Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buckinghamshire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This non-article page is within the scope of the WikiProject Buckinghamshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating.

Contents

[edit] WikiProject Milton Keynes or WikiProject Buckinghamshire?

As big as this is, i do not think it is large enough for a project. However, there is no project covering the county i which Milton Keynes is in so may i suggest this project expands its scope and become WikiProject Buckinghamshire? Simply south (talk) 16:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

A reverse take-over! I like it :) --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
This project was suggested at the WikiProject Council sometime back. However, a Buckinghamshire Project, and potential Milton Keynes taskforce, could work better as it would hopefully get more people interested. SeveroTC 22:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
So what defines a 'task force'? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
It's like a mini-project. It has it's own group of members who look at a specific area within the scope of a project, but all the admin and bureaucracy is still covered by the main WikiProject, avoiding doubling up of all the admin work etc. SeveroTC 13:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Should i move ths project and sort things then? Simply south (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Y Done —SeveroTC 14:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Scope

I've tagged about 1000 articles that fall under the recursive category of Buckinghamshire with some exceptions, some which then fed into other counties (the categorisation in these cases is wrong) and people who play for sports teams in our areas (my thinking is that sportspeople from Bucks are within the scope, but sportspeople who play in Bucks are not). If you find a load of articles that are tagged and you're not sure they should be in our scope, or vice-versa, leave a note here and we can do whatever's necessary! SeveroTC 12:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there a way of seeing what has been tagged in this way? -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:WikiProject_Buckinghamshire gives you the list. SeveroTC 16:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, I thought it was something like that. -- Roleplayer (talk) 16:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

One that's come up is Calchfynydd. I was a little sceptical about adding this one as I thought "hang on, that sounds Welsh!", but it's clearly marked Category:History of Buckinghamshire..... SeveroTC 21:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say don't include it, because it's only one researcher that is trying to push that it was in the Chilterns area - all others place the kingdom elsewhere. However if you want to pre-Roman district that modern-day Buckinghamshire is in, it's Catuvellauni, and that's not in WP:BUCKS yet. -- Roleplayer (talk) 22:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
In that one, someone had got overzealous in putting it in the History of Buckinghamshire category, not to mention History of Herts, Oxon etc. I think we'll find some other dodgy categorisation here and there. I don't think such articles, including Catuvellauni, that date back so far before "Buckinghamshire" was conceived, should be included. SeveroTC 22:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
How about Cunobelinus though? He was the king of the Catuvellauni, and it is he that the Kimbles are named after. -- Roleplayer (talk) 23:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I think, in general, pre-Buckinghamshire history should not be covered, however, in specific cases such as the one you mention where the subject has some significance now, then they should be included (if my meaning is clear). Either way, if anyone thinks a particular article should be added, be bold and add it :) SeveroTC 21:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Project banner image

I was looking for a more appropriate Buckinghamshire photo for the project banner, but in lieu of a flag or a very recognisable building or scene, I wasn't really sure what to pick. I would have chosen a little map, but I couldn't find one on commons :S The current one is very MK biased! SeveroTC 12:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The county does have an unofficial flag, but it's very difficult to draw seeing as it has the county swan in the middle of it. What about a notable landmark? -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
How about the swan logo? Or even a picture of a swan? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Concrete Cows. Simply south (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The concrete cows are still very MK-centric. I like the idea of a picture of a swan. -- Roleplayer (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree. A swan sounds good. SeveroTC 00:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goals

My thoughts on project goals:

That's about all for now :) SeveroTC 12:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

  • I notice that Buckinghamshire used to be considered FA status in the past - can we focus on getting that back up to scratch first? -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree, when it was promoted the criteria was a little different so there may be a fair amount of work to do in some areas, but I think it's core for this project! SeveroTC 16:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Buckinghamshire navigation template

Would it be possible for this new team to create and roll out a Template:Buckinghamshire inline with the rest of England (as per this link)? Something like Template:Greater Manchester or Template:Oxfordshire would be great! --Jza84 |  Talk  01:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I've made a start, where does this template go then? -- Roleplayer (talk) 11:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I forgot to check if this had been actioned! Looks like you've worked that one out! It looks great! Well done! --Jza84 |  Talk  01:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requests

I don't know if it was the right thing to do, but I started a list of requested articles, here. -- Roleplayer (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll do a navigation box so it's easy to find such subpages. There is already a category (Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Buckinghamshire) for photographs. SeveroTC 21:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Museums in Buckinghamshire

Could I ask for some help accessing local knowledge, from members of this wikiproject, on the behalf of the new WikiProject Museums? We are currently trying to identify articles within the Museum projects scope (& develop guidelines to help improve them etc). There is a List of museums in Buckinghamshire. Could you take a look at the list for your local area and see if any are missing or create articles for any red links. Could you also add the new project banner "{{WikiProject Museums}}" to the Talk pages of the articles, so that we can identify those in need of work etc. Any help appreciated &, if anyone is interested you are welcome to join the project or discuss Museum related articles on the Project Talk Page.— Rod talk 13:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Resources/sources

[edit] Severo

I'm thinking between us we probably have a lot of hard sources to hand,so how about a listing so that we can easily ask someone if we need something from a particular source? I'll get the ball rolling, I have in front of me:

  • (March 1970) The Plan for Milton Keynes Volume One, Milton Keynes Development Corporation, Bletchley: European. ISBN 0903379007. 
  • (March 1970) The Plan for Milton Keynes Volume Two, Milton Keynes Development Corporation, Bletchley: European. ISBN 0903379007. 
  • Markham, Sir Frank [1973] (1986). History of Milton Keynes and District Volume 1. Luton: White Crescent. ISBN 0900804297. 
  • Markham, Sir Frank [1975] (1986). History of Milton Keynes and District Volume 2. Luton: White Crescent. ISBN 0900804300. 
  • Clapson, Mark (2004). A Social History of Milton Keynes. London: Frank Cass. ISBN 0714684171. 
  • Cook, Robert (2004). Bletchley Past & Present. Stroud: Sutton. ISBN 075093445X. 

SeveroTC 23:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC) (Updated 12:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Roleplayer

See User:Roleplayer/Bucks sources

-- Roleplayer (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quality Assessment

Can others please suggest/ advise on how articles in the Bucks Project should be (peer-)reviewed and their ratings reassessed. Some articles have ratings based on Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography assessment previously done others do not. Meanwhile I saw one tagged just now by this project which is also part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Football i.e. Talk:Milton Keynes Dons F.C. which was just reassessed. I could see no discussion or peer review it seems it was done on the run without reference here or to the football project. If we are to have some consistency it would be useful to know the criteria/ process and / who has responsibility to do this and how the community should be involved. ThanksTmol42 (talk) 23:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I've been running AWB to migrate ratings carried out by other projects to our new project banner and assessment scheme. This reduces the amount of articles we have to assess from around 1000 to 250. All projects broadly base their assessments upon the Version 1.0 Editorial Team assessment criteria, so there shouldn't be any differences in ratings. I will migrate the various bits from those pages to project sub-pages here when I find the time. On the levels below Good Article - namely "Stub", "Start" and "B" - no further peer assessment needs to be undertaken other than a "silent review", there doesn't need to be discussion at these levels. With the example you cite, someone asked me about the rating of the article so I reassessed it manually and it fits the "B" criteria, so I altered the assessment ratings on the talk page.
The point of assessing is two-fold. First, it enables us to chart the quality of the individual article. Second, it allows us to chart the quality of articles within the scope of the WikiProject altogether. This is the more interesting one for us as most articles are already covered by another WikiProject and so individually assessed.
As for who/how to assess and so on, all guidelines are taken from the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. Up to and including the "B" assessment, anyone can assess or reassess an article - it is completely unbureaucratic. It can be a bit subjective. Beyond "B", there is an assessment system for Good Articles and Featured Articles. The "A" assessment I don't think we will end up using - it is a seldom used stepping stone between GA and FA which only larger projects (for example Biography) use. I personally don't think it's good practice to grade your own work above "Start" (recognising up to "Start" is easy, beyond is where the subjectivity starts), so I would typically remove the assessment altogether, which places the article back into the Unassessed Buckinghamshire articles category. Hopefully then someone else comes along to assess it - this is more likely if the category holds less than 20 articles at any one time! Hope this answers your questions! SeveroTC 23:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, if you want a certain few articles reviewed sooner rather than later, list them here and I'll look through them tomorrow. SeveroTC 23:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your full and very helpful reply. The issue I have found with contributing to articles about small settlements, unlike larger towns and conurbations, is they tend to be developed by one or two editors only so there is next to no development and refinement based on critique of each others edits etc. I have been working on quite a number of the typical small village settlements(only 100-300 inhabitants) in the Chilterns spiraling out from a hub / cluster of 4 villages whose history /communities are closely interlinked due to their relative isolation from others not far distant.
So it would be really helpful if you could take a look at Cholesbury and Hawridge which are furthest advanced editorially speaking of the four and follow most closely the template guidance for village settlements and then if you can spare the time then either Buckland Common and St Leonards which are yet to be reconfigured like the first two. It would be also useful for others to know what needs to be contained within a very small hamlet like Chivery or Asheridge which are to be fond all over Bucks to get them a descent rating. Being remote autonomous settlements which fall below the level which census and other demographic data can be desegregated from Local Government statistics limits what can be incorporated. Any thoughts will be much appreciatedTmol42 (talk) 23:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
I've left comments about Cholesbury at the talk page there, it's "B" standard but really suffers from the lack of inline citations. I haven't left comments at Hawridge but it's very similar, although there doesn't seem to be the issue of repeated links in sections. Considering the size of the villages, I think it's very good work! Keep it up! SeveroTC 00:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks the guidance and suggested improvements here will be helpful in improving the article and I think will be of use for others working on upgrading villages and other settlements Tmol42 (talk) 13:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)