Talk:List of ecclesiastical parishes in the Diocese of Bath and Wells

@Rodw:, @Rjm at sleepers: The table on this page is a scrape from current church data, and it should list every parish in the Diocese of Bath and Wells. I've chosen this diocese simply because its the first alphabetically, but it also has the benefit of covering areas that are covered by CPs and at least one city that doesn't have any CPs (Bath). And also Rodw, I know you care about Somerset articles :)

My intent here is to see if a proper list is viable (in its own article, or within articles on the larger units), to determine which EPs have related articles, and in the longer run see if all the redlinks could be articles. Help with wikification would be appreciated, as well as any comments on concept.

I want to contact the Church to see if I can use the data fully. There is a non-commercial restriction on the data, which would prevent map creation.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. but as discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#What kind of "parish"? Most of the current articles in Somerset (which is the area I know a bit about) are about civil parishes. I'm not sure EPs will have enough RS discussing them to make them notable (as ONS data, local authorities etc all use CP). Are you inviting us to edit User:Nilfanion/EP as I don't normally edit other peoples sub pages/sandboxes? Is district local council - in this case Bath and North East Somerset a unitary authority + districts of Somerset County Council what should go in the "District" column? What action should be taken where the CP & EP are not contiguos (ie an EP may be in more than one CP or vice versa). The city of Bath does not have civil parishes. I would have a separate column for a link to the Anglican parish church (many in Somerset have articles see Category:Churches in Somerset.— Rod ^talk 08:11, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I know this is in my user space, but I don't think this is suitable for a live article at present - feel free to edit as you would an article in mainspace. This might be the germ of an article titled List of ecclesiastical parishes in Somerset? The question to pretty much all of your questions is "I'm not sure", but I agree the parish church should be linked in any final article. Any chapels of ease would be worth recording as well.

The main thing I want to work on is to get the mapping from EP to CP(s) - I have access to the relevant GIS data so can rattle that off myself. If Foo EP is mostly the same as Foo CP, but also includes a bit of Bar CP, I want to record that. I think that level of detail should guide us on what is actually pertinent to WP.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (will act on above) One list would be too long

If you are hapopy I will drop my working draft onto your page for further work. It is a long way from done but I have identified some issues:

• I would get rid of the 1st column & make this clear in the title/lead
• Sometimes it is unclear which civil parish to use for an area (there may be several CP in one EP or seveal EP in one CP)
• Could/should we add a pic of the church and or a map of the EP (more your expertise than mine)?

Still working/thinking.— Rod ^talk 17:26, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree this will probably need to be split as its too long, and I think that split should follow ecclesiastical lines (ie Ecclesiastical parishes in the Archdeaconry of Wells). I suppose before we get to the parishes, we should work down the CofE's hierarchy. Dioceses are definitely notable. Are archdeaconries? Deaneries? Benefices? I'm going to trawl through the map data to work out the variations.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:33, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Maps and pics might be a good idea, but I wouldn't worry about them at this point. A developed article probably should have plenty of links to achurchnearyou.com .--Nilfanion (talk) 17:35, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)::::I think the level of notability depends on RS. I'm not aware of a guideline on the notability of the different units (perhaps you should draft one). I have a memory of one Somerset benefice having an article & I will find it as I work through the list (but can't remember off the top of my head). Can you take a look at the "?"s & bold text - whatever list you got this from doesn't always include the full name of the benefice (too many characters for whatever list). Would you like me to keep working my way down?— Rod ^talk 17:39, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

The data is from the CofE (there's a webmap here). There is obviously a character limit going on. I've added section headings so we can reduce edit conflicts. feel free to keep going? :)--Nilfanion (talk) 17:45, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

This from A Church Near you gives more info & a way into the hierarchy.— Rod ^talk 17:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

If you keep chopping them into smaller sections, I will come back later & try to do some more along the lines I've been doing. Can we remove column 1?— Rod ^talk 17:55, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I will remove cols 1-3 in the deanery sections.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:00, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

OK gone through Bath now. I know that's not a typical area, but it seems rare for the EP and CP to match each other. I've had a scan round other areas and that's typical.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Churches

The churches should definitely be included, but I'm not sure about presentation. To look at Three Saints (Axbridge) as an example, as there are two problems with that entry: It isn't clear which of the 3 churches is in which village, and the word church is repeated 3 times. I'd said the word "church" doesn't need to be mentioned at all in the specific entry, as the column says its "parish church"

That could be presented better by just stating the dedication of the church and the village (or vice versa). Phrasing "St Michael, Brent Knoll", "Brent Knoll: St Michael" or similar would work. That also handles cases where there isn't an obvious dedication: Combe Hay's church would just say "Combe Hay". Looking to the future when the village is named for the saint, just say it once (a common situation in Cornwall).

There's a related issue with church article names. In general, a church dedicated to St X is called "Church of St X" in documents like central CofE data and any Historic England listings. However, that church is typically "St X's" to the church itself, the press and its community. IMO that's a classic split between common and official name.--Nilfanion (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I can go with "Dedication, village" as a format, but do we include redundant ones or those where there are two or more in an EP? There are plenty where the saint is part of the village name eg Stoke St Michael, Seavington St Mary & Seavington St Michael etc. I don't think we will solve the church naming issue which has been around for years - if you want to change thousands to either the official name or the common name I would suggest putting your protective clothing on first. I intend to go back and change the black links to church names, where we do not have an article yet, to red links - based on the titles used as links on sublists of Grade I listed buildings in Somerset & Grade II* listed buildings in Somerset (which I'm currently working on (but it takes a while). Where I have put ?? can you check please.— Rod ^talk 20:46, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Would it be worth bringing User:Peter I. Vardy into this dicussion as he knows more about church names etc than I ever will?— Rod ^talk 21:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree the church naming is a perennial issue and I don't particularly care about it (beyond a preference to follow general guidance). When it comes to tables like this it should be consistent even if article titles aren't. The multiple churches in a parish situation could be complex. Historically, there would have been one parish church in a parish. However with mergers like Three Saints, all 3 of those churches would have been parish churches in their own right. I think that ties our hands and we have to include all of them, I can't see how we could pick just one. It might be we change the column header from "parish church" to "church".

I'll get to the ones you have queried before Monday. I've also contacted the church regarding maps. One question at this point - what do you think about EPs like [1]? For the most part the EP resembles the CP, but there are there's a bunch of exclaves.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

The latest one I've worked on "Shepton Mallet" just has saint names - is that better? Agree the multiple churches in one EP is difficult & what about where there is no longer any working church (maybe I'm just not finding them)? exclaves will be complex - but you are the map expert. I can't get the map link you sent to look at wells but try - St Cuthbert Out (also claled Wells St Cuthbert Out) & Wells St Cuthbert In, Wells St Andrew (or St Andrew Liberty). I get confused and I know the area (and a bit of the history) - how do we present that lot to readers?— Rod ^talk 21:30, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah I think that's cleaner. The last question is easiest: I think we will need maps to present areas like Bath or Wells. We might be better off dropping the text descriptions of CPs, as some of the ones I've added are hopelessly complex. Just saying the main settlements and working out how to show it graphically makes more sense.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

That would ba lot of maps which would need to be small - would it be better to add a link to your example search on A Church Near you? also we should be providing a citation at least for each EP - would the Church near You site be the best one & which clolumn should the ref link go in?— Rod ^talk 21:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

The maps would be in the section, not the table. Maybe for individual benefices or more likely for deaneries. I agree cites are needed, and ACNY would be sensible. You have far more experience at prepping a good list so I'd defer to you on where to place it.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

OK so if the maps are outside the table can I argue for thumbnails of the churches? I will look at references etc again tomorrow.— Rod ^talk 22:51, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Yep, I'd want photos in the table not maps. One final thought here, maybe this should be re-tasked to the churches instead of the parishes, as in 1 row for each church? That resolves many of the problems, and means most rows will correspond to notable subjects. The benefit of this structure over the more standard church-in-county type list is it then matches the hierarchy of the church.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I will play with photos & references later but I would keep it to one entry per EP. We already have list of civil parishes (see for example List of civil parishes in Somerset) and the listed building examples I've linked to but what this brings is something different. I wonder if we should also include key staff at least at archdeacon level - maybe not vicars as they change on a fairly regular basis.— Rod ^talk 07:35, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Can you take a look at what I've been doing with Chew Magna & tell me if you like it before I go any further?— Rod ^talk 11:02, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Chew Magna looks fine to me. Biggest issue for me really is the choice of church when there's more than one in the parish - especially when the name doesn't give any indication of precedence. I think some thought needs to be put into the CP information.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

OK I've had a go at Deanery of Bath giving the pics captions (pics still need to be centrered) & putting each CP on one line. Could you take a look so we can agree a final format before I go any further with this?— Rod ^talk 20:50, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

The bits of the table you've worked on looks fine with me. Biggest problem I have with that table is the CP info for Bath. I know the city is unparished, but maybe something more precise ("North" or "Central") would be better? The bit I'm least happy with in the section is the text intro, as I don't think a description of Bath is relevant. I think that should be more about the Deanery - When was it created? Who is the Dean? How many churches? What is its geographic extent?--Nilfanion (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Lost the intro - I don't have info on the specific Deanery. Pics centred. I will duplicate the tabel format as I move down but will not be able to do much for a few days - family stuff. I am looking forward to your maps & trying to work out where they are going to go?— Rod ^talk 21:45, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Unattached

What is the "Unattached" section for? I have removed several redundent or closed churches as I went through - should I have put them here - I am unclear what the criteria re for inclusion in this section or how they should be presented?— Rod ^talk 21:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

I know its titled "Closed churches, Extra parochial places etc", but I do not think it actually contains any closed churches. The parish associated with a closed church would just be merged into a different parish (or parishes), as I can't see the CofE leaving any location without an active parish church for long. As the list is about the current EPs I wouldn't worry about defunct ones.

As for the three areas listed as unattached, they are all included for differing reasons.

1. Wells Cathedral itself is within an extra-parochial place and is not attached to any parish, benefice or deanery. Bristol, Exeter and Truro Cathedrals are similar as they are not in any deanery (although they are technically parish churches). That means the Cathedral needs inclusion in a separate section.
2. St Mary's, Walton-in-Gordano looks to be a data anomaly. In 2016 this was a single-church benefice. That benefice appears to have been merged into the larger one covering East Clevedon, so that parish is now in that benefice. We can move it to the relevant deanery (Portishead).
3. The Lands Commons to Parish of North Curry, West Hatch and Stoke St Gregory. It is split between the 3 parishes (which are in 2 different deaneries). It appears to be the only area in the diocese without a church, and it doesn't actually have any buildings in it - it roughly covers the section of West Sedge Moor between the Parrett and the road SE of North Curry and is entirely fields. Lands Commons to Parishes are rare. For lands common to civil parishes, even if they are unpopulated there will still be civil functions so it makes sense to treat them as an independent CP. However, the CofE will have absolutely nothing to do with that area so we could omit it entirely from the EP list.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanations. Can I leave you to sort this bit & if they are to remain in an unattached section include a clearer explanation - it might even be better to do this as text.— Rod ^talk 08:55, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Will do. I think it would be good to try for DYK, so after I've finished the CP linkage I'll look to work on the text. For instance, this Contacts list names the majority of the deans.--Nilfanion (talk) 18:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

OK I think I've gone about as far as I can with this & happy for you to move it to article space when you are ready. I think a lot of the red links need to go blue before FLC become sa possibility - a job for 2018.— Rod ^talk 18:39, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Maps

I will delay any map generation until the Church has gotten back to me. The maps I'd like to generate are:

1. A diocese-level map showing archdeacon & deanery boundaries
2. A set of deanery-level maps, showing EPs. I think it will make sense to remove exclaves when they are just fields.

I'm not sure if the maps should show the relationship between civil and ecclesiastical boundaries. It might be useful to show the parts of Somerset not in Bath & Wells, and the parts of Bath & Wells not in Somerset...--Nilfanion (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I'll happily bow to your expertise on maps - have too many boundaries can get confusing though. Where are you intending the maps to go?— Rod ^talk 18:40, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm thinking lead section and alongside the intro text to each section. I agree too many boundaries get confusing, I think its important to show the EPs and not get bogged down in cartographic trivia. This is "list of EPs in Bath and Wells" not "comparison of EPs and CPs in Somerset".--Nilfanion (talk) 18:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

OK that is sort of what I was thinking - it would be nice to have a bit more text for the lead of each section so there is not too much whitespace.— Rod ^talk 18:52, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

The church has given me a negative response on usage - I'm not that surprised to be honest. I'll work out if there's any value to pursuing further or not; and finalise this article ready for move to mainspace.--Nilfanion (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

That is a shame - I'm not sure exactly what you were asking for but may reflect many organisations who haven't got their head around "open...". Let me know when you move it. Is it going to be called List of ecclesiastical parishes in the Diocese of Bath and Wells?— Rod ^talk 18:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Basically "Can I use your data to create maps (that can be used on WP)?" And yes that's the obvious title. @Rodw: Now live. I'll see how this one goes, before considering ones for the other dioceses.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Rodw:Nilfanion (talk) 21:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Possible FLC nomination and width of tables

What else would be needed to ensure this meets the featured list criteria? On my screen (I use wide monitors) some of the tables (eg Deaneries of Locking & Midsomer Norton) do not go fully across the screen - would it be worth setting their width to 100% (or making some others 95% or whatever)?— Rod ^talk 09:33, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Comparing to the CP list, the point you raise about table widths is obvious. I can't think of anything else in terms of the criteria. My biggest concern is a relative lack of links from related articles.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I've equalised the table widths. I think there are enough links in but could add a see also to all of the churches listed (that have articles) if you think that would help. I've now turned red links blue for nearly all Grade II* listed, most of those that are left are Grade II so could have articles (as parish churches) but the general consensus is Grade I listed buildings are definitely notable, G II* probably notable & G II depends on individual circumstances.— Rod ^talk 10:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I meant links from, not to, related articles: As it stands this page is all but an orphan (with 2 links only). I agree that sounds like a reasonable rule of thumb regarding the churches.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:35, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I think you will now find there are several hundred "links from". I also noticed going through there are still a few "?" where I would appreciate you taking a looking and see if you can work out what is going on with that EP & whether some churches should be included.— Rod ^talk 21:12, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm starting to slog through and pick up the remaning churches now (combination of real-life busy and working out how to parse the data). I've put minimal ACNY links in. The number of churches and parishes included the tables should match the totals for the diocese, as shown by the infobox. If they don't match, and the difference isn't explained, that's an obvious data gap that should be picked up at FLC.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Rodw: I've gone through the Bath archdeaconry and matched it up to the ACNY listings. I'll do the other areas over weekend, and once that's done I'll improve the linkage to same standard as the rest. I'm not sure about closed churches, like those held by the Church Conservation Trust - include or no? They have no current function in current CofE structure, but they certainly had historical relevance. Excluding them gives an easy to complete closed list, including might be more thorough but it will be much harder to capture everything.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks - Having thought a bit more about it, I think the closed churches should be excluded. There already have articles as listed buildings &/or List of churches preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust in Southwest England and I agree are no longer part of CoE structures.— Rod ^talk 07:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Number of parishes

The statement in the intro that there are 477 parishes is referenced to a large website. From there I downloaded Parish_CensusDetail_18Jan2018.xlsx (updated 18 January 2018) via https://www.churchofengland.org/more/policy-and-thinking/research-and-statistics/resources-publications-and-data which lists 463 in this diocese. Can the source of the 477 be added? Wire723 (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
By my reckoning there are 465 in the current revision of the article (this count includes the extra-parochial place, which is in the mentioned spreadsheet). Wire723 (talk) 14:02, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

• I suspect the 477 may be old data and this is reducing as parishes merge. User:Nilfanion who originally added the 477 (and came up withe idea for this list) may be able to help, but I would be happy for the figure to be updated.— Rod ^talk 09:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

• The 477 came from the article on the Diocese (I didn't add it). The tables are built from 2017 data, with a total of 465 parishes (including the extra-parochial place). I have identified one change since - the merger of Castle Cary and Ansford - I will trawl through to identify other changes.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)