Talk:Foremarke Hall

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Derbyshire Mid‑importance

	Derbyshire portal The article on Foremarke Hall is supported by the Derbyshire WikiProject, which is a collaborative effort to improve the quality and coverage of Derbyshire-related articles on Wikipedia.DerbyshireWikipedia:WikiProject DerbyshireTemplate:WikiProject DerbyshireDerbyshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture: Historic houses Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Historic houses task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Blah

(This exchange is titled by WiKID Daryl for the sake of neatness)

Its a good page about the building, but less good as a school page. Maybe the building and school need different pages as the school is a relatively recent tenant of the building ... Victuallers 14:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've basically edited most of this article from the time it was a stub. i'm glad that i contirbuted greatly to turning into a Start-class article, but i think it deserves to be a B-class.:p

Yeh the history and the school should be separated to avoid confusion but nevertheless closely linked!

i'll work on an independent school-page and link it with this when i find the time.

Soz forgot my signature, the above comment was written by me--WiKID Daryl 18:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B Class?

The main item for B claa is refs. OK It does have a few refs that were added by "someone". The rest of the article is uncited. This is particularly important with the Myths stuff which I'm not sure will ever make it into a wiki unless the myths are ported in a reliable(ish) source.

Oh and you were lucky I saw this ... try Schools Project or my talk page Victuallers 19:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

School Importance Ratings

Since this article is about the history of the Manor Foremark and its Manor house and a page about the Prep school has been created, i think the School-Importance rating tag should be relocated on that page. that article also have an infobox, so the tag won't be needed. I've also added an "Other Uses" tag to this aricle to prevent confusion. WiKID Daryl 05:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea! - I think Ive done it... but tidy up if not Victuallers 21:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Vics, it's been too long lol; let's try to get this article to GA Class Status; the content needs to be sorted out as well; not to mention the school article has even less information compared to the article about the Manor House. And information regarding the Manor should really be in the Foremark article.

--WiKID Daryl (talk) 20:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major Factual Error & Confusion

In the original text before I re-edited it, it reads in the history section:

Foremarke Hall was built as a Stately home evidently for Sir Robert Burdett's son - Francis Burdett[citation needed] in 1760 by David Hiorns - a famous architect then whose architectural firm in London still thrives today. [2] The building is therefore of Georgian and Palladian architectural style with imposing portico, cursive, round domes, chamber/pillars and a magnificent south front.

Additionally, the annotations of the photo of Sir Francis Burdett described him to be the son of Sir Robert Burdett, 4th Baronet; which is nonsense; as in the case of the above paragraph:

Robert's son Francis Burdett by Francis Cotes in 1764.

My older edits clearly established that Sir Francis Burdett (5th Baronet) was not the son of Sir Robert Burdett, 4th Baronet but the son of a Burdett with the same first name- Francis Burdett (1743) who did not inherit the Baronetcy of Foremark from his father.

Strangely enough; the user who altered that content from my older edits still managed to get it wrong despite the clear explicit facts I have already written out...

The user clearly wasn't familiar with the subject matter. If he/she would have spent a little more time to research properly by viewing the pages of the members of the Burdett Family it would have been impossbible for he/she to make such a mistake.

Next time, anyone who decides to write anything should make sure they are certain with what they are writing before doing so; so that they don't waste precious time and effort of others spent re-establishing things previously established.

--WiKID Daryl (talk) 18:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reassessment

I think this article needs to be reassessed for quality, it's getting too damn good to deserve a B-Class rating! :P
Somebody please help! lol --WiKID Daryl (talk) 23:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foremarke Hall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20120708185622/http://foremarke.org.uk/foremarke-in-tatlers-top-100-992011 to http://foremarke.org.uk/foremarke-in-tatlers-top-100-992011

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:32, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]