Talk:Hereford Mappa Mundi

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Herefordshire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Herefordshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Herefordshire 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.HerefordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HerefordshireTemplate:WikiProject HerefordshireHerefordshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Maps Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Maps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Maps and Cartography 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.MapsWikipedia:WikiProject MapsTemplate:WikiProject MapsMaps articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.
	This article had an importance automatically assigned to it. Once it has been checked by a human, please remove `\|autoi=yes`.

Largest medieval map

"...is the largest medieval map currently in existence." -- I don't understand this - surely no more can possibly be created? 84.9.145.154 (talk) 19:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right; that was non-optimal wording. Fixed. DS (talk) 13:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: The Middle Ages

Changes and footnotes styles

Hi all, I'm going to try to expand this article on the basis of some of the sources oive added to the list, especially to look at the purpose of the map and its interpretation. This will involve using multiple uses of the same sources, probably with differing pages, so the notes would work better as the harvnb style often used on history pages, with notes for each reference, and the sources listed in full once at the end. I know Wikipedians don't like changes to notes and language styles without editorial consenses, so please let me know if there's any objection. I'll leave it for about 10 days before I do anything! Jim Killock (talk) 17:58, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me as long as it's done consistently through the article. Glendoremus (talk) 18:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's done. Jim Killock (talk) 20:24, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New material

Hi @Deor, apologies for leaving the page in a half finished state. I'm about to add material from the sources I've already added relating to anti-semitic images that were used to help justify the expulsion of the Jewry, according to one interpretation; and information about the portrayal of women which the source contends was designed to reinforce patriarchial views of society. These are decidedly not tangential pieces of information, as I hope you will see. I will therefore restore and expand on my edits - please bear with me!

Jim Killock (talk) 20:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Deor, could you please check before deleting sources I add? I am not adding them randomly. For instance, you have deleted information about one book being a second edition; this important as the editions are quite different. You have also deleted a Mittman reference, which I am about to add information from. Jim Killock (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JimKillock: I don't recall deleting any sources or any information in them, but it's possible that I did so inadvertently. Could you post diffs of the two instances you cited above so that I can learn from my mistakes? I've tried to stay mostly out of the way of your work on the article since I realized that you were planning a major revision, butting in only when my edits seemed unlikely to interfere with your efforts. Deor (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sure, and thank you. See this diff. Thanks for making the other corrections also. I think I'll be working on this for a while, it turns out to be a very big topic! Jim Killock (talk) 23:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only edit I was intending to make there was to change "Connolly" to "Connelly" in the shortened ref (which I see you had already done). I was probably inadvertently editing the old version with "Connolly", and that had the effect of wiping out several of your subsequent edits. (I should have noticed that my edit, which shouldn't have changed the byte count of the article at all, actually removed 508 bytes.) I've made that sort of mistake only a few times in the past, and I apologize most heartily. Deor (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem and thanks for checking! Jim Killock (talk) 00:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]