Jump to content

Talk:List of monastic houses in the East Riding of Yorkshire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thicket

[edit]

Thicket Priory was in the "old" East Riding on the banks of the River Derwent in Wheldrake Houses of Benedictine nuns: Priory of Thicket Does this count?--Harkey (talk) 20:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Now included. (This page - like many in the series, is not yet as comprehensive as it will be - but I'm working on it as time allows) --JohnArmagh (talk) 13:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Columns

[edit]

Why have we got references and co-ordinates in the same column - as it stands it is confusing and difficult to understand what is going on. Furthermore why have we just got the references as external links and not correctly cited in the references section where more detail of the reference can be given? Keith D (talk) 14:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


1. The column headings clearly show what is contained in each column.
2. The references provided in the columns are pertinent specifically to the listed item. A conventional reference section would be unnecessarily unwieldy, especially considering this particular page is one of many which county-based pages which form part of the List of abbeys and priories in England, and the references thereon would be quite considerable if they are conventionally cited. The intention is that each transclusion in that list conforms to the same standard (for consistency within that list) and can form part of that list as well as standing as a separate county-based list without unnecessary duplication of data. --JohnArmagh (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with the references is that you have to open up the page to find out what it is about. You need to know the title, publisher accessdate etc for each of the references on the page. The way to do this is in the Reference section, if they are transluded together then that would be OK but as it stands they are next to useless either on the individual page or the transluded page. I cannot see why there is a problem with separating out the references from the co-ordinate data as I had done until reverted as it is much clearer to have the reference markers and the co-ordinates separate from each other. It would also be useful to add the OS reference which is more important for use in the UK than just the co-ordinate data. Keith D (talk) 18:08, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The references contain external [online] corroboration of the information presented in the for the listed establishment against which the reference is placed. There is no problem having the list of references at the foot of the page as well - but for consistency this must be done for each of the counties - not just for East Yorkshire (or whatever area the editor has a parochial interest in). I also have no issue with the OS reference being included - but this also must be done for all the counties. As it is I am trying, over a long period of time, to arrive at, and implement, a format agreeable in general and incorporate that across the subject - and I am partly basing this on how I personally would use the data considering that I am intent on visiting as many of the sites as possible. --JohnArmagh (talk) 07:20, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Keith D. The lists would be better with separate columns for external links and geographical information. I would also prefer to see expanded references in a References section at the foot of each page as I like to have more details about web sites that I am about to open. I don't think this is a parochial interest, just a well meaning suggestion for improvement.--81.170.101.105 (talk) 13:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


OK - I will re-separate the columns. But someone else can do the references how they think they should be done.--JohnArmagh (talk) 15:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that the co-ordinate data could by used to plot the items on a map using the {{kml}} template, though unsure what would happen with the translusion of this. Another option would be to use an in page map similar to that used in List of civil parishes in the East Riding of Yorkshire. Keith D (talk) 15:32, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If we could imlpement both of those options then that could incorporate more preferences. --JohnArmagh (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Just a thought, but how does this look?

Foundation Image Communities & Provenance Formal Name or Dedication & Alternative Names OnLine References & Location
Beverley Minster + built on site of secular canons' monastery, secular canons fd. c.700;
dis. 1547, collegiate 		The Parish Church of Saint John and Saint Martin, Beverley [1] [2] [3] [4]
53°50′21″N 0°25′29″W / 53.839167°N 0.424722°W / 53.839167; -0.424722 (Beverley Minster)

--JohnArmagh (talk) 17:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe would look better with a more muted bgcolor="silver" or "Gainsboro". See Web colors.--Harkey (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Separating them out like that makes it clearer. Keith D (talk) 18:31, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. I just want to get some consensus before I trawl through the lot in trepidation. --JohnArmagh (talk) 10:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Faxfleet

[edit]

I have looked at the mapping that you added and there appears to be a problem with Faxfleet which is showing up towards Pontefract so there is something wrong in the co-ordinates. Keith D (talk) 14:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

53°42′25″N 0°41′38″W / 53.707°N 0.694°W / 53.707; -0.694 (Faxfleet Preceptory) seems to be nearer the spot.--Harkey (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of other readily-available data I took the coordinates from the Faxfleet Preceptory page. --JohnArmagh (talk) 17:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like that page is wrong as well, co-ordinates were added in an attempt to get them added to all the articles tagged as missing, I wonder how many more are wrong. I could not locate an accurate point for it when looking at the East Riding articles needing co-ordinate data so left it tagged for someone else to look at. Harkey's co-ordinates above are near the mark. Keith D (talk) 18:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I can't physically locate a place on the map/aerial photograph then I usually go to English Heritage Pastscape - but I can't seem to find anything there for Faxfleet. --JohnArmagh (talk) 07:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Try this. --Harkey (talk) 10:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is it as well, I think.--Harkey (talk) 10:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about the use of abbreviations in these lists

[edit]

I have started a discussion at Talk:List of abbeys and priories in England#Use of abbreviations which applies to all of the "List of monastic houses in X" (where X = counties of England) articles. The contributions of any interested editor would be welcome.— Rod talk 13:54, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of monastic houses in the East Riding of Yorkshire. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 04:20, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_monastic_houses_in_the_East_Riding_of_Yorkshire&oldid=1203097906"