Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lincolnshire

Elliott Morris at AfD

Elliott Morris, up-and-coming young guitarist from Lincolnshire, is at AfD. Trilliumz (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

River Lymn

I have made a start on expanding this article, but am not sure what to do about the Steeping River. There is no article for it at the moment, but it is essentially the continuation of the River Lymn with a different name. Any suggestions as to whether it should be a separate article or part of the same one? Bob1960evens (talk) 17:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

If it is any help, I have just found more of the Lymn to the north of Wainfleet All Saints, and the Steeping River becomes the Wainfleet Haven and the Wainfleet Relief Channel! Bob1960evens (talk) 19:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Lincolnshire will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in Lincolnshire's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 22:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hatfield Chase

I have just added an infobox to the Hatfield Chase article. It required co-ordinates, so I chose Tunnel Pits as the approximate mid-point, but when it displayed it on the map of South Yorkshire, it was outside the bondary and in North Lincolnshire. Should I add the article to the Lincolnshire Project? Bob1960evens (talk) 11:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I have added the project banner as it is partly in Lincolnshire. May be the article category's need to include Lincolnshire ones as well. Keith D (talk) 19:52, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination

I have just nominated Haxey Hood for GA status, but on reflection I expect it to fail on lack of in-line citations. Can someone who understands these things have a look at it?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 14:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Guerillero | My Talk has just assessed and failed it, but I can't see any notes--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The reviwer did not put the information in the template on the talk page. I have modified the template to show where the review page is. Or you could go direct to Talk:Haxey Hood/GA1. Keith D (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I've put it on the To Do list--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Pastscape template

Someone has created Template:Cite PastScape

I commend it, and will be using it for references in future. (e.g. Dogdyke railway station)
--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Also worth mentioning Template:IoE and Template:NHLE

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:51, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

To Do list

To Do list created with two items. --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:51, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

List of bus routes in Lincolnshire

List of bus routes in Lincolnshire has been nominated for deletion here. Keith D (talk) 13:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Voted. Although I don't really care much either way, I don't like the way this is being done. There was no consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Buses#Lists_of_Bus_Routes but the Worcestershire and west midlands lists have already gone without being moved to Wikivoyage. Looks like an agenda, not something constructive.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 08:29, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the option was left to move the content (and probably to Wikia fwiw) if it was wanted by the closing admin in the Worcestershire and West Midlands case wasn't it? The same could be done here. The content at Transport in Lincolnshire is reasonable, although if there was shed loads more historical detail then a Buses in Lincolnshire article could be added - a prose one of course. It's been done before and can make an effective enough article summarising the major routes even. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

North Lincolnshire Council

Looks like the North Lincolnshire Council have re-organised their web site and all links to http://www.northlincs.gov.uk/NorthLincs are now dead. I have started to mark them as dead. May be there is an easy way to repair them if some one can come up with a translation. Keith D (talk) 19:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Categories

If you look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lincolnshire#Assessments there are 14 'category' pages in mid importance & 318 in NA. I imagine one of those is wrong. Which one?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

GA nominations

Nominated River Witham and River Welland
--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 10:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

River Witham passed on 4th May.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 06:35, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Rive Witham passed on 31st April.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 14:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Does Austendyke exist?

See my new discussion at Talk:Austendike#Does_Austendyke_exist?. All contributions welcome there.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 09:34, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Replied there. Acabashi (talk) 09:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

All Saints Church, Barrowby

Could someone assess the importance of this one please - thanks. Acabashi (talk) 09:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 Done--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Census data

The Office of national statistics has the 2011 census data presented in a different way to the 2001 census.

I wrote them the following email:

Here is a queer thing.

The map at http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadDomainList.do?a=7&b=11120794&c=bitchfield&d=16&g=6482018&i=1001x1003&m=0&r=1&s=1366828291601&enc=1&domainId=58&census=true
clearly shows Boothby Pagnell inside the parish of Bitchfield and Bassingthorne.

But according to SKDC, they are separate:
http://moderngov.southkesteven.gov.uk/mgParishCouncilDetails.aspx?ID=411
http://moderngov.southkesteven.gov.uk/mgParishCouncilDetails.aspx?ID=410

Your own site gives them separate in 2001
http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do;jsessionid=0JhQR4dTql4Lx8ZQGGgnvXm4g6YvnyJ4B7rC7ZylPq13m9n249J4!-1346669638!13668262

59859?instanceSelection=03070&productId=779&$ph=60_61&datasetInstanceId=3070&startColumn=1&numberOfColumns=4&containerAreaId=790460&nsjs=true&nsck=true&nssvg=fa

lse&nswid=1024
So is it your map that is wrong?

The reply I got back was

The parish guidance at

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/Info.do?page=census2011onness/geography/parishes/parishes-and-communities.htm provides an example of a similar instance that you report under the '...The boundaries for my parish/community don't look right compared to previous versions..' sub-heading.

Producing data for small areas, such as villages, can be problematic, not least due to the small populations often living in a village there is the risk of disclosure. In addition a villages can vary immensely in nature across the country so are difficult to define statistically.

To address the issue of disseminating data at small area level, the concept of Super Output Areas (SOAs) was devised. Details of SOAs and their rationale can be found here

http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/Info.do?page=aboutneighbourhood/geography/superoutputareas/soafaq/soa-faq.htm
http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/Info.do?page=nessgeography/superoutputareasexplained/output-areas-explained.htm

While the intention was that SOA geographies were meant to be stable, population changes arising from the 2011 Census meant that some new geographic entities had to be created and some existing ones merged, please see the PDF report at http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/products/census/report--changes-to-output-areas-and-super-output-areas-in-england-and-wales--2001-to-2011.pdf for more details.

For 2001 Boothby Pagnell parish was associated with the Output Area (OA) E00133659, for 2011 due to the changes in the above report it was now associated with a new OA E00169422 this has changed how Boothby Pagnall is represented statistically. The maps within Neighbourhood Statistics are to show statistical dissemination only, they are not intended to provide a definitive geographic representation of a particular area.

The parish guidance at http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/Info.do?page=census2011onness/geography/parishes/parishes-and-communities.htm provides an example of a similar instance that you report

I hope this helps, apologies for all the links, unfortunately it is quite a complex subject that does not fit easily into a single email.

It would seem that what I would assume was a reputable source, nay the definitive one, cannot be trusted below district level.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I found that out when I was updating the East Riding parishes. They have amalgamated small parishes with the adjacent one without telling you so the figure and map you get could include more than one parish where one has a low headcount. At least in the 2001 census data you could get the headcount from the map which is no longer possible for 2011. Keith D (talk) 17:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

GA

Come on, lads. Of the 20 articles in Category:GA-Class Lincolnshire articles 7 are 'inherited' from the Waterbabies, one from the steam nuts, and one from chatteringclasses. Can't we beef up some of our 'own' articles? Like Lincoln Castle or Stamford or Lincolnshire Wolds ?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 06:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

St Martin's Church, Ancaster and St Bartholomew's Church, Welby and St Peter's Church, Ropsley

Could someone Talk Page assess these new ones please. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 19:34, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination

A Did You Know nom has been presented for the Lincs article St Peter's Ropsley - [1] Acabashi (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

On the subject of the bells, does anyone know which is the cracked one & if the other one is actually rung?--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 22:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for St Peter's Church, Ropsley (Lincs article promoted)

The DYK project (nominate) 20:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

St Andrew's Church, Billingborough

Please assess this one for the Lincs Project. Many Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 00:14, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

done, but with comments.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 09:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks - I have responded there too. Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 20:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Useful resource

From google books: [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=YlAGAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=linz&hl=en&sa=X&ei=IAXjUaLGD8K5hAfomYC4Cw&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q&f=false The History of the County of Lincoln,: From the Earliest Period to the Present Time; Thomas Allen 1834 ].--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

St John the Evangelist’s Church, Corby Glen

Could someone assess this one for the project please. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Done, with comments.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 06:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Roll call

I've just checked the list of project members on the front page and very few are current contributors. I think that it's just me and Acabashi at the moment. Who is still interested?

Knock once for yes...

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 18:52, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I am still around. Keith D (talk) 20:26, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Still busy busy on Lincs and not far off finishing all the London distances - can one of you assess this new one please - St Nicholas' Church, Fulbeck. I was surprised that my WP friend User:Panderoona stopped a year ago as I did - she was a great asset in starting over 150 Lincs place articles while developing her favourite Brothertoft. I suppose she might have burned-out and needed a break - it can happen to anyone. I will send her an email and invite her back. Best. Acabashi (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

St Nicholas' Church, Fulbeck - assessed.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 22:54, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I am still around, because I returned as an admin in January. However, I am still not as active as I was before. I have done some minor editing, and I have just found an academic paper I got before I withdrew a few years ago about archeological finds in the parish church of Great Hale, where I used to live. I will try to get round to being more active in the future.  DDStretch  (talk) 16:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Edmund Weaver (astronomer)

Can someone assess this one please. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Please help get Lincs 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) 14:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've added pictures for about half of Grade I listed buildings in South Kesteven. Someone else can do some more! --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 19:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikilinked most of that, & added some more existing pics--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The more I look at this the odder it seems. Why not start at the top with Scheduled ancient monuments? Those are in a very parlous state on WP. Go look at Category:Scheduled Ancient Monuments in Lincolnshire to see what I mean.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Error in List of civil parishes in Lincolnshire

See the comments on Talk:List of civil parishes in Lincolnshire--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 09:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Fixed it myself, despite the intimidating structure.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 08:33, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Another resource

https://sites.google.com/site/thesurveyoflincoln/home-1 --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 00:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Also:

• http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/products/names--codes-and-look-ups/names-and-codes-listings/names-and-codes-for-administrative-geography/index.html
• http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/geography/products/names--codes-and-look-ups/code-history-database/index.html

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 01:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Deletion?

I reckon it is time to ask for the following to be deleted:

• Garden Village, Lincolnshire
• Stainby railway station
• Austendike -- Merge with Moulton, Lincolnshire

Anyone good at doing those? I always seem to stuff these ramshackle pages up when I try.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 08:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Categories for church articles

I'm beginning to think that pages like St John the Evangelist's Church, Corby Glen look slightly out of place in Category:South Kesteven. Should there be a Category:Churches in South Kesteven which is itself a single member of the parent? we have Category:People from South Kesteven (district)‎ (etc. - applies to all districts) (how does it work in other places?)--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Parishes

I have been resolving red links in List of civil parishes in Lincolnshire#South Kesteven, and have created:

• Londonthorpe and Harrowby Without
• Little Ponton and Stroxton
• Gunby and Stainby
• Newton and Haceby
• Ropsley and Humby
• Counthorpe and Creeton
• Ewerby and Evedon
• Aubourn and Haddington

I have, where required, created and populated the matching commons category - all further contributions gratefully received.

None of them have infoboxes. I am not an infobox sort of person. If anyone is madly enthusiastic about them, feel free.

I have one more to do, then on to North Kesteven. On the way I discovered a whole range of parish councils, from the madly efficient to the about-to-be-sanctioned. Some have just been rolled up with next door.

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:34, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok that's the SK ones done, with Lenton, Keisby and Osgodby.

I will move on to NK, unless anyone else fancies it.

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 23:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

St Vincent's Church, Caythorpe

Project assessment on this one please. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 00:17, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Comments there. --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 05:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Found humour

From our cleanup page:

Doris Stokes...Articles with dead external links (October 2010)

Well, it made me laugh!--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 10:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Another another Resource

There are some useful notes here: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/archaeology-east-midlands/ and here: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/east-midlands-heritage/ Both have significant downloadable pdfs.

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

George Hussey Packe

Project assessment for this new one appreciated. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 19:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

St Mary and St Peter’s Church, Harlaxton

Could someone please assess this new one for Lincs Project please. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 01:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

St James' Church, Aslackby

A new one just uploaded. Can I have a Project assessment on the Talk page please. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 23:32, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Susworth

An assessment please for this short one. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

And this one please: Moulton Seas End, Lincolnshire. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 21:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Seacroft, Lincolnshire

Call out to anyone who passes this lonely backwater. I've tried to add stuff to Seacroft - difficult as there is nothing - it's only a short road. The geocoords link to Leeds - can anyone be bothered to fix this? - I don't know how to do it - here's where the 'place' is as you won't be able to find it: http://gridreferencefinder.com/?gr=TF5669261280%7CPoint_s_B%7C0&v=h

Might it be better, however, to give this one the coup de grâce ? Acabashi (talk) 21:06, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Holbeach Clough & Holbeach Bank & Holbeach Marsh

Anyone care to assess these new ones ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 13:10, 3 September 2014 (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)

Old maps and views of the East Midlands

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 - East Midlands

which currently shows pink templated links for 113 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 Lincolnhire and the East Midlands. (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)

Geoffrey (archbishop of York) nomination for Today's Featured Article

I've nominated the article Geoffrey (archbishop of York) to be considered for Today's Featured Article, nomination discussion is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Geoffrey (archbishop of York). — Cirt (talk) 01:43, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Change of school name

Locksley Christian School has been renamed Regents Academy as of January 2014 - can the page now be moved to reflect this change? I represent this school in this matter, however I do not have the option to 'move' the page myself. Walkmeister (talk) 16:39, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

It's been done. Primefac (talk) 17:21, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Sleaford peer review

Hello, I am just notifying you that I have just put Sleaford up for Peer Review here. Any feedback would be great. Many thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 15:45, 18 January 2015 (UTC).

Assessment ?

Anybody care to talk-page assess this one: Edmund Turnor (1755–1829). The Turnors look to be the most influential family in Kesteven, and to some extent in parts of East Lindsey in the 18th, 19th and 20thC, and the third biggest landowners by area in 19thC Lincs. I previously put this one - Christopher Turnor MP - as a low out of modesty. It's difficult to assess importance as there seems to be no Lincs or other Project-specific (or general) guidelines as what constitutes importance. A side shot - I notice for quite a few articles on Grade I listed buildings there can be a tendency to give a High Project importance, and elsewhere Mid or even Low, depending on the county, or which editor is assessing. Stub/Start/C etc is pretty straightforward, but should we try some kind of consensus on what might constitute levels of importance for different types of articles. ? Acabashi (talk) 02:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, in terms of the article, you might want to take a look at his entry at the History of Parliament project here. It's a very reliable, scholarly work and could probably provide more information about his political career. The first paragraph is cited, but you may want to consider putting individual citations for each main statement, i.e. his parentage, descent, marriage, death, etc. (It also feels odd to mention his death at the end - perhaps it could be moved to the end of his "career" section...) The same is true for the paragraph which starts "counted among his friends". I would say that the article certainly meets "Start" and likely, with info on his political career, a "C" grade; the prose is good, but it feels a bit disjointed in the "career" section; it is cited with what appear to be reliable sources (the ODNB, Gent. Mag., Ruvigny (generally reliable), etc.); the lack of info on his political career is a big gap, which means it fails criteria "2" for B-class ("The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies"). Above, you mention the size of his estates, but in the article, you don't - if you found that in a reliable source, then you could add it. Also, did he influence local life? Are there local history sources that could tell us more about how he affected the communities who lived in the estates he owned? Lastly, I would argue he is "low" in importance, possibly "mid" if more info can be found to assess how influential he was in the county. Thanks, --Noswall59 (talk) 11:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC).

Thanks for that. I will use the source when I get around to it - his political career only spanned four years so it might not be all that influential, that's why I didn't use an MP infobox, but he is an accepted antiquary. The size of the estate is based on that during his son's Rochford/Panton tenure so I'm not sure I can use that, but I can't find anything to say that it was a different size in his day, especially I have a source that says that his descendant sold off 6000 acres from the Kesteven and Lindsey estates, so it was probably larger. Like other Lincs estates Rochford/Panton came nowhere near the huge Yarborough/Brocklesby. The death info is a bit tricky to fit inside the genealogy or career, and as very often happens, something that doesn't quite fit gets tagged on to what might or might not be the nearest relevant section to avoid a one sentence section. When it comes to refs I'm always irked when they are sprinkled throughout a para, something that interrupts the readers' flow, so I tend to stack them at the ends. I don't mind a 'low' for him, and only a 'start' looks obvious as it isn't a 'C' for substantial, or 'B' for almost complete. I think it unlikely it will get ever past a 'start', although I have seen some quite overblown assessments for insubstantial not so important Lincolnshire articles :) My chief concern above was 'importance assessment' for listed buildings which, between and within WP county projects, often don't seem to have consistency. Acabashi (talk) 01:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

St Andrew and St Mary's Church, Stoke Rochford

A Talk page assess on this new on please anybody. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 01:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

GA nomination of Sleaford

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

Proposal to move Methodism to Child Project

Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Methodism Jerodlycett (talk) 09:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Peer review for Manor House, Sleaford

Hello, I have put the Manor House, Sleaford up for peer review here. It's an interesting building with some notable owners, and has received less attention than it should have done. Having squeezed the sources dry, I'm hoping to nominate it for GA and so any comments would be much appreciated. Kind regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC).

General election results

Just to let everyone know, I believe all of the results for Lincolnshire constituencies have been updated. It will be worth checking Category:Parliamentary constituencies in Lincolnshire, but it appears all have been done. I have updated the four remaining ones: Sleaford and North Hykeham, Lincoln, Gainsborough, and Louth and Horncastle. Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 15:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC).

List of public art

Please populate List of public art in Lincolnshire; see [2] for a guide. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Lincolnshire Members!

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

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

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

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

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

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 18:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Spalding War Memorial

Hello! Is there anybody watching this page who is within striking distance of Spalding? I'm trying to get better photos of the town's war memorial for use in a potential featured article. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:07, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Popular pages report

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

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

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

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

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

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

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

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

The discussion about this can be found here.

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

Background

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

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

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

So far, 84 editors have joined.

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

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

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:East Midlands England for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Immingham Carmelite Friary, Immingham Dominican Friary

Unsourced.Xx236 (talk) 12:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

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

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

Parishes project

I have started a project for missing civil parishes at User:Crouch, Swale/Missing parishes. The missing parishes in Lincolnshire are:

• Brant Broughton and Stragglethorpe
• Claxby with Moorby
• Cranwell, Brauncewell and Byard's Leap
• Crowle and Ealand
• Culverthorpe and Kelby
• Doddington and Whisby
• Frithville and Westville
• Garthorpe and Fockerby
• Hawerby cum Beesby
• Keadby with Althorpe
• Luddington and Haldenby
• Lusby with Winceby
• Rigsby with Ailby
• Roxholm
• Saxilby with Ingleby
• Skidbrooke with Saltfleet Haven
• South Ormsby cum Ketsby
• The Moultons
• West Fen
• Withern with Stain

And these exists as a redirect only but should have separate articles:

• Covenham St Mary
• Eagle and Swinethorpe
• Hardwick, Lincolnshire
• Strubby with Woodthorpe
• Toft with Lound and Manthorpe
• West Firsby
• Wyville cum Hungerton

A total of 27, see User:Crouch, Swale/Missing parishes (2)#Lincolnshire. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

• Pinging participants to get more input @245TomUsername, Panderoona, BSTemple, BulldozerD11, Keith D, Hurst477, Ddstretch, Dendodge, Dsergeant, DominicCyninge, GrahamSmith, Jkslouth, Brunnian, DancingGerbil, Acabashi, Footballgy, Robert EA Harvey, Mwheatley1990, EverythingGeography, Mirrorme22, and Zakhx150:. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

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

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

and turns it into something like

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

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

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

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

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

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

Re-activation of WP: Lincolnshire ?

Hi folks. You are all tagged in here as being listed members of the currently inactive WikiProject Lincolnshire. Before I dive too far down this rabbithole, I'd like to take your temperature on making some efforts to re-activate this WikiProject - updating the project page, goals, achievements etc.

For all intents and purposes I am individually creating a reasonable amount of new pages on Lincolnshire topics and will be continuing to do so regardless, but it'd be great to have a nodal place where efforts of editors might be either co-ordinated, acknowledged, or promoted.

@245TomUsername, Panderoona, BSTemple, BulldozerD11, Keith D, Hurst477, Ddstretch, Dendodge, Dsergeant, DominicCyninge, GrahamSmith, Jkslouth, Brunnian, DancingGerbil, Acabashi, Footballgy, Robert EA Harvey, Mwheatley1990, EverythingGeography, and Mirrorme22:

Thoughts, views, etc. all welcome please.Zakhx150 (talk) 16:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Reactivation would at least get the logs restored so that article changes can be monitored. I still tag articles for the project when I do project tagging. Keith D (talk) 19:40, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

That makes two of us then. There was a point a few weeks ago when an editor was amended my new articles which had WP:LINCS tags to be WP:ENGLAND and I feel this is much less useful. I'll see if there are any further replies here in due course.Zakhx150 (talk) 12:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

I will probably add Lincolnshire again when I next run the tagging if it is in a Lincolnshire category. Keith D (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

For better or worse I have pinged this into ACTIVE status once more. Amends/updates to WP homepage to follow in coming weeks/months. In the meantime, let there be content.Zakhx150 (talk) 14:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Glad to see this, Zakhx150. I'll add myself to the participants list. I lived in Lincoln for a while and I'm the author of Spalding War Memorial. Will see if I can get round to some more Lincolnshire articles. High Bridge is on my long-term to-do list. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:56, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I've undeleted the assessment categories and some other pages. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

And the Lincolnshire articles by quality and importance table is now updating nicely. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Reimagining Lincolnshire

Copied from my talk page. Keith D (talk) 11:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I notice you have an interest in pages relating to Lincolnshire. As part of the Connected Heritage project at Wikimedia UK, we are running an event with Reimagining Lincolnshire next week for Black History Month, on Thursday 20th October. If you'd like to join us, please do feel free to register here. If you would like to circulate to your networks, that would be much appreciated. All best wishes, Lucy (WMUK) EriedgenArc (talk) 11:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Belton House

I have nominated Belton House for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Desertarun (talk) 09:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Featured Article Save Award for Belton House

There is a Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Belton House/archive1. Please join the discussion to recognize and celebrate editors who helped assure this article would retain its featured status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

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

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

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Bracebridge Heath

Chunks of long-established plausible historical content, added by an IP in 2014, never tagged as unsourced, have been removed recently. Someone with access to historical sources about the area might like to check, source, and reinstate. (I wish editors would tag as "citation needed" rather than removing long-established uncontentious content as "OR and Undue", but opinions differ.) PamD 09:37, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Skegness Town Hall

Hi - It would be great if someone could take a photo of Skegness Town Hall and upload it to wikimedia commons. Many thanks, Dormskirk (talk) 09:20, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

There don't appear to be any images at Geograph, otherwise I would upload one of those. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Horncastle Roman walls

Horncastle Roman walls, and Grade I listed buildings in East Lindsey, would benefit greatly from photographs of the visible, and visitable, sections of wall. There are six listings, but I can't tell which are publicly accessible. Commons, and Geograph as far as I can see, are sadly lacking. If any Lincolnshire-based editors have the time and inclination, I would be most grateful. KJP1 (talk) 09:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)