are public domain and not need crediting? MortimerCat 02:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Very dependant upon the licence of the photos. some stuff doesn't require it, others do, while other photos (eg fair use) may not be usable (ie on a portal it isn't fair use as it was back in the article). Pickle 03:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I'll will go through the pictures and check the licences. Can you show me a Portal where they have that credit. MortimerCat 08:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The same applies to the biography and featured article. Roger Dean, the biography which was originally static on this page, was using a debatable copyrighted image of his work. MortimerCat 08:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Architecture, Portal:Texas, Portal:Science are just a few of the Featured portals that credit the photos, (there are as many that don't). I didn't think about the licensing issue, I was just following suggestions for other sites after they'd had peer reviews, thinking it was polite to credit the creator. - Olive Oil -_ŢάĽɮ - 08:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject Kent

I've created Category:WikiProject Kent to show pages actively involved with the Kent Project, it includes the Project pages plus any pages using the {{User Wikiprojectkent}}, {{WikiProject Kent improve}} and {{WikiProject Kent}} templates. Olive Oil 13:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

2 things

1. a suggestion - put this on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. Show the proposal of the project and follow the procedure.

1. WP:RM London to Ashford to Dover Line --> South Eastern Main Line. Simply south 19:25, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I think its a bit late for the project proposal procedure! MortimerCat 20:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Project/Article/Area of the month

Please read/edit the seperate Article Improvement subpage.

Citations

I've created the {{FactKent}} template

 {{FactKent}}  adds a request for a citation (source information). 

Appearing as [citation needed], linking to the Citing sources Manual of Style page

used in the body of an article as a request for other editors to find citations:
1. to label a passage which is incomplete without a cited source of information
2. to label a quotation which lacks a citation

The template updates Category:WikiProject Kent Citation needed - Olive Oil - _Talk 08:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Kent discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

Description

Improving articles related to the county of Kent in South East England

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1. Olive Oil 20:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Comments

WikiProject Kent

To Do list

I've created Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/To Do, which uses the comments added when using {{WikiProject Kent}}. Included are the Top and High priority articles, please add to these, but more importantly edit the articles or add comments on the Talk pages - Olive Oil -_ŢάĽɮ - 15:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Project banners

Forgive me, for I am a complete outsider, but a couple of things. Why do you have two project banners? And do you not think {{WikiProject Kent}} is rather large? Seems to dwarf other banners on the same page to me - and there is enough discussion about how project banners are taking up too much space at the moment. Regards, Severo 01:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

IMHO the kent ones do look a little to big, especailly when next to some of the others (eg trains, geogrphy, etc), but not being a techy i don't know how to change it. Pickle 15:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Templates

I am a bit concerned about the templates {{FactKent}}, {{UnreferencedKent}} (and others?) there are probably in excess of 200 cleanup templates, if we multiply these by the counties of England alone, we will have a logistical nightmare (actually we already have one). Would it perhaps be better to request a regular bot assisted listing of articles in both the Kent project and some array of cleanup cats? Rich Farmbrough, 21:10 1 April 2007 (GMT).

Request for help

I've just added the IPA pronunciation for Ightham, but I'm not sure if it's right. I came here to ask for help, so first can anyone who knows about IPA lend a hand? Second, I think the project page needs to give directions on where to ask for help. Cheers guys! Tbone762 20:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

a) your probably asking in the write place, but b) i haven't a clue, i know (as a local) how it is pronounced but I've no idea how to convert that into letter! Pickle 04:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the IPA, but if you say Ite'am (quickly) you won't be far wrong. Ite as in bite. Maybe this will help to get the IPA correct if needs it. Mjroots (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration technique

I am trying to get some feedback on an idea. The talk page is useful for discussing ideas, but when the article has lots of sections, and is actively being improved by many editors, comments can get lost.

My idea is to have a collaboration subpage from the main talk page. Every section in the main article has a corresponding section on the collaboration talk page. This helps people who want to work on the Transport section, for example, to have have all the Transport comments in one place.

This idea seemed to work well when I was working on Eastbourne, see Talk:Eastbourne and Talk:Eastbourne/collaboration, although I have only just moved it to its own subpage. MortimerCat 10:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

agree - Sounds like a quite a good way of proceeding - saves clogging up the talk page - let's try it! Regards, Lynbarn 11:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I have created the collaboration for Dover. If anyone wants to comment generally on this idea, please do so at Template talk:Collaborate. MortimerCat 16:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Dover collaboration

As this article has had a cleanup tag for nearly a year, I think this should be a new collaboration. Maybe an opportunity to develop the Collaboration technique idea?

agree - why not, Dover is as good a place to start as anywhere in Kent! Regards. Lynbarn 11:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Paddock Wood

I've done a bit of work on the Paddock Wood article, including a partial rewrite and an image. I'll try and take some more photos soon. I've tweaked the box on the discussion page, but if someone who actually knows what they're doing would like to take a look that would be great! -- JediLofty ^{User | Talk} 12:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I've carried on the rewrite, and I think it's just above Start class now! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 20:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

John Brunt

I've added an article about the John Brunt V.C. public house in Paddock Wood. Does that belong in this project? -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 20:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure as its a pub in Kent, if its in Kent, about Kent, etc - its within WikiProject Kent's scope. Having the banner on the talk page gives other editors who may be trying to get hold of someone, etc about the page, a place to contact people, etc. Pickle 01:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

John Brunt (the person this time, not the pub!)

Hi all. I've just given the John Henry Cound Brunt article a major overhaul. While he wasn't born in Kent, his parents moved to Paddock Wood when he was at school, and it was the last place he lived before joining the army. Does this belong in WikiProject Kent? -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 22:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The Hop Farm Country Park

I've been having a bit of a mad few days creating articles! I have a new one, which I've put the template on, but would appreciate someone else reviewing, at The Hop Farm Country Park -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 19:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Impressive start, you even included references! I made a spelling correction, then spelt the edit summary wrong :) It does need someone else, with the knowledge, to add a bit more, just to maintain NPOV. MortimerCat 11:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for help: external links and blogs

Would anyone knowledgeable about Wikipedia's guidelines on external links (WP:EL) care to have a look at Talk:Margate and give their opinion. Much obliged. Pgr94 18:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

People from Categories

A discussion has been opened at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London#Category:People from Ealing by district about upmerging local area categories for People from... into current local government boundaries only. This could have implications across the whole of England if carried through. Your are invited to join the discussion. The proposer is planning a massive merge by 22nd June if no objections are received. --Regan123 11:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Improving the University article

I'm hoping to get the University of Kent up to GA status and help would be much appreciated. In particular if anyone knows anything about the Medway and/or Tonbridge campuses that would be extremely valuable as most of the alumni & current student editors tend to be from the Canterbury campus. Timrollpickering 02:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Medway is my home town so in a few months I'll be back there, what are you after? Pickle 19:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Some general details about where the Medway campus is, the facilities it has, any pre-existing notable buildings that were taken over and the like. I admit this is vague but this is because my knowledge of what there is in Medway is very limited. Timrollpickering 12:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Right ho, off the top of my head and 200 miles away the university thing down there is based in the former RN Dockyard all together, sort of not the historic section (which is a distinct part of the old navy base), north of Brompton but not on St Mary's Island. I'm pretty certain they are in some nice old navy building but I've never been actually into their bit so i can't say which uni has which buildings. I'll do some digging when I'm home next, September time (remind me if your desperate!). Pickle 18:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try adding some of this the University of Kent#Medway campus, but help next month will be very useful. Timrollpickering 08:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Neighbouring projects

Just in case anyone hasn't seen it yet, there's now a Wikiproject for the county next door. Wikipedia:WikiProject Surrey isn't so advanced yet and any helping tips would be much appreciated. Timrollpickering 08:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

User box

I've just created Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Membership for anyone wanting a Userbox for the project. Timrollpickering 08:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Very nice (proably better) but for some reason i've found this one too {{User Wikiprojectkent}}. Really should fiddle witht he front page to show new members how to add the user box. Pickle 18:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Importance

I've upgraded the importance of some towns and villages, as I don't think it's useful for 90% of Kent articles to be classed as low. Any town with a population of over 30,000 is now "high", and any village/parish with a population of over 4,000 is now "mid". Epbr123 11:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok i've done a long overdue overhaul of the WikiProject Kent banner template. I've shamelessly copied the Trains Wiki Project assement page, so we now have our own one here. I've changed the template to include links to it. If we all agree to to Epbr123 proposla on importance we can furnish that info on the example table on this page - Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Assessment. Hope that makes sense!. Pickle 03:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Kent created

Bizarrely there was no actual article about the Flag of Kent. I've created a stub, but compared to Flag of Derbyshire, Flag of Devon and Flag of Lincolnshire it's very brief and needs details added, both the history and technical stuff like the correct ratios and colours. Timrollpickering 15:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

• 7 September - expires 12 September
  • Beulah Christian Fellowship (PROD by User:Montchav; "Beulah Christian Fellowship is a church in Gillingham, Kent.") —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceyockey (talk • contribs) 03:35, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know, IMHO its not crtical, notable etc so panic not. Pickle 09:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

• 7 September (continued)
  • St George's Church, Folkestone (PROD by User:Montchav; "The church was opened in 1938 as a daughter church of Holy Trinity.") --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • St Paul's Church, Sandgate (PROD by User:Montchav; "St Paul's Church in Sandgate, Kent is part of the Trinity Benefice in Folkestone.") --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Trinity Benefice (PROD by User:Montchav; "The Trinity Benefice in Folkestone consists of the Parish of Holy Trinity, the Parish Church of St George, and the Parish Church of St Paul.") --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 11:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

St Augustine's Abbey

Hi, I belong to those German wikipedians who visit the English edition from time to time for interwiki-related issues or simply to see how things are done here. Among the curiosities of the English edition are the article ratings on the talk pages that attempt to assess the importance of an article in the scope of a particular wiki project and its so far achieved quality. I'm not really a fan of this as these assessments seem to be quite arbitrary at times. One such case is St Augustine's Abbey which is rated to be of low importance for this project. Maybe, Kent has quite something to offer in ancient monasteries and ruines and the latter are in this case not that extraordinary. However, it belongs to the UNESCO World Heritage and even Kent has not heritage sites of such rank in abundance. In addition, it is the very first Benedictine foundation outside of continental Europe. And finally, it had a remarkable library even in comparison to other major sites. So you might want to reconsider this assessment, or even better to improve this article. Cheers, AFBorchert 11:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC), main author of the corresponding article in the German wikipedia

Thanks you for taking the time to chat with us over here.

re importance and assement in general - it has its pros and cons. in the case of kent, we've realised that the Kent article was the most imortant to us and as a starting point needed a lot of work to be done there first. now its a "good article" we can focus efforts elsewhere. Thus one of our members has gone around putting the big towns/cities of Kent as the next target of our attention. elsewhere, i'm a member of the much larger wikiproject trains, but due to our size we've ommitted focusing on some of the basics, which when people like the team who want to publish a basic enclopedia tell us they need a good article on the basics of rail tranport we find we've ignored this key starting point (yet focused on certian obscure specailites), - thus we're refocusing our efforts on the basics.

so in this case, by all means St Augustine's Abbey is important on many a scale, but given the (still) infancy of this project, such a mertious article is not yet higher up our scale (Canterbury Cathedral is only a "mid" and a "start".

by no means should this discourage you or other editors from expanding upon this article (be bold!).

and once agian thanks for taking the time to drop by, unfortunelty my german is soo limited i cannot hope to grasp what is at corresponding article in the German wikipedia

Pickle 20:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the importance score is a relative measure, not an objective one. In this case, it is relative to the Kent project. Another wiki project might include the very same article and rate it differently. That's not to say the current score is right (or wrong). Pgr94 21:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just followed the assessment scale given here. This reserves an assessment of "low" to cases which are not well known outside of Kent. I think that a UNESCO world heritage site is very well known also outside of Kent or the UK. I'm German and I have never been even close to Kent but I know, of course, of your cathedral, of St. Augustine and his abbey and of many other important archbishops like Lanfranc, Anselm (he, like Lanfranc, has not even been included in your article list) and Thomas Becket. Thanks for your invitation to contribute. I think, however, that my German is far superior to my lacking mastery of English prose. Hence I'll continue to contribute mainly in the German edition. However, I'm always open to questions and discussions of monastic sites in England. Just drop me a note on my talk page. Regards, AFBorchert 22:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

a) hmm i worte that

b) you highlight very well how importance varies from each editor's perspective

c) thanks for letting us know ;)

Pickle 23:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Guidelines

Hello WikiProject Kent participants,

Just a line trying to promote some trans-WikiProject guidelines for settlement articles. WP:UKCITIES are guidelines from the "mother" WP:UKGEO project based on those at WP:CITIES (A "global" WikiProject for settlements that is US driven). They have been employed by a number of articles to standardise content, obtain a consistent style and approach and drive them towards good and featured article status with considerable success, and are so far also endorssed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester, Wikipedia:WikiProject Cheshire, Wikipedia:WikiProject Somerset‎, Wikipedia:WikiProject Yorkshire and Wikipedia:WikiProject Sheffield, amongst others.

Not too many users (or indeed projects) are aware of the guidelines, and thought it may be helpful if all the county WikiProjects had a link to them to help them get the results they want.

As it stands, unlike other county WikiProjects, this project mainspace does not have a section entitled "Guidelines" - it may be suitable if {{main|WP:UKCITIES}} was affixed to such a section to raise awareness of the guidelines. Hope that helps, Jza84 16:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice idea, although the project page is rather complicated to edit, i don't know if want to risk brekaing it (anyone else understand it!) Pickle 17:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I think I've just about managed it... just... (!). Thanks for the support! Best of luck with the project! Jza84 20:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

"Loose cannon", please advise

Recently, there have been a number of contributions to various Kent-related articles that are coming from IP numbers (80.0.110.148, 80.2.201.239, 80.0.117.237, 80.1.88.210, etc.). It looks like it may be the same person. The problem is that although the contributions seem well-intentioned, the editor appears to be blissfully unaware of WP's guidelines (POV, linking policy, verifiability etc). So far I have been unable to communicate with them because the IP address keeps changing.

It seems heavy-handed to revert, but at the same time their contributions need extensive fixing. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to deal with this? Does anyone think it's not a problem? Pgr94 01:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Possible new GA candidate

Have recently rewritten Wormshill in line with a GA self-nom. It's a small village so not much in way of sources - plus I'm based in Australia so much harder to get hands on papers/published works. Please could participants take a look at the article and see if they can help with possible extra content or possible avenues for further sources. Would be great to get this one into GA. Cheers Dick G (talk) 06:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Article has achieved GA and is now up for Featured Article. Would be great if Kent editors could drop in on the article and add bits and pieces (if they have any) or offer any tips on the candidate page. Cheers Dick G (talk) 01:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Maidstone

Would love to see a concerted effort on this one from experienced WP:GEOGRAPHY or WP:CITIES editors. As the county town of Kent it's in a pretty poor state as far as an article goes - particularly having regard to the wealth of information out there about the town. It should be one of the top two or three priorities of this project behind the main Kent article. Considering the level of detail that can be achieved on small individual parts of Maidstone e.g. Penenden Heath and Mote Park the article on the town itself should easily be able to achieve GA or above if a number of editors join in.Dick G (talk) 04:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy to help - there is a great deal of Maidstone related stuff (I've been adding a bit to the prison) and I've got some images too. Nogbad (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of "List of Churches in Kent"

For your information (I am not the proposer): Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of churches in Kent. It was listed on 1st December.  DDStretch  (talk) 09:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fastrack

Has anyone a good picture of a Fastrack bus that they would be willing to contribute to that article? David Arthur (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)  DoneClemRutter (talk) 11:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Lord Lieutenant of Kent

Just saw that the incumbent Lord Lieutenant, Allan Willett, was not represented on wiki. He now has a bright shiny new article. There are a few for Lord Lieutenants who haven't yet got articles - I appreciate these days its a largely ceremonial role but historically I suspect these gents were important in our county's history. Perhaps folk might like to put together stubs to fill in the gaps. Follow the red links in Lord Lieutenant of Kent to get started. Dick G (talk) 05:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

"Villages" in Kent

There are a large number of settlements, most of which are included in the Kent geography stubs category, which are at present described as "villages in Kent". As a geographer I am concerned that this blanket description gives an entirely wrong impression of the relative importance/size/shape (some are just scattered houses given a name on the map) of these settlements. I am working my way through them, and trying to make the description fit the actuality. If in doing so, I upset anyone who actually lives there, then I apologise - but in that case they should look at the introduction to the article Village, which shows the differentiation between that and a hamlet. The Human settlement article is also aposite to this.

As I do this, I am also trying to give a better location than that often given - "in Kent" or even "East Kent" - and the talk page on that article has pertinent things to say about that! Peter Shearan (talk) 13:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

List of civil parishes in Kent

I am copying here a note I put on this article, since I had no apparent taker for its implications:

I think it is vitally important that a civil parish is understood. It is NOT the same as a village, and that is what most of the references here originally led to. The two differ, in that a village often has the same name as the civil parish, but the latter covers a greater area, and includes other settlements (villages, hamlets) within it.

I then went on to say that the following might constitute the pattern of the article:

The parish:XXX is a village and civil parish in the XXX District of Kent, England. The parish is located [here should appear a general description of the location, eg north west of XXXX]. Within the parish are the [settlements] of YYY and ZZZ. The population of the parish is ..... include communications (railways, roads) passing through the parish

The village: details of its size, shape, location (include distances from nearby towns etc); its church it is dedicated to St ...; and then other details specifically about the village.

Other settlements within the parish: these should referenced to a separate article, so that they will then be included on the list of villages in Kent can have them included

There is often a website for the civil parish not often one for the village specifically; likewise population figures are for the civil parish, not just the village

I should be grateful for comments Peter Shearan (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Staplehurst

I have added an RM to move Staplehurst, Kent to Staplehurst (which is currently a dab page). Comments are welcome. Parable1991 (talk) 15:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Sarre ~ pronunciation

Hi Kent Project members,

I'm hoping to record spoken versions of Kent's various Featured Article status towns soon. I notice that the village of Sarre appears in the text of Birchington-on-Sea, and for the sake of prudence (and knowing that many Kent villages are pronounced in a less than intuitive way), I would be grateful if somebody could either confirm that it is pronounced /sɑr/ (to rhyme with "car") or advise me how it is pronounced, if different. Thanks a lot! Hassocks5489 (talk) 12:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Sarre is pronounce as though an "s" was in front of the word are, or alternatively drop the "e" off the end to get Sarr. Watch out when you get to Trottiscliffe! Mjroots (talk) 15:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks for that. That's how I expected. (Unlike "Trosley", as you mention!...) Hassocks5489 (talk) 21:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Kent County Council

I have been looking at KCC page and i see that in the infobox the MP's for Kent are listed. I feel this should be replaced with the members of KCC and the positions. As the infobox is currently miss leading as it implies that the MP's make up the KCC. How do we feel about changing this? Cheveney (talk) 06:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Recently two sections have been added to the article that 'though accurate' are changing the neutrality of the piece. It looks like the start of a whinge list. I was tempted to move them to the talk page, so they could be discussed- but placing my concerns here will probably reach a wider audience of experienced editors. :-ClemRutter (talk) 14:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Assessment / Reassessment

As we are up to date with unassessed articles, maybe it's time to start reassessing articles. It's been pointed out to me that just because we have no backlog doesn't mean assessments are up to date. I propose we start reassessing stubs first, starting with "A" and working through to "Y". Once this is done, there's the Start class articles to go through. Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I've been through the "A"s, leaving those I have had significant input into. Addington needed a substantial rewrite, which I have done. The "B"s are now listed ready for reassessment. Mjroots (talk) 12:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Bs done (as above), Cs listed. Found one article that shouldn't have been in WikiProject Kent and one that is almost B class listed as a stub! 09:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Cs done, Ds listed. Would appreciate a bit of help though! Mjroots (talk) 15:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like there is no interest from anyone else in reassessing articles. If anyone is interested, carry on from D Mjroots (talk) 09:58, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

To be honest I'd like to be able to help but it's a pretty big undertaking in terms of time and I can't really see me spending a couple of hours trawling through the pages on the off chance that an article has improved/degraded to a material extent. However, that's not to say I (and I'm sure many others) don't appreciate what you're doing. Thanks for doing this and I'll see if I can stop by when the Z's come up ;) Dick G (talk) 11:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Template Todo List

These appear to be broken- I have tried to edit the Dartford and The Canterbury list to add a //done// and I just get an error message. Firefox can't find the server at en.wikipedia.org{{localurl. ClemRutter (talk) 11:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I thibk there was a major sever problem with Wikipedia yesterday for about ½ hr about thar time. Mjroots (talk) 06:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Minster-in-Sheppey

I did put a note on this article's talk page a while back, but as no-one has come across it I thought I'd mention it here. There seems to be some discrepancy about the name of this village on Sheppey: it is recorded 3 different ways in one stub article! The article is entitled Minster-in-Sheppey, the lead paragraph refers only to Minster, where the Infobox is marked as Minster-on-Sea. Could somebody local clarify, perhaps including a section on the names if there is a varied use on the ground? Tafkam (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Answered on the talk page of the article. Mjroots (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Museums in Kent

Could I ask for some help accessing local knowledge, from members of this wikiproject, on the behalf of the new WikiProject Museums? We are currently trying to identify articles within the Museum projects scope (& develop guidelines to help improve them etc). There is a List of museums in Kent. Could you take a look at the list for your local area and see if any are missing or create articles for any red links. Could you also add the new project banner "{{WikiProject Museums}}" to the Talk pages of the articles, so that we can identify those in need of work etc. Any help appreciated &, if anyone is interested you are welcome to join the project or discuss Museum related articles on the Project Talk Page.— Rod ^talk 14:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Plucks Gutter

I've just removed some vandalism from Plucks Gutter - thought I'd mention it as it seems to be a regular target Nogbad (talk) 20:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Assessment backlog

The backlog of unassessed article is starting to build up again. I've assessed all Kent articles that I have not created or had a significant input into <g>. Mjroots (talk) 11:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Research source

I've found this website which seems to be a good source of material for Kent, Sussex and Surrey articles. Mjroots (talk) 18:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

There's also this one for historians Peter Shearan (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Parishes

Hi, just noticed that there is two categories for civil parishes in Kent, one of which has only one entry, Category:Civil Parishes in Kent and Category:Parishes of Kent. I think that you should consider combining these as they appear to perform the same function. Keith D (talk) 23:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1442 articles are assigned to this project, of which 173, or 12.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Medway Mariners is currently at AfD. Mjroots (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I've tried to expand the article but I'm having trouble finding any reliable third party sources. I did make some changes, I added a reference from the BBC website but from what I understand, the team is an amateur squad so we're going to have trouble with notability and verifiability —— RyanLupin • (talk) 17:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Missing geographical coordinates

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

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

• Kent articles missing geo-coordinates.

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

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

There are about 214 articles missing coords - I hope you'll consider adding coordinates so as to make Kent articles more visible on the web. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Update. Articles needing coordinates have been placed into a category. 18 articles in Category:Kent articles missing geocoordinate data do not have geographic coordinates. Coords are useful for making the article appear on Google Maps & many other mapping services; and they allow our users to click through to see the article subject location on a map. There's a short guide to on how to add geocodes to articles ... it really is very easy to do. I hope you'll take some time to ensure that Kent is as well represented as it can be on wikipedia by fixing up the listed articles. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Any help would be appreciated -- ClemRutter (talk) 23:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Archbishops of Canterbury

I've nominated this article for removal of it's featured list status. Feel free to comment, here. iMatthew (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Hasted's History of Kent

Is available online. Useful for padding out Kent places articles. Mjroots (talk) 06:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Possible copyvio

The Chiddingstone#Parish Church section reads to me like a verbatim copy of a guide book or similar. I have reported it at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 February 5 (I hope correctly), but I thought that this wikiproject's participants might be best placed to do something about it? Thryduulf (talk) 23:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I would have thought that you would need more evidence than just your own subjective view on the matter. At the end of the day we are encouraging editors to write in a encylodpedic style, and surely that is not a lot different to a " ... guide book or similar". I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Bhtpbank (talk) 07:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have looked at the text and it must be a scan and OCR of a parish mag- dashes are even rendered as tildes. It is written in the first person, and gives the priests telephone number-- copyvio of not, couldn't you just give the guy a ring and ask him to log on and write something in his own words. --ClemRutter (talk) 10:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Gateway TV.

I have posted this comment on new user User talk:John F Ryall page.

John

Wikipedia does have rules about links to commercial sites. What is seen as commercial spam is deleted. I have reviewed the link you are adding to many Medway and Kent sites- and the home page you link to is not relevant- but following your /sitemap link, I can see pages that are specific to the subject- and though I cannot guarentee that other editors won't think that adding so many links is merely an attempt to push up your google rating- I would suggest you link to the specific page that addresses that community in each case. I will cross post this to the Kent talk page.

Clem

Perhaps someone has an opinion. I think the case is marginal but in the main OK.

Hi, I reverted the addition of the links. The policy on external sites is reasonably clear; they must have a strong relationship with the content of the article and give the reader the opportunity to increase their understanding of the article's content. If some article content were supported by their website, then a direct link to that specific material might be acceptable - but are they a reliable source? Kbthompson (talk) 18:29, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup listing

I took the liberty of subscribing Kent to the [User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings|Wolterbot]] listings - the first one arrived earlier today, and can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Cleanup listing. I have added a link on the main project page.

It basically lists all the articles within the Kent project that have been marked with the various cleanup flags, a useful resource for anyone looking for an article to tidy. MortimerCat (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Emma

I know this might be a bit of a late request but if it's not an inconvenience, could somebody local try to take a photo of the filming of Emma, which will be going on in Chilham this week. The Chilham parish council website say that the production crew will be involving the local community, which I take means photography will be allowed (if not of filming then at least of the production sites, cast and crew). Thanks. Bradley0110 (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Not able to get the photos but I've expanded the Chilham article to mention it. Mjroots (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Requests for reassessment.

I looked at Chatham this evening. It was last assessed in March 2007- and I think it is due for a reassessment. This has always remained a mystery to me. Firstly how do we tag the request? I have read the advice sheets- but don't understand how they tally with Kent? Who gives the authority, and how is consensus within the WikiProject Kent? Are there just two assessors? Is there a mentor system for potential assessors? If the assessment is formative what are the aims? If it is normative- where are the norms set or agreed? --ClemRutter (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ooh, signs of life! <g>. Clem, anyone can assess an article. The guidelines for assessment are at WP:ASSESS. Anything higher than B class needs to go through various reviews before being awarded. If you click on the [show] button for each criteria it gives a fuller overview of the cat. There are some 40 unassessed Kent articles if you want to try your hand with assessment. Although you are not prohibited from assessing articles that you have created or substantially edited, it is my personal preference to let someone else assess them. If I vastly disagree with an assessment I'll bring it up with the assessor on their talk page. An editor is free to reassess any article at any time. Mjroots (talk) 03:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I promoted it to a C; in terms of quality it may be even a B level, but I was unsure and as such didn't want to seem an intruder drastically rocking the boat. It certaintly does not deserve anything less than a C at that level. I hope nobody objects to it however, if so I will gladly allow it to be reverted.

As a request, seeing as I am here, can anyone give the Eurostar page a reassessment? I cannot do it as it would be bias with the amount of involvement I have had with it; but it is certainly no longer a 'start' class (actually it is pretty close to GA, but right now is rated B). Thank you in advance to whoever does the page justice, or at least gives it a lookover.81.111.115.63 (talk) 14:31, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

B is the highest rating an individual editor can give. The Eurostar article is currently a Good Article nominee. Mjroots (talk) 04:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, sadly WikiKent's tag rates it as Start class. :S I've taken it upon myself to change it to B; though this is probably against the letter of the law... I hope this is appropriate/not detestable.81.111.115.63 (talk) 10:27, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Similar sentiments re Reculver - I may have missed something, but as far as I can see it was last assessed in March 07, since when much has changed. It's still by no means stunning, but maybe someone could have another look? Nortonius (talk) 00:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Montefiore Windmill

This mill is also known as the Jaffa Gate Mill. There is a dispute over whether the alternative name should be included in the lead and infobox. Input welcome at the talk page. Mjroots (talk) 10:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Turner Contemporary

Following a weekend visit to my home for the first 18 years of my life (Margate), I saw & took a pic of the construction work on the Turner Contemporary which has now started, so I've improved the article a bit (& added it to this project - hope thats OK). If anyone else wants to help improve the article that would be great.— Rod ^talk 21:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Coords

Category:Kent articles missing geocoordinate data now has about 230 fewer members than it did a few days ago. :-)))) But that's it - I'm not doing any more, but it should be a bit easier to maintain from now on. Boy am I bored of Category:Schools in Kent by now. They represented about a third of all the articles needing tagging, and not surprisingly they're in pretty rough shape, some more than others. I've also tried to add project tags when I've remembered. A few things for your attention :

• I couldn't be certain of my locations for the following, they're all <1km (ie better than a lot of the village articles out there !?! ) but it would be nice to nail them exactly, even if it's just to be told that I've got it right : Deal barracks bombing, Dover Immigration Removal Centre, 1951 Gillingham bus disaster, MidKent College, RAF Brenzett, St Augustine's College, Canterbury, Scot's Hall, Staplehurst rail crash, The West House, Townley House
• Scot's Hall should move to Scott's Hall - the former is used by some literary sources, but the gazetteers and the modern OS map all use Scott's Hall.
• Temple School has just merged with Chapter School to form Strood Academy. Since we don't have articles for the latter, I suggest that the Temple article is renamed to Strood Academy (and given a good cleanup, if some of the spelling that was on that page is any indication, it doesn't say much about the education of people interested in that article. :-) )
• I've suggested a couple of mergers, some are obvious some I'm not at all certain about but thought I'd get some opinions on : Coxheath Common, Maypole, Kent, RAF Gravesend, Stafford House College, St Clement's Church, Romney Marsh, The Monkey Rainforest
• Some of User:Faedra's articles are almost unintelligble, it's like they're out of some Victorian magazine. My enthusiasm faltered on some of them, I'm about to sort Mary White (lifeboat) but someone might want to look through some of her other contributions.

Think that's about all. :-) 82.20.52.30 (talk) 22:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Luftwaffe bomber crash near Kingsdown, Kent in November 1940

New article could do with some experienced help. Ty 01:40, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

England at GAC!

Alerting all WikiProject Kent/Archive 1 members that England is undergoing a review for WP:GA status. Things you can help with are listed here. Please help if you can... England expects that every man will do his duty.... :) --Jza84 |  Talk  16:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Greater South East

I am proposing to merge a number of low or moderately active projects in south east England. The discussion is here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject England#Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater South East MRSC (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Message from a pleased Wikipedian: congratulations on some excellent articles

I was browsing along and I happened across the Sevenoaks railway accident article. Initially I thought "this seems slightly non-notable", but before raising the issue on the talk page, I took a look on some of the articles to which it linked. To my surprise, Sevenoaks, Sevenoaks railway station, and even the fortunate engineer, Archibald Jack, had well-developed articles. Looking further, I discovered that the Kent WikiProject is filled with especially well-written and formatted articles—some of the best I have ever seen on small localities. (Cranbrook, Kent has 7,000 people, the article says, and the article is better developed than many I have seen on much larger communities here in the U.S. I wish some American contributors would take some time off from writing massive articles on video games to cover their communities more.)

In short, your project is turning out some exceptional work. It reaffirms the mission and purpose of Wikipedia at a time when too many people seem to be taking our site for granted. Sorry for taking up space on your talk page, but I simply had to comment on how much this delighted me. If there were an award for "Excellent Wiki-Project", you would assuredly get one. Good work, all! –The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 17:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of High Speed 1

I have done a GA Reassessment of High Speed 1 as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to be informative and well-written. It does not however, fully comply with the GA Criteria. As such I have outlined my concerns here. I have also put the article on hold for one week pending work. I am notifying all interested projects and editors of this event. If you have questions or concerns please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Archive 1/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Archive 1/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 00:43, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Tudeley and treacle

Hi there. The problem with the article on Tudeley is that it is otherwise so short: to devote 10% of a 120-odd word article to what is, essentially, a children's fairytale, adds little of value to the general reader, and is surely disproportionate. Could you not expand the article with some more factual info, and then add your treacle mine info as a humorous point at the end? Thanks! Tishtosh20 (talk) 15:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Note This was meant for my talk page. Copied over to there. Mjroots (talk) 12:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Book

I have made this book:Rivers of Kent . Is there somewhere for it to be displayed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sillybillypiggy (talk • contribs) 16:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Not sure about that, maybe a category for Kent Wikibooks? There is also Book:Windmills in Kent that could be added to that cat. BTW, you've missed off the East Malling Stream and the Wateringbury Stream. Mjroots (talk) 21:57, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Notes on the churches in the counties of Kent at Wikisource

I have recently finished the Kent section of the book s:Notes on the churches in the counties of Kent, Sussex, and Surrey (1852) by Arthur Hussey and put the cleaned up images at Commons:Category:Notes on the churches in the counties of Kent, Sussex, and Surrey (book). The parishes are linked through to article space in WP. There is some reasonable text in there that may be useful for historical sections. billinghurst sDrewth 06:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Judd School

This article is now a featured article candidate, would be great if you could review and support/oppose as appropriate. Many thanks, Tom (talk) 16:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Kent articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Kent articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Paddlesworth - spoof newspaper etc - help needed

Today an internet spoof has been launched based on Paddlesworth a small village in Kent (see Guardian report & fake newspaper. It is likely that this will lead to disruptive edits to the village article & I would welcome the help of others in keeping an eye on it. I think wikipedia should probably have an article on the spoof (once there is enough coverage) but we need to inform readers what is real & what is spoof - I'm not sure of the best way to do this & I would appreciate any help.— Rod ^talk 10:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Templates

I created the {{Hadlow}} template yesterday. IMHO, it works well. Today, I've had a go at creating a template for Tonbridge, which can be seen at User:Mjroots/sandbox#New template 2. Opinions welcome on the proposed template, which could be turned into a {{Tonbridge}} template if there is consensus to do so. If created, I'd appreciate assistance in placing it on all relevant articles (which is not all the linked articles!). Mjroots (talk) 07:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Following a rethink about the large number of people, and the creation of List of people from Tonbridge, I've decided to create the template. Mjroots (talk) 19:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Dover

Just to let you know, a user has proposed a rename of Dover to Dover, Kent - see talk:Dover, best. Likelife (talk) 14:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

H.S. Pledge & Sons Ltd

Is there anyone in Ashford who has some time on their hands? The H.S. Pledge & Sons Ltd article needs expansion, but there is very little online about the firm. I suspect that there could be a fair amount of material available via the local library, as they were probably the second largest firm of millers in Ashford after Denne's. Mjroots (talk) 08:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

AfD

The Oast Theatre, Tonbridge article has been nominated for deletion. Mjroots (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Geoboxes

Can we ensure that all Kent location articles have geoboxes added. You can copy the example below and adapt as necessary. Mjroots (talk) 09:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Kent town and village templates

For the past few weeks, I've been working my way around the Wealden villages, creating templates for them. The vast majority of templates have a "people" section, where people connected with the place in question are linked from. Naturally, the relevant template has been added to the article on the person in question. Recently BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) has been removing these templates from various articles on people, claiming that the template is "spam". Therefore, I'm throwing this open to discussion. Should the templates be added to articles about people connected to a certain place always, sometimes, or never. Is being born in, or living in a certain place a sufficient connection? Mjroots (talk) 21:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I have not removed the templates from places, only from people whose connection to the area is not connected with their notability.

For example, someone born in Xtown may never have lived there beyond childhood, and achieved fame elsewhere. They may never have even returned to Xtown after infancy, and have had no further involvement with it until someone put up the blue plaque after their death. Even categorising such people as "from Xtown" is controversial, but while the place of birth does of course merit a mention in the article, it's quite enough to have the one link to that place. By using a template to add lots of other links to everything else in around the village, that aspect of their lives is given utterly undue priminence.

A useful analogy would be for the a University, say the University of Cambridge. We don't add {{University of Cambridge}} to everyone who studied at the University ... we just link to the Uni and/or the college, and let the reader follow down that path if they want to. -BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I had a look at Harrietsham as an example: several of the links in the template are not mentioned in the article on the village/parish, while that article mentions at least one "settlement" in the parish which is not mentioned in the "locations" part of the template (Pollhill). It seems to me that the encyclopedia would be better served by sections on "Notable people connected to Harrietsham" and "Notable buildings in Harrietsham" in the body of this article, to which all the other articles will naturally have links. These sections could include more information than the template (eg "George Frederick Nott, (1767 – 1841), an English author and a Church of England Clergyman, was rector of Harrietsham in 1813"). PamD (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

So fix it then! Pollhill added to {{Harrietsham}} and template added to Pollhill. It's difficult with the watermills, as they are more a part of the river system they are on than they are part of the location the they serve. Windmills are not such a problem. The buildings on the Harrietsham template are the three watermills, the church, railway station, and a Grade I listed building. Agree that the notable people linked with each village should really be mentioned in the articles, and in some cases this has been done. Some of the smaller hamlets could probably be merged into the villages too. For the moment, I'm concentrating on creating the various templates and adding geoboxes (see above post) to the various location articles. Currently working my way south of the North Downs escarpment towards Ashford, then I'll tackle a template for the County Town. Mjroots (talk) 18:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear: I suggest that there is no need for these templates for villages/parishes, and that the encyclopedia would be better served by expanding the core article for the location - all the other items in the template will already have a link to it, and someone looking at the page for, perhaps, a person with a connection to the place is unlikely to be interested in a template offering a catalogue of specialised articles with some association with the place, and would be better served if the link to the place led to an article containing all appropriate information. PamD (talk) 19:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

The creation of templates for every main village in Kent (and elsewhere) is in accordance with WP:NBFILL. Some templates only have a few entries, others have more. The creation of templates and expansion of articles should be seen as complementing each other rather than being in competition with each other. Mjroots (talk) 07:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:NBFILL is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Wikipedia talk:A navbox on every page shows no support for the proposal. PamD (talk) 08:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can see, PamD is right: these templates cover too small a geographical area, so there is not much which genuinely belongs in them ... so to try to pad them out, Mjroots has filled them with tenuous links, and to try to expand their deployment they were splatted onto articles with only a tenuous connection to the area. I'm glad that the splatting has stopped, but I just took a look at one of the latest templates, and I didn't like what I saw.

In {{Hollingbourne}}, I found that all four the people listed in the template had only brief and non-notable connections to the area, so I removed them (the 4 were: George Paine, John Boys, John Warner, William Colgate). Of the remaining nine items in the template, five are mills listed in a sub-section of one page; there seems to be no evidence there that any of them is individually notable, and it's quite a stretch to link them individually. Maybe one link for Mills on Hollingbourne Stream would be OK, but certainly no more than that. So I merged those links, and the resulting BHG-trimmed template has four blue links and one redlink. This doesn't need a template.

At the current state of article development in this area, there simply are not enough articles to justify a template for the little village of Hollingbourne, and it should be deleted. I suspect that the same may apply to other templates for small villages: strip out the padding, and there's little meat left. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Paine and Colgate were both born in Hollingbourne, the others were both clergy who held Hollingbourne for at time. I don't see that any on them haven't got a strong enough connection that they should be removed from the template. Mjroots (talk) 08:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

It's explained in the edit summaries on the template, but let me spell it out.

1. William Colgate was born in the village, but left for America when he was 15, so it seems utterly implausible that he played any notable part in the history of the village. In terms of his life, there seems to be nothing about his time there which is relevant to his notability: he made his name in America, as an immigrant helping run a family business. That he had emigrated from Hollingbourne (rather than some other village somewhere in Europe) is a tiny detail in the story of a life whose most notable aspect is the founding of a big American business.
2. George Paine's article doesn't even mention the village other than in the infobox. He didn't even go to school there, and none of the rest of his life appears to have involved Hollinbgourne.
3. John Boys (dean) and John Warner (bishop) were both nominally the rectors of the village for one year. That's a very short connection, and even if they were living and preaching there it would be a significant part neither in the history of the village, nor of their lives. However, the article on Boys explains that the rectorship of Hollingbourne was actually a sinecure, so these two may never have even visited the place apart from for an installation ceremony. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

First one at TFD

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 December 11#Template:Hollingbourne. As noted there and above, I suspect that many of the other similar templates should be deleted, but I'll start with the one I have checked out most thoroughly. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 December 11#Template:Tudeley-cum-Capel. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I had a similar discussion with Mjroots here. I agree that placename templates are disruptive in articles about people who simply lived in the place. Even worse, Mjroots uses the placename templates to make it appear that orphaned stubs are not orphans, which helps to protect them in AfDs. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 09:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

More villages templates at TFD

See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 December 19#Kent_villages_navboxes, where I have so far nominated for deletion {{Langley}}, {{East Sutton}}, {{Sutton Valence}}, and {{Boughton Monchelsea}}. I am trawling through the other similar templates, and expect that I will be bring more of them to TFD. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I have also nominated {{Appledore}}, {{Bearsted}}, {{Ulcombe}}, {{Benenden}}, {{Harrietsham}}, {{Brenchley}}, {{Loose}} and {{Plaxtol}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:31, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion seems to be a pointless and un-constructive activity. If templates are found to be useful by just one editor, and that helps to document this populous county then they are doing a good job. There are many jobs that need doing. These pointless TFD just waste good editors time as they are dragged from article creation into defending the template in the labrynthine world of the wiki-gnome. Give it a rest and do something useful like trying to pull all these villages to GA status. --ClemRutter (talk) 23:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

The templates do nothing at all to document the county; the county is documented by writing or expanding articles.

No editor who wants to focus their energies on creating or developing articles need waste a second of their time on these TFD discussions, because no articles will be deleted in this process.

The templates are not doing a job. We create the encyclopedia for readers rather than for editors, and readers are impeded by visual clutter such as pointless or irrelevant navboxes. (see for example the essay WP:NENAN)

All this rubbish has been created by one editor, whose judgement as to what is "useful" is bizarre. See for example hir defence of a navbox-to-nowhere, or Template:Sutton Valence, which lots of links to ppl with no significant place in the history of the village, such as Adrian Bawtree. Bawtree's connection to the village is that he got a job after the previous holder of the post went off to Sutton Valance. Or see the discussion about how this editor spammed Template:Tonbridge onto ppl who had no connection with the place apart from going to a boarding school there. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:10, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

When to create navboxes for villages?

This discussion started with a post on my talkpage. To centralise discussion per WP:MULTI, I have copied that post below, and replied here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

I note that you consider 5 valid bluelinks as sufficient to retain a navbox. At least that gives me something to work with. Re your comments that entries without a full article don't meet WP:GNG, in almost all instances you are referring to watermills. Watermills are less glamorous than windmills, and generally get less coverage. I could quite easily create hundreds of watermill stubs, each of which would just about pass GNG. My general criteria when creating articles is "can I write an article of C class or better about this?" If yes, then I will write it. If the answer is no, then I ask myself "can I create a Start class article from the info I have, and would it be likely to be expandable from sources I don't have? If the answer is yes, the I will create it. If the answer is no, then I will only create an article if I feel that the subject is sufficiently important that an article should exist (BRUTE is an example of this). Otherwise, the topic is covered as part of another article. With watermills, it is logical to place these under articles on the river that powered them.

Suggestion

If we are agreed that 5 valid bluelinks is a basepoint, how about I continue working up templates in my sandbox, and let you vet them before creating the template (if approved). Mjroots (talk) 08:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Please don't put words in my mouth. No, I do NOT agree that 5 valid bluelinks is sufficient. I was just looking for ways to group the TFD nominations, and a grouping by the number of bluelinks seemed like a good way to do it while we test where the consensus lies.

I can see some situations where a navbox might be appropriate with only five bluelinks, such as when it connects a set of very closely-related articles. For example List of UK by-elections started off with only 5 bluelinks (several of them were red at the time), but it was worthehile because it grouped very-closely-related articles, mostly splits of a list relating to the same topic. In that case it was highly probable that someone finding one of those lists would want to see the others in the series, so a navbox was justified.

Per WP:NAVBOX#Properties, "The goal is not to cram as many related articles as possible into one space. Ask yourself, does this help the reader in reading up on related topics? Take any two articles in the template. Would a reader really want to go from A to B?"

That is often not the case with these villages. Many of the entities in those navboxes are quite loosely-related, and in many instances it is unlikely that someone reading an article on one topic will want to jump to another of the articles in the navbox. As an example of that, it is highly unlikely that someone reading H. F. Stephens would want to jump to an article on Homewood School or Start Art magazine ... but that's what was presumed by your addition of {{Tenterden}} to the article on him.

In many cases, it is better to just have links in the body-text to the closely-related topics, and in some instances to have a "see also" section.

Unfortunately, you seem to be approaching this from a presumption that you should create a navbox if you can possibly find a way to justify it within the guidelines. That's the wrong way round; it is much better to consider how closely-related the topics actually are, and examine what is the best way of linking those which are sufficiently-related to justify interlinking.

The watermills is an example of that. It would make a lot of sense to use a template to interlink the watermills to each other, and possibly to have a series of templates for different groups of watermills. But it makes very little sense to use a navbox to spam multiple links to the same group of watermills onto an article related to a school, and using a template to do so gives WP:UNDUE pronminece to those unrelated topics.

Another example is the people associate with a place. Many of them have nothing in common other than that they happened to live in a particular place at some point in their lives, often for a short period. It's fine to list them in a "notable people" section of the article on a village ... but often completely irrelevant to interlink them. For example, the fact that 20th/21st-century journalist Ian Hislop lives in the same village as the 17th-century Royalist Sir John Baker is a coincidence far too trivial to mention in either article ... but with {{Sissinghurst}}, you have prominently interlinked the two. That sort of unrelated-linking doesn't help readers, it just clutters up pages with irrelevant links and makes it harder for the reader to pick out the genuinely-related links.

Rather than setting out to create new templates, I suggest that it would be much better to start by improving the village articles to ensure that they link to the other entities in their areas, and that they have lists of notable people.

I note that in the discussions on this page, nobody has supported keeping the existing templates (the closest is one editor who reckons it's a waste of energy deleting them); and so so far at TFD there is not a single "keep" !vote for any of the 40 navboxes there from anyone other ran you.

So if you really do want to create new navboxes, I suggest that you create them in a sandbox and seek a consenus here before moving them to mainspace. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

So, would you say that major towns are probably going to be able to sustain navboxes? There are still plenty of those without one, other than Borough navboxes (which perform a useful, but different, purpose). Mjroots (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you are still asking the wrong question.

I would say that a town is more likely to be able to sustain a navbox which genuinely helps the reader, because it is more likely to have a series of article on major entities relating to the town: the council, then town hall, the parliamentary constituency, the major sports teams, etc. But rather than saying "it's a town, it needs a navbox", each case should be treated on its merits. It's really not very relevant whether the place is a hamlet or a city; the question is whether there is a group of articles which are sufficiently-closely-related that a navbox will help the reader to navigate to another article closely-related to that topic. There are lots of towns which don't meet that test. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, let's look at the town navboxes I have created: - {{Tonbridge}}, {{Royal Tunbridge Wells}}, {{Cranbrook}}, {{Tenterden}}, {{Ashford, Kent}}. There are arguements as to whether or not {{Hawkhurst}} is a town or not. TWBC certainly seems to think that half of it is!. IMHO, these are all valid navboxes, and the linked articles/sections are valid links. Mjroots (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Again, it's better to examine each of those templates on its own merits, rather than making a blanket ruling. As above, the question of whether Hawkhurst is a town or not is basically irrelevant to an assessment of the utility for readers of {{Hawkhurst}}. (Kakamega is a city of 73,000 people, but there are so few articles in Category:Kakamega, Kenya that a template would be superfluous -- the city article already links to all the articles in the category). --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

Starting with {{Tenterden}}, because I am most familiar with that one, it was padded out with lots of links to people, most of whom had not connection to each other apart from the coincidence of having lived at difft times in the same town. I have removed most of those links (see edit history, where I have set out the rationale for each removal), and AFAICS the remaining ppl should be removed too.

Looking at the other links:

• Fresh Media Design is a vanity article on a company which gets no hits at all on Google News. The article should probably be deleted, but in the meantime including it in the navbox gives massively WP:UNDUE prominence to yet-another obscure digital design business.
• Leisure Painter magazine also shows no evidence of its notability, or its significance to the town. It too shoukd be removed per WP:UNDUE.

I'll comment on the rest when we have discussed those links. Once we have removed the dross, let's see what's left, and then we decide whether the template serves any useful purpose. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:10, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

If you believe any article linked on a navbox does not meet Wikipedia's standard criteria to sustain such an article, you are at liberty to PROD it, and if the PROD is challenged, nominate it at AfD. If the article is deleted, then it is removed from the navbox. This is a process which I do not have an issue with per se. Mjroots (talk) 17:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The question of whether articles such as Fresh Media Design and Leisure Painter magazine should be deleted is a separate one. (I have tagged them for notability etc, and will try to remember to PROD if there is no improvement after a few weeks). But even if they stay, including them on the template gives them WP:UNDUE prominence, and per WP:NAVBOX it is highly unlikely that anyone reading an article on Tenterden St. Michael's railway station will be assisted by the presence of a templated link to those companies ... and after all these discussions, I am disappointed that you still seem unwilling to engage with this central point about how closely-related the topics are. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, any link in a navbox is because there is a connection with the locality in question (which is the point of the navbox). There may or may not be a further connection between linked articles. Mjroots (talk) 19:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

This is the core of the whole problem: you are persistently fail to consider whether that connection between the articles is strong enough to justify a templated link between them. I'm not just deriving this from first principles; it's there in WP:NAVBOX, which says "The goal is not to cram as many related articles as possible into one space. Ask yourself, does this help the reader in reading up on related topics? Take any two articles in the template. Would a reader really want to go from A to B?"

So, per WP:NAVBOX, how likely is it that a reader of Tenterden St. Michael's railway station will want to go directly to Fresh Media Design? Your creation of the template has established that link, so please explain why you think it is likely to assist a reader? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll give you a better example - {{Lamberhurst}}. People looking at the template will see Denis Thatcher there. They may wonder if it is the Denis Thatcher who was married to Margaret Thatcher and click on the link to find the connection with Lamberhurst. Having found that it is him, and that he lived in Lamberhurst at the time he was married to Margaret, they may well wonder why Margaret Thatcher isn't on the template too (it was, but BHG removed it). Mjroots (talk) 05:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Very bad example.

Firstly, readers don't read templates, they read articles.

Secondly, you still misunderstand the purpose of a navbox. Per WP:NAVBOX, "goal is not to cram as many related articles as possible into one space" ... instead the test is "does this help the reader in reading up on related topics? Take any two articles in the template. Would a reader really want to go from A to B?"

Denis Thatcher is already multiply linked to Margaret Thatcher, and vice versa, so there is no need for the template to link those two articles. If Lamberhurst is in relevant to either article, then link to Lamberhurst from that article, and if either or both of them are counted as notable residents of Lamberhurst, list them in the "notable residents" section of that article. (However, note that according to the article on Denis, they also owned a house in Chelsea at the same time, so it's unclear to what extent if any they ever lived in Lamberhusrt).

The only purpose of the template is to link them directly to every article related to the village. Why do you want to spam the Thatchers bios with links to the mills in the area, when their connection to the area receives such scant coverage in their biogs? (It isn't even mentioned in Margaret Thatcher). That's simply giving WP:UNDUE weight to a minor item in their lives.

Given a) the low significance attached the Lamberhurst in both the biogs, and b) the fact that it was at the time one of two homes they used, I have removed Denis from {{Lamberhurst}}. That also resolves your concern. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposal

Navboxes may be created for localities below town status where there are bluelinks to five stand-alone articles connected with the locality. New templates to be proposed here and consensus gained before creation. Towns and cities shall be deemed capable of supporting a navbox in all cases. Mjroots (talk) 16:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose all of this premature proposal, except the suggestion that "new templates to be proposed here and consensus gained before creation", which is needed to avoided any repetition of the flood of uselssness, such as the 3 navboxes-to-nowhere.
The rest of this is at best superfluous (if prior consensus is sought in each case, there's no need for a hard-and-fast rule) ... but more importantly it completely misses the principles set out at WP:NAVBOX. The issue is not the "status" of a place, but the number of closely-related articles. Also, a numerical test of links is insufficient; what matters is how closely-related those links are.
Finally, this proposal has been made when a newly-created broader discussion was underway above, and creating this new sub-section risks fragmenting that ongoing discussion. I suggest that this proposal should be withdrawn for now. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer to see what other editors not involved in this dispute have to say first. Let's see if a consensus emerges. Mjroots (talk) 16:49, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

If you are genuinely looking for a consensus, it would be much better not to fragment the discussion, and not to place a proposal on the table while the issues are still being discussed in broader terms. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Notice of intent

I intend to open a RFC on the issue of these navboxes in the next few days in order to get input from the wider Wikipedia community. As this is something that could be applied to locations worldwide, suggestions as to a suitable venue / suitable publicity etc would be welcome. Mjroots (talk) 07:25, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

If you do intend to open an RFC, then please start by reading WP:RFC, and note in particular the bolded requirement to describe the dispute neutrally. It would be an abuse of the RFC process for you describe the dispute in the thoroughly misleadingly way in you misused the Administrators' noticeboard to waste your time and everybody else's (in the words of the uninvolved admin who closed that thread). I hope that you will also refrain from repeating the falsehoods about other editors which you have so far done in at least three venues in relation to this issue.

Per WP:RFC, it would be a good idea to try to work collabaratively on a neutral summary of the issue, to ensure that RFC remains focused on the policy/content issue rather than being diverted into questions of process.

The major point of contention relates to the inclusion in these village templates of biographies, because you are not persuaded by the fact that at least four editors have opposed your blanket inclusion of biographies in these templates. That is the consensus so far, and it is supported by WP:EMBED#Related_topics_.28navigational_lists.29. Rather than try to circumvent that limited consensus by pushing your desire for a simple numerical threshold, it would be much better to start by examining the narrower question which led to this disagreement, and where you reject the consensus of views expressed on this page.

One possible venue for that discussion might be WT:NAV, where similar issues have already been discussed. In keeping the RFC neutral, you will obviously want to draw attention to the existing guidance in the MoS at WP:EMBED, which has already been discussed at WT:NAV#Guideline_for_when_to_use and WT:NAV#Constraint_on_placement. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:14, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

New neighbours

A new wikiproject has been created covering our neighbouring county, Essex. See WP:ESSEX for the project page and WT:ESSEX for the discussion page. Mjroots (talk) 14:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

New User edits Trosley Country Park and is savaged : WP:BITE

We have a new user User:DavidAnstiss who has been adding material to some country park pages including a new one for Trosley. As can be expected, he has made a few mistakes... --So within minutes he was savaged. I have put this comment on the aggressors site

I more than a little annoyed by your carnivorous behavior to the first new user in Kent to show any interest in the environment. WP:BITE . It would be more helpful to have tagged the article with Trosley Country Park {{Kent-geo-stub}} and introduced him to Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent. Yes there are several copyvios- but Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent can take them out- it is almost certain that the 2003 website would be considered a government website in the US and it would be dubious whether copyright would apply! However I don't expect a new user, in his first week of editing would understand that, hence WP:BITE. An apology on his user page would help.

I am in dialog with this editor now so hopefully something can be resolved.

Can members look at his edits- and see what needs to strengthened or changed.

--ClemRutter (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Cheriton

I've done a driveby on Cheriton, Kent, it still needs a fair bit of work but at least it's now pointing in the right direction. If anyone fancies it, taking it to WP:GA would make a nice little project - enough there to be interesting, but not unmanageable. I've got lots of relevant photos, but they'll have to wait just for the moment - just like all the others I've been taking. I've been making reasonable progress in my project to take photos of geotagged articles without one, I've now pretty much done all of them east of a line between Hythe and Canterbury, but I keep getting distracted by improving the articles themselves rather than uploading the pics - doing this makes you 'really aware of inaccurate coordinates for instance! I've even started doing photos for articles which currently just have Geograph pics, as they tend to be a)not great quality (no more than 640x480 from what I can tell) and b)not the most flattering, it's amazing how much better places look when it's sunny... Le Deluge (talk) 16:00, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Start class is a reasonable assessment, possibly could go to C class but a severe lack of referencing prevents it going higher atm. Mjroots2 (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh I wasn't claiming it was GA at the moment, just that it would be a relatively easy one to take up to that standard compared to the average dog's dinner of a geopgraphical article... <g> It's a lot of work pulling in all the related articles and knocking it into the basic structure of WP:UKTOWNS, even if that effort doesn't particularly get reflected in the assessment. In particular having the related articles linked in means that there may be a lot of refs that can be borrowed "for free". I also cleaned up Faversham a bit some time ago although that was in a lot better shape to start with - but I really ought to spend more of my Wiki time getting some of my photos cleaned up and uploaded... Le Deluge (talk) 11:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

New Kent template:

{{Small-village-of-about-1,000-inhabitants-in-Kent-stub}} is at TfD. PamD (talk) 20:56, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Article alerts

Wikipedia:WikiProject Kent/Article alerts has been created; generating Article alerts for this WikiProject. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

w:fr:Discussion catégorie:Hameau du Kent/Suppression

Sorry for my poor English.

Can you read w:fr:Discussion catégorie:Hameau du Kent/Suppression about deletion of w:fr:Catégorie:Hameau du Kent and its content (16 entries). Nota bene : w:fr:Catégorie:Hameau du Kent = Category:Hamlets in Kent ...

You can write in English in w:fr:Discussion catégorie:Hameau du Kent/Suppression.

Thank you.

129.102.254.253 (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

My thoughts are that what fr.wiki and what en.wiki do are separate things. What is desirable on one wiki may not necessarily be desirable on the other. We should allow the French to run their wiki in their way. Mjroots (talk) 15:41, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Resources

I've started a resources page at WP:KENT/R. Feel free to expand, organise and generally improve the page. Mjroots (talk) 08:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Romney Marsh is said to be the homeplace of many writers, including Joseph Conrad, Stephen Crane etc... It seems to me that you should also mention Ford Madox Ford who first settled in the Romney Marsh in the summer of 1894. There he met Conrad who became his collaborator for ten years or so. After staying five years in the area (Bonnington) he wrote a historical book called "The Cinque Ports". Later he portrayed Meary Walker and her neighbours, all inhabitants of the Romney Marsh, in "Women and Men". I am no specialist myself, but you can refer to the biography of Ford Madox Ford written by Max Saunders, "Ford Madox Ford : A Dual Life" Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.235.196.91 (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hasted-bot

I see bots doing auto corrections. Cannot a bot be devised which inserts links to the relevant page of Hasted ( http://www.british-history.ac.uk/place.aspx?gid=99&region=2).Gdcox (talk) 17:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The place to talk to bot makers is Wikipedia:Bot requests - but you'd have to be a lot more specific about exactly what you want. How would a bot know what page of Hasted is relevant? Or are you talking about a template that would expand say {{Hasted|4|191}} into a full {{cite}} template linking to http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=53803 ? Trouble with that is that BHO doesn't always map 1 page to a page of HTML, so that could get tricky, I'm not sure if the guys over at Wikipedia:Requested templates could do something. Or are you talking about adding a link to the first page of the relevant section of Halsted to the Further Reading section of articles? In which case it might not be worth the time to create a bot to work out a) the various formats for naming town articles - Faversham is easy, but you wouldn't want to add a Further Reading section to the Ashford disambiguation page and b) which page of potentially many in Hasted you actually want to refer to. Instead you might be better off with a semi-automatic process, feeding categories such as Category:Villages in Kent into WP:AWB. If you can be a bit more precise about what you want, then people should be able to help you. Le Deluge (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I use ref name=hasted cite journal |last=Hasted |first=Edward |date=1800 |title=Parishes |url=http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=62986 |journal=The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent |publisher=Institute of Historical Research |volume=6 |pages=467-481 |accessdate=8 February 2014 as a template to add all my hasted references and then copy and paste from one article to another and then edit to suit. But a bot would not work due to the amount of unneeded stuff in Hasted. Re;Badlesmere, Kent mention is a page worth of Hasted notes but only used about 10 lines of decent wiki notable notes.DavidAnstiss (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam

The newspaper (and other stuff) archive Highbeam are generously offering up to 1000 free accounts for their service to Wikipedians with more than 1000 edits to their name. No catch, you just sign up by Easter Monday at Wikipedia:HighBeam.Le Deluge (talk) 13:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Unreferenced Kent-related articles

The Category:Unreferenced Kent-related articles seems to be out of date, containing many articles that have references. Perhaps a check and cleanup may be needed? And doesn't this cat need to be hidden, like other maintenance cats? Fram (talk) 07:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The 1580 mayor of Faversham up for deletion

• Read all about it! Poeticbent talk 05:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Tributaries of the River Rother, East Sussex

Greetings. I am not part of your project, but have been working on the River Rother article, which is. I have taken the liberty of removing the unref=yes tag from the Kent Project banner, since I have expanded it by a factor of nine, and everything is now referenced. I still have quite a bit more to do, but I am stuggling to find the names of most of the tributaries, or sources for such information, and wondered if anyone here might be able to suggest anything. Bob1960evens (talk) 18:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Please help get Kent ready for the start of the Wiki Loves Monuments competition on 1st September

This September the UK is taking part for the first time in the international photography competition Wiki Loves Monuments. Participants will be invited to submit pictures of listed buildings of significant importance (grades I or grade II*), as recorded by English Heritage. The main external website for competitors can be found here, and you can leave a message there if you have queries about competing. Do please join in, and let people in your local area know of this excellent way in which both existing and new Wiki users can help improve the encyclopaedia by contributing photographs of local listed structures. What about organizing a local Wikimeet to attract new people?

In preparation for the start of the competition on 1st September there is still quite a lot of work to do, and we would like to ask for the help of members of this wikiproject. Your local and expert knowledge will be invaluable in ensuring that the lists of eligible buildings are up to date and correctly formatted. If you look at Listed buildings in the United Kingdom you will see how many structures are included. If you then follow the link to Listed buildings in England, you can get to the detailed lists for your area. Alternatively have a look at the WLM planning table. Can you help to ensure that the lists for your area are up to date and well presented?

Some of the lists have been semi-automatically generated from data provided by English Heritage. These use pre formatted templates (eg EH header) which will make it much easier for competition participants to upload their photographs to Commons as an automated process. Please don't change the template structure, as we need to ensure that the templates are properly compatible with the WLM standards that are in use worldwide. The format will allow a bot automatically to collect the information and to put it into the international Monuments Database.

The data still needs the attention of local editors:

• The "title" may need wikilinking to a suitable article name (whether we currently have that article or not). If there are several buildings in one street all of the wikilinks point at an article about the street; however each entry has a separate line in the list.
• The "location" column looks and sorts better if just the parish or town is included (& wikilinked).
• The "date completed" column sometimes has eg "C19" for 19th century, and "C1850" for c. 1850 when the date is uncertain - these need to be corrected manually.
• The "grid ref & lat & long" (which is occasionally missing) may be given to 8 characters — only 6 (grid ref) or 5 (lat & long) are really needed.
• Clicking on the "list entry number" should take you to the data sheet for that entry on the English Heritage database which can be checked if needed for details.
• The image column should have a picture added if we already have a suitable image on Commons. (N.B. if you are going to be taking photos yourself for inclusion in the competition don't upload them until September)
• References may be added according to normal WP practice.

For further information, please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom.

If you have any queries, please post them not below but on the Organizers' help page on Commons.

Anything you can do to help improve these lists will be much appreciated. The final deadline for cleaning up is 31st August.

--MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Fluted pillar box in Gravesend

There is a rare example of an early type of Victorian pillar box in Gravesend: an 1850s fluted style post box in Norfolk Road near the junction with St John's Road. It is a Grade II listed building. Wikimedia has photos of better-known examples in Malvern, Warwick and elsewhere, but seems to lack a picture of this example in Gravesend. Please will someone photograph it and donate the image(s) to Wikimedia? Thanks, Motacilla (talk) 01:01, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

You mean this one ! http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/en-356396-pillar-box-at-the-junction-of-norfolk-ro If I have some time this winter - I will try to get a photo DavidAnstiss (talk) 22:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Portal:Kent nominated for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Kent. Bencherlite^Talk 16:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Importance ratings

I noticed that there appears (in my view) to be some inconsistencies in importance ratings. For example, Wat Tyler, a resident of Kent that led the Peasants' Revolt (which is rated Top importance by wikiproject England), has been rated of low importance by us. Meanwhile, Jade's Crossing which, with all sentiment removed, is simply a modern footbridge over a road, is rated as mid-importance. In my opinion, one or both of these need reassessing as one is of lasting historical and national significance and one isn't, but their current relative ratings don't reflect that. danno_uk 22:00, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to reassess them, just give a rationale in your edit summary. Mjroots (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

It's worth remembering that the ratings are not about what "is of lasting historical and national significance". Rather than "importance", it would be better to follow the model of {{WP:BIO]] in calling it a "priority" for that particular WikiProject to work on. There will be articles where a local WP has a lot to offer, and ones where it doesn't - and personally I think people tend to over-tag biographies in particular when the only connection is birth/childhood which is obviously important for the person but doesn't yield much by way of WP:RS for the local project to contribute. Obviously Kent-based Wikipedians are uniquely placed to access resources about Dickens or Turner for example, but I'd guess that in the case of Wat Tyler there won't be much of a Kent angle, the medieval historians will be best-placed to access the sources. If WP:MA can take the lead there, then Kent's resources are better targeted at articles that won't attract much effort from elsewhere, like North Kent Marshes or the various town/borough articles. It's quite normal for articles to represent different priorities for different WikiProjects - for instance another writer that could be claimed by Kent is Ian Fleming - a blue plaque at Pett's Bottom claims (although it's disputed) that he wrote You Only Live Twice there, and the original Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was made in Canterbury. But you'd be pushed to say that this Project had much to contribute to his article, which is a Top priority for the James Bond project, of mid importance to the Literature project, and Low importance to WP Jamaica.

It's actually surprising how closely people's assessments of priority follow the pageviews of an article - Lows are generally <300/month, Mids between 300 and 3000/month, and Highs over 3000/month. Obviously pop culture articles get more than their fair share, and "overview" articles deserve more work than their views would suggest, but it's a pretty good guide give or take one level of priority. I'm a big fan of letting the readers set the priorities of editors, at least as far as the article's "lead" WikiProject is concerned. Wat gets 6k/month with the odd spike, so is obviously of High priority to the History projects, but I think it's reasonable to tweak that down one to Mid priority for secondary projects like Kent. Perhaps surprisingly, Jade's Crossing is on the borderline of 300 views/month, and growing despite the fact that it's not really been edited since November. Like you I don't really understand why it should be so popular, but we have to accept that people are interested in the subject no matter how trivial we might think it, so I'd give it the benefit of the doubt as a Mid for the moment.FlagSteward (talk) 12:19, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

(edit - I assumed that the History Projects would be on Wat but they weren't, I've now done that and tweaked him to Mid for Kent. Also WP:WPBIO only sets priority at the workgroup level which he wasn't tagged for - hopefully that all makes things look a bit more logical.FlagSteward (talk) 12:30, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks for your responses, very interesting. danno_uk 23:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Wormshill on the main page

I understand that Wormshill, an article I slaved over about 6 years go to get to FA! will be featuring on the main page on 30 March (see Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 30, 2014). Quite chuffed. Dick G (talk) 10:12, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

That's great news. Mjroots (talk) 13:06, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

For some reason I thought that had already been FAed. I do remember reading it some time ago and becoming green with envy as it made most of my contributions seem very pale in comparison. Well deserved. danno_uk 23:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Highest Point in Kent

I have re-created and expanded the article on Betsom's Hill, it was only when I had done some work on it that I noticed it was on your 'things to do' list. Curiously, when I looked at the Geography of Kent article, I saw that it declared that Ide Hill was the highest point - am I right in thinking this needs to be changed ? --Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Looking at the OS map, Ide Hill is 216m rather than (the phonetically similar) 260m as claimed by the Geography article, but Ide Hill is the highest village/church in the county as opposed to highest point. Also worth noting that the OS map shows a 245m contour on both Toys Hill and Betsom's Hill, it seems to be customary when the high point is on the border to also mention the highest free-standing hill. Le Deluge (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply Le Deluge, looking at this List of Kent Hills it shows Betsom's followed by Toys Hill and then Wrotham Hill, strictly as highest points. I will alter the Geography article to confirm the highest point, and put Ide hill as the highest village church - unless there are any better suggestions -- Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Joyce Green

Does anybody know anything about Joyce Green, Kent. It once had a Edwardian fever hospital [1] and a First World War fighter airfield [2], but now seems to have been swallowed up by the town of Dartford. Is it still a distinct entity and is there enough for a small article or a paragraph in the Dartford page? Alansplodge (talk) 17:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Joyce Green should be able to sustain an article, as should the Joyce Green Hospital. The airfield could possibly sustain an article too. Mjroots (talk) 05:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Joyce Green Hospital would be an interesting article but the rest of the area is now part of the 'Bridge' development. DavidAnstiss (talk) 10:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Joyce Green on the 1940 OS map, and the current one. Mjroots (talk) 15:23, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I can see Joyce Green in 1923 (note the 1924 Watling Street improvement), and the hospital in the 1950s. A number of hits for Joyce Green in the London Gazette. Perhaps Joyce Green Hospital would be an easier task to get sources, but the place definitely existed and so should an article. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Yes, an article on the JGH would be worth having. For some background to the formation of the hospital see HMS Atlas (1860), PS Castalia and HMS Endymion (1865). Mjroots (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

And lo, the Joyce Green Hospital redlink became blue. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:55, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Slade Green

River Darent separated the airdrome at Joyce Green from the Thames Ammunition Works at Slade Green. Weapons were made on the western side, an airdrome operated on the eastern side, and I think some kind of early air-to-surface munition was tested in the river. One light railway served the secure munition works on the western side, and another light railway connected parts of Joyce Green hospital - were there any physical, political, or economic connections behind these industrial programmes? Another shared industry may have been paper mills along the banks of the River Darent.

Does the Slade Green article belong in both WP London and WP Kent? I understand this is for the "ceremonial" county of Kent, but if WP Kent is post-1997 only then why would you include currently defunct or demolished areas such as Joyce Green?

Yes, the Slade Green article falls under the remit of WP:Kent as it was formerly within the county. This WP covers all locations formerly in Kent but now in London. Mjroots (talk) 21:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Request for inclusion raised. Someone needs to change the description of WP:Kent from "ceremonial county" to "traditional county". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.16.231 (talk) 06:21, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

 Done, project scope amended to clarify we also cover those places formerly within Kent. Please do not remove your signature from posts. Mjroots (talk) 14:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:Kent articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 03:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

@Iceblock: - I've got this WP watchlisted. Post here if there's any update. Mjroots (talk) 13:06, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Old maps and views of the South-East

As you might have seen in the Signpost last week, there's currently a drive to go through the million 19th century images released by the British Library last year, and identify all the maps, with a view to their being georeferenced by BL volunteers, and then uploaded to Commons early next year. After the first week, over eight thousand new maps have been identified, with 40% of the target books looked at -- see the status page for the latest figures, and more information.

A part that may specifically interest this project is

c:Commons:British Library/Mechanical Curator collection/Synoptic index/England - South East

which currently shows pink templated links for 309 Flickr book pages still to be looked at. (Though there are lots of other parts of England, and indeed of the world, still to be looked through as well).

Any help looking through these would be very much appreciated -- as well as the maps (and ground plans) for tagging, you may well also find other interesting or useful non-map views that may be worth considering or uploading for articles on Kent and elsewhere in the South-East. (If uploading, please use the ingestion template described here, which sets up some appropriate image templates and categories).

Thanks, Jheald (talk) 21:32, 8 November 2014 (UTC)