Talk:Weald and Downland Living Museum

A fact from Weald and Downland Living Museum appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 May 2008, and was viewed approximately 1,213 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Winkhurst Kitchen and Titchfield Market Hall, which are now at the Weald and Downland Open Air Museum, Singleton, Sussex, have been dismantled and re-erected twice?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/May.

Wikipedia

Museums Low‑importance

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sussex Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sussex 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.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mills C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mills 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.MillsWikipedia:WikiProject MillsTemplate:WikiProject MillsMills articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Cats and navbox

@Dave.Dunford: re this edit and this edit, whilst I appreciate your reasoning for the removals, I'm not sure that they are good. I could write an individual article for both the watermill and windpump, but they would both struggle to get above start class, which is why I feel that they are better served by being covered in the article about the museum. Your edit emptied a category, which I got a speedy deletion notice about. I've contested the deletion pending discussion of this issue. Mjroots (talk) 19:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel that strongly, so revert if you like, but it still seems peculiar to see a collection of buildings in a category that refers to a particular type of building (which doesn't apply to most of the collection). I had an analogous discussion with an editor about the inclusion of a large moorland area (Combs Moss) in a hill forts category (Category:Hill forts in Derbyshire), because the hillfort in question (called Castle Naze) only occupies a small part of the plateau and was only relevant to part of the article. The solution there was that the author created a redirect for Castle Naze that pointed to the Combs Moss article, and then he put the redirect page into the hill forts category. Is that a possibility here? Dave.Dunford (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's a possibility, yes. I've notified all three WikiProjects of this discussion. Let's see what other editors think. Mjroots (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjroots:Just for the record, on reflection there's no real reason to object to the inclusion of the Windmills navbox – happy for you to revert its removal without further discussion. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I note from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mills#animal mills and categories an analogous situation where Estate Mount Victory was removed by another editor from a (since deleted) category Category:animal mills, prompting the comment that "I think that removal is unhelpful because it goes against regular usage of categories to indicate presence of things in articles." That article, referring to a historic estate in the U.S. Virgin Islands that possesses "[r]uins of a factory, an animal mill, a steam mill chimney, a wind mill, outbuildings and Mt. Victory School", is still in Category:Windmills, which seems similarly unexpected to me. I'm in agreement with the editor who removed the category with the edit summary "while the estate may have used animal engines, the estate is not an animal engine" – to my mind, categories should contain only articles about objects that fall wholly within that category, not wider collections that do or did contain objects of the said type. To offer a rather facetious analogy, you wouldn't expect to find Windsor, Berkshire in Category:Castles in Berkshire‎ just because the town of Windsor contains a castle. This may be a wider discussion – I'd be surprised it's not arisen before. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Animal mills was never created, but Category:Animal engines was. Mjroots (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dave.Dunford: this is an issue that only affects a very small number of articles. There are three open air museums in the UK with windmills moved from elsewhere - Avoncroft Museum of Historic Buildings, the Museum of East Anglian Life and Weald and Downland. The two latter also have a watermill. There are also a number of similar museums worldwide, but I would not expect this to affect more than 25 articles. Mjroots (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's a wider issue, though, beyond windmills – namely, "should we include articles that mention an example of X, in Category:X"? My answer would be "no", but I don't know what the consensus is. Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As we already had a redirect for the Westham windpump, I've gone a categorised that. Will create a redirect for the Lurgashall watermill and do the same. With that, I think we're done here. Mjroots (talk) 13:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good solution. Thanks. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]