Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cheshire/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
		<< 1	< Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3 >	3 >>

Contents 1 Feedback 2 "Thematic" articles 3 Templates 4 How far do we go?

Feedback

I must say I'm quite jealous of the amount of progress and organisation that is evident on this project! It seems better than that of the wider UK geo project! - shame I'm north of the border however!

Was wondering if I could have some feedback with regards to an ammendment I'm proposing about settlement article structuring; I think the proposal is a positive one, but would like consensus and feedback if pos. The proposal is found here. Hope you guys can help! Jhamez84 22:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

"Thematic" articles

We are putting in some good work on the administration and the Settlements of Cheshire, and User:Salinae has done some good work on Salt Mining in Cheshire and Canals in Cheshire, So, I wondered if it would be a good idea to produce a list of more "thematic" topics which might be put on some wanted list for articles? In that way, we might be able to get a better skeleton structure for what work needs to be done. Some ideas that spring to my mind are these:

• Canals in Cheshire (already started)
• The Salt Industry in Cheshire (already started)
• Public Footpaths of Cheshire
• Roads of Cheshire
• Rivers of Cheshire (possibly closely linked with the canals article)
• Railways of Cheshire
• Archeological Sites of Cheshire
• The Silk Industry of Cheshire
• Public Parks and Gardens of Cheshire
• Religion in Cheshire

Are there any others that spring to people's minds, and should any which I have listed so far be discarded? If we can build up a list of possible themes that we can arrange in order of priority and number of people willing to give them a try, we can start to fill out bits on the main project page more. What do people think?  DDStretch  (talk) 16:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Good idea - perhaps these need to be posted on the main page. There are a number of railway station pages, plus a number of road articles, so putting this together under a larger umbrella of "transport in cheshire" would be relatively easily initially. We could then "grow" these themes. Pixie2000 18:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I had been thinking of a Firsts in Cheshire, listing inventions, structures etc. However, I could only think of three things (polythene, Anderton Boat Lift and the Bridgewater Canal), so I thought it would be a bit sparse. Salinae 21:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Just came across the fact that (apparently) Mollington was the first place to have a Neighbourhood Watch scheme. That is four "firsts" then. Pixie2000 22:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to find out if there are any more "Firsts" for Cheshire which might be added to any article. So, I think it should be added to the list. We can always decide to put it in as a prominent section of, say, the main Cheshire article if it still seems a bit sparse after some hard searching around.  DDStretch  (talk) 00:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok - I'll put all these possibles for articles on the main page in the "Open Tasks" section. I'll put in some more tasks which I know some are already doing as well. If people are working on something themselves which has not already been mentioned, feel free to add them. I'll also put in a section where requests for help can be put if anyone would like some help with some of the tasks they are working on.  DDStretch  (talk) 00:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Templates

I've added some more templates on the main project page. They have been designed for the civil parishes within each borough. I've got Ellesmere Port and Neston, and City of Chester still to do. I've tended to neglect Warrington and Halton for now.

I've undoubtably missed out some "principal settlements" within each template, so would welcome changes made to add in the towns that people think should be added. I'd also welcome other comments about them.  DDStretch  (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I've thought about adding a [[Category Cheshire]] and [[Category {{PAGENAME}}]] to the Cheshire template. This would mean that each town in Cheshire would automatically have a category - the same as Category:Middlewich. For example Castle Park House, Frodsham could then go in the Frodsham category. What do people think? Salinae 23:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately this doesn't quite work - although the page (for example Northwich) has category links to Category:Northwich and Category:Cheshire, the Northwich and Cheshire Categories dont have a back link to the Northwich page. Does anyone know how to fix this? Salinae 12:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought this would initially be a good idea, but now I'm not so sure having seen it work to some extent and thought about what is exactly happening. May be I am missing something here? This is what I understand now happens: The Cheshire Template is added to all settlements in Cheshire as well as some other places. This means that these would all attempt to have a category created for them - even villages in Cheshire would have an attempt made to create their own category. Now, if I have this correct, I am not sure that this would be welcomed by the wikipedia admin people nor would it be what we want to happen. Perhaps I am missing or misunderstanding something here, though? Could you comment, please?  DDStretch  (talk) 13:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. Everything which included the Cheshire template (basically towns and villages) would have a category created under its own name. Having tried it I can see that it could cause a problem if everything (villages etc) wanted to use that template. Maybe drop it for now, and put them in by hand where its worthwhile (e.g. towns)? Salinae 21:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Would it be "tidier" to place a reference to the Cheshire Portal inside the {{cheshire}} template (Template:Cheshire)? I think this would be a cleaner look for all the places, and also save us having to update the individual articles. This is how they have done it for Template:London and Template:Cornwall. I would do it myself, but I cannot figure out how with our template!  Pixie2000 (talk) 10:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I added {{portalpar|Cheshire}} to Template:Cheshire yesterday (28th January 2007). However, since this template doesn't get put on all Cheshire-related articles, there will still be a need to add the portal to some other articles. Last night, I tried to think of how we could select all articles that were concerned with Cheshire, and add the portal to them, but I couldn't think how. That is, unless we had a global category in which all articles were routinely placed, or had some kind of "bot" that trawled through adding the portal link to all Cheshire related articles it found. I don't think Category:Cheshire has any way of "propagating down" any additional stuff placed in its top level, and I don't know enough about bots to know how to do, whether we can do it on our own, or how we might specify "all Cheshire-related articles" to it in a way a program could interpret. My solution was to do what you've suggested, but may be we can specify a few other places to add the portal link which would increase the amount of "automatic coverage".  DDStretch  (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I have started a discussion point on the County template talk page to make it easier and cleaner to add the portal link into the template on which the Cheshire template is based. I think it will end up with a cleaner look than we currently have, but this change does not resolve the problem of Cheshire-related articles that do not include the Cheshire template as they are not "place" articles.

Would it therefore also be worth considering a new second Cheshire Template that contains links to "topic areas", and include a portal link on this new template too? I was thinking of something like the bottom part of the Cornwall template. This could be added to every Cheshire article.  Pixie2000 (talk) 14:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with you about the ugliness of the present placing of the Cheshire portal link. I remember playing around with it a bit when I was considering putting on various templates, and none of the now readily available solutions looked any better. I agree with you about the advantages that might be had by having a second Cheshire template. If we had one that gave topic areas, as you suggest, then it could be added to every Cheshire-related article, thus doing away with the necessity of the Cheshire template (for placea and settlements) being edited at all. The new template idea would be perhaps a better solution as well, as it would not mix up so much the distinction that can be drawn between a template containing purely "settlement/local administration information" and more "internal wikipedia-topic information". I hope such a move would not be in opposition to any guidelines or perceived guidelines that other, non-Cheshire Project editors, might think are more set in stone than they are. I mention this as I have a vague recollection of some discussion somewhere about this sort of thing, but I can't now recall exactly where on wikipedia it was. I personally would say "go for it" and let us as a project for Cheshire just deal with the people who object if and when that happens.  DDStretch  (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I have updated Template:County and Template:Cheshire to improve the link through to the portal. If anyone thinks they can do a better job then please do have a go!!  Pixie2000 (talk) 21:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

How far do we go?

I am fairly new to Wikipedia and note that initially you wanted the template just on towns and villages. Now interest seems to be spreading to canals etc. I have written a few new articles and added to some older ones, almost all with a Cheshire basis - Cheshire people, buildings, structures, etc.(see my user page). Should they be included in the project? Should I add the template to the talk pages of all of these? Are the talk pages containing the template integrated somewhere (like lists of...)? It's a worthwhile project and something we Cestrians should take pride in. Peter I. Vardy 21:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for the comment and your work already on articles concerned with aspects of Cheshire. Please feel free to add your name to the list of participants on the main project page. I think the template should go on all articles that are concerned with Cheshire. I saw the first task of the project as getting a start on sorting out the county, district, town, and village articles, but the project should also work on other aspects as stated in its aims. So, if you would like to add templates to any of your projects, please feel free to do so. As far as I know, the record of where the template has been used is not recorded in a permanent list, but it is possible to construct a list "on the fly" by going to the template page and clicking on "What links here" in the menu (the Context bit of the menu on my setup). So, one would go to Template:WikiProject Cheshire by typing that into the "Find" box and pressing go. Then one would click on "What links here". I think at some point, we may be able to think about having a "Cheshire Portal", just as Cornwall and London do. We would need to know about a few more "thematic" articles existing on Wikipedia before that could happen convincingly, though. If people think the project should be restricted, though, let's discusss this. I agree we should take pride in our County (even though I was born in it and don't live in it at the moment, I still think of myself as someone from Cheshire.)  DDStretch  (talk) 00:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed - anything Cheshire related can be included as far as I am concerned. Pixie2000 08:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just extended an article on Robert Spear Hudson who was born in West Bromwich and whose business activities were in that town and in Liverpool. However he lived for some 9 years at Bache Hall, Chester and during this time played a prominent part in the civic and religious life of Chester. Do you think that he (and others similar) should be included in the project? Then how about Joseph Crosfield, subject of a recent new article? He was the founder of Crosfield's, the chemical business in Warrington, now in Cheshire but throughout his life he and his business were in Lancashire. Peter I. Vardy 16:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)