Jump to content

Talk:Selsey

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

Is there a Cathedral out at sea or is this urban legend? I know the Cathedral used to be at Norton in the 11th Century, but have not heard any fact surrounding the sea based cathedral, any ideas?

There's been significant sea level change in the English channel, and/or erosion, over the last 2000 years. They found a chapel off the south coast of Hayling Island (underwater) recently, and looked through the medieval documents; discovered it as listed as being in the middle of the island. Also, Julius Caesar wrote about his invasions, and specifically mentions that his soldiers could wade across the Solent to the Isle of Wight (try that today!). I don't think there's been much investigative archaeology off Selsey (digging underwater is hard work) but I encountered some references to the settlement being lost a couple of years back. Its mostly inferred from a fair amount of documentary evidence, I think, with the geography supporting it.

Norton (The Mount; Pagham Harbour) is listed as "Earthwork remains of an C11 ringwork castle; traces of possible Iron Age occupation were found; Neolithic scrapers and other worked flints were found during excavations. Roman tile and pottery may indicate the site of a villa. Had been identified as an Elizabethan battery. Excavated in 1911, 1965 and 1980."[1]

Graldensblud 23:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inundation

[edit]

Your article refers to inundation and also speaks of erosion. Apparently there are underwater ruins, too? It would be nice if you would tell us the story! I got here through the article on Ys that mentions the fact that many of the lands around the English Channel have been inundated, so I am looking for info on that. Was it flooded, or eroded? When did this happen? What do the underwater ruins, if any, consist of?

Amity150 06:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have specifics, but i read not long ago of an early mediaeval church being found off the south coast of hayling island, where the only documentary reference to a church in such a position was to it standing in the middle of the island. This was claimed at the time i read it to be representative of the sort of sea level change we know has to have occurred re the wading across the solent the romans undertook. 82.10.108.49 (talk) 10:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Britain is still slowly sinking after being lifted during the last ice age, in response to northern Britain being pressed down by the huge weight of ice on the north. I forget how fast, maybe half a centimetre per year, but significant over two thousand years. Some alleged buildings in the sea have been shown to be natural rock outcrops, and wave action is likely to have destroyed anything that had not allready been salvaged by the locals.--Charles (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are currently pioneering some interesting technology for seabed scanning at Dunwich, one to watch I suspect. 82.10.108.49 (talk) 20:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Manhood School

[edit]

Manhood is now the only secondary school in West Sussex without an article. I am about to create a stub article, but it really will be that as I can find little evidence of the school's history online. Anyone with local knowledge, and access to local sources might be able to improve the article considerably, hopefully. Tafkam (talk) 23:55, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The stub article now exists at Manhood Community College. Tafkam (talk) 04:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wave sculpture

[edit]

controversial ... has irked local residents on account of its cost, content (see reference) and artistic representation. In particular, a smaller wave can be seen apparently travelling in the opposite direction to the main wave, which is not likely to happen in reality and is a feature not present in the original print. <ref>Revealed: Selsey's new £60,000 sculpture, Chichester Observer, July 2007</ref>

Citation for residents plural being irked, and for this analysis of the work? The cited newspaper article says "one Selsey resident, John Napper" criticised it. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 09:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bunn Leisure

[edit]

It seems madness that there is an article about Selsey which doesn't even mention the massive holiday camp which must take up 1/4 of the land area. Could anyone add something referenced? 81.103.233.194 (talk) 02:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's not much on modern Selsey in the article really. As well as Bunns,could do with something on Langmeads, the high street conservation area coastal erosion etc. Wilfridselsey (talk) 09:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look at a map suggests less then 5% of the area SovalValtos (talk) 17:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quite Good

[edit]

I would now say that this is a "quite good" article, and have moved up the rating to B Class. A little more work, such as expanding the lead and addressing a few of the above points, and it might stand a good chance at GA. Good luck. Rob (talk) 19:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Selsey. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Selsey. 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.

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) 11:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Climate Edit War

[edit]

I am not totally sure who is right or wrong but we need a concensus here. It isn't going to happen in one line edit descriptions. A revision with it in is here. I have currently removed it. This does not mean I am for or against it, I might be marginally in favour but I'd like to see the arguments for and against. I think everyone is trying to act in good faith. I see how discussion is going in a couple of days time Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:45, 17 January 2018 (UTC) Adding a few notes:[reply]

  • This article is under WikiProject UK geography (amongst others) with Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Geography relevant
  • A list of (current) weather stations here [[1]]. The nearest to Selsey is Bognor. Guidence seems to be to use Template:Climate chart (however use of Template:Weather box seems quite prevalent.
  • From a quick glance round the practice for local coastal resorts without a weather stations does appear to be not to published climate tables. Worthing is a similar 'B-Class' article with an approach similar to that for Selsey (without the climate table).
  • The climate data will usually be available at the next regional level up (usually county), in this case West Sussex, though Hampshire takes a different (possible better) approach showing a spread of results from weather stations. Interestingly the 'See also' goes to the UK climate article skipping the county section article.
  • The case for the climate tables are that visitors intending to Holiday to Selsey and checking Wikipedia might be interested in the climate data
  • I believe the climate table contributor would indicate the data is properly sourced on the basis of the 5km grid data published from the Met Office. I have only a hazy understanding of how this works but is apparently interpolates between weather stations and is supplemented by other sources and they are fairly confident most spurious readings have been eliminated.
  • My though is longer term not automated manual maintenance of such climate tables is probably unsustainable.

Overviewing these points I conclude on balance the climate data should not be included for Selsey but I am open to other arguments. Djm-leighpark (talk) 08:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I my experiance consensus is that covering climate is best done at county level. Unless there is an official weather station in the settlement the data is going to be extrapolated and not verifiable in such fine detail. Local factors can not be factored in with certainty. Such a mass of detail is probably undue for an encyclopedia article on a settlement. If we use anything I would favour the climate chart because it conveys sufficient information for the average reader in an easily digestible form.
There is also the question of original research as the data is copied from a primary source database, and one that requires login.
As to informing visitors Wikipedia is not a travel guide. We have Wikivoyage for that function, and that can be linked to. In this country the weather we actually get has little relation to averages anyway.Charles (talk) 10:02, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The main climate points about Selsey is that it is in the sunniest part of the UK and in a tornado hotspot ('The Isle of Wight and South Coast Anomaly'), the article now provides that information. The citations include links to quite comprehensive Met office climate tables for Selsey. The weather detail on the West Sussex page is quite limited, hence the See Also to the UK Climate page. I think the section now works with or without the climate tables. But as you say, the problem with climate tables is that they have to be manually updated. Wilfridselsey (talk) 10:27, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The current version without a weather box seems to be going in the right direction by using text and cited sources. One advantage of Wikipedia is the ease of linking information. Just because the Met Office do a synthesis of data does not mean we need to use it in all settlements a few miles apart giving it undue weight. Wikilink(s) to the appropriate regional level or nearest weather station site article would hit the mark. Introducing material with an unsustainable maintenance requirement does not seem a good idea. Incidently would it not be better to have the climate content as part of a Geography section?SovalValtos (talk) 11:13, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to having a discussion about the weather box. What I do not agree is that the weather box must not be included until we reach a consensus. I added the data back in the Autumn and added the record highs and lows in the following months, until recently all of that data has gone unchallenged. Soon as the weather box was there before this dispute had begun, then arguably it should remain in place until we reach a consensus. The primary reason I added the weather box was because Selsey is located in the sunniest grid square of the UK according to the Met Office. So because of this, a climate chart will not do as it does not display the sunshine hours. Selsey does not have significantly different weather to most other parts of the UK with the exception of its sunshine totals.

I also do not agree that weather boxes bear little resemblance to the actual weather conditions. Most likely this is used as a cover up to claim things like there are more sunny days in the winter or the south coast of England is not sunny in the summer, both of which are undisputedly false.10 December 2017 (talk) 16:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given content arguments so far I'd recommend removal of weather box and move climate section to subsection of geography. I am personnally not undoing that last edit (821130566) at the moment to avoid warring.Djm-leighpark (talk) 17:55, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am beginning to think concensus is unlikely to be reached. And there have been no updates in 24 hour to that revert re-inserting climate data with a weatherbox the which is not in my opinion consistent with WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Geography. Unless someone feels confident to back the weatherbox out we will need to go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution / WP:Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests which gives a number of directions and I would appreciate comments on which way to go. 19:32, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Being involved through my revert 11 januari 2018, after which I double checked the sources, and actually didnt find anyhting supporting the mentioned weather box. I therefore agree with @Djm-leighpark:, that a removal of weather box and move climate section to subsection of geography. I would therefore back the weatherbox out, but still think that its a good idea, to bring the issue to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, in order to support later, similair actions of removing claims which are not really supported by relevant sources. Dan Koehl (talk) 11:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please be aware I have raised this issue at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Selsey#Climate Edit War. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to comment by charlesdrakew: If Selsey is outstandingly sunny that can be stated in prose with a suitable source. It does not justify including a mass of detailed data not even specific to the settlement As I said before, the data is specific to the settlement--10 December 2017 (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Licensing and attribution of datasets from Met Office

[edit]

Possible license breach in publishing 5km data (UKCP09 gridded observation datasets) : Believe applicable license is http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/. see https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/data/ukcp09, http://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/87f43af9d02e42f483351d79b3d6162a & Citable as: Met Office; Hollis, D.; McCarthy, M. (2017): UKCP09: Met Office gridded and regional land surface climate observation datasets. Centre for Environmental Data Analysis, date of citation. 'http://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/'UUID. I may have this wrong but believe there may currently be a possible license breach.Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It says you are free to: copy, publish, distribute and transmit the Information; adapt the Information; exploit the Information commercially and non-commercially for example, by combining it with other Information, or by including it in your own product or application. I did check before I made the weather box--10 December 2017 (talk) 16:10, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of the public references above indicate you are free to do that providing you attribute in the prescribed manner (and perhaps link back to the open government license?). However the Met office site seems a little messy and ambiguous and you may have been able to get to the data without going through that license condition. Also you may have downloaded from the Met office site whereas the pages I an reviewing indicates it was migrated to CEDA. (I have logins to neither). So overall quite confusing. But license conditions are important so I have brought this up. I have put this in a different section as it is a separate issue.Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:02, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It appears to be Template:OGL-attribution is useful if it proves necessary to refer back to OGL, and I personally would use it if downloading from here: http://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/87f43af9d02e42f483351d79b3d6162a ... however your download road may have been different.
@User:10 December 2017 I have considered this some more. It appears you seem to be saying you are using this under the Open Government Licence (OGL) probably version 3 but possibly version 2. It is important to know which is/was applicable for your download . This is a Copyleft license. If this is the case the OGL states "You must, where you do any of the above:

acknowledge the source of the Information by including any attribution statement specified by the Information Provider(s) and, where possible, provide a link to this licence;".

  • My understanding is it is possible to provide a link to an OGL license via use of the Template:OGL-attribution and failure to do so is a breach of the OGL license.
  • I cannot seem to get a login from the Met Office website but only to the CEDA website where the attribution used is very explicit. However you may have a login to the Met Office website and have directly downloaded from there in which case the current attribution is sufficient (Your source seems to imply this).
  • I can't wrap/add the OGL-template myself because I do not at this time have sufficient certainty it was used and at which version (2/3). However I will remove the data in 48 hours as I reasonably feel there is a license breach unless we make progress in discussions here. (I'd dont want to remove it and am hoping OGL-template can be used but I will as licensing is critical for Wikipedia).

- I must also apologise as something personal has come up for me that I need to attend to with some urgency and I don't have this in as friendly manner as I like. Djm-leighpark (talk) 10:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NB: I have experimented with the OGL-Citation template at User:Djm-leighpark/sandbox7 (may be volitite) ... this will subjected to change and page may be deleted in due course.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://homepage.mac.com/philipdavis/English%20sites/3585.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Selsey&oldid=1223152705"