Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Piers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome to the WikiProject Piers Talk Page.--Paul E. Ester 16:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] InfoBox

Please add any criterias that should be added or deleted from the infobox template--Paul E. Ester 05:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Would some extra fields to describe the construction method/materials be useful, e.g wood/concrete/iron piles/arches/lintels supporting hardwood/tarmac/concrete deck Lynbarn 13:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree it's an excellent item for inclusion. I got the template from the bridge articles, they have "design" and "construction" the latter assuming to be the firm that built it. Is there a term that generally describes the items used in construction. "Materiel" comes to mind or maybe something like "structure", what do you suggest? --Paul E. Ester 13:36, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
I added the infobox to the North Pier, Blackpool article as a reference.--Paul E. Ester 16:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I notice that the default map locator set defaults to the US in the infobox template as shown in the North Pier, Blackpool article. I will create alocation property and add an /if so it can go back and and forth. I'll check if there is support for the HK pier locations.--Paul E. Ester 15:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Model Pier Articles

We need some candidates for "model" pier articles.--Paul E. Ester 05:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pier/Amusement Park list

http://rcdb.com/qs1.htm?quicksearch=pier

I found this project working on the roller coaster wikiproject, since many piers are also amusement parks. The list is from the roller coaster database, a resource used for the coaster project. I hope this helps, and I'd also like to ask that if, as a part of this project, articles on roller coasters are created, you refer to our project and follow our guidelines. Thanks! --Phantom784 21:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brighton's Piers

Hello Project Piers :-)

I've been one of several users involved in cleaning up and improving the Brighton and Hove articles in recent months, and I'd just like to put out a plea for some co-ordination on the treatment of the West Pier, Brighton and Brighton Pier articles. The "Palace Pier", as I and most residents call it, is now called the "Brighton Pier" by its owners. Apparently, according to various edit summaries, the National Piers Society fails to recognise this name change. Personally I would support them if that is the case, however, Wikipedia must reflect facts, and not reflect the way things "ought to be", no matter how laudable the desire. So, I'd like to ask that those in the know about piers also consult with those in the know about Brighton, and maybe we can come up with a form of words everyone is happy with. But let's try to avoid the current situation where from time to time people change the name of the Pier back and forth. Today's change within the West Pier article broke the link to the other Pier. – Kieran T (talk | contribs) 17:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleethorpes Pier

In paragraph two the Cleethorpes Pier article claims "Nowadays, it is the shortest UK pier, at just 335ft."

On other Wikipedia pages Burnham-on-Sea claims to have the shortest pleasure pier in Britain.

See:

I have not found any figures for the length of Burnham's pier to make comparisons. However, various images of both piers on Wikipedia and elsewhere would suggest Burnham's claim is correct. Unfortunately Burnham's pier does not, and never did have features such as a promenade, which would qualify it as a proper pleasure pier to my mind. On the other hand, the former Redcar pier had lost its promenade by the time I knew it, leaving only the Mecca ballroom and that was still considered a pier.

Rather than discuss what makes a pleasure pier, I think a minor modification to the wording would clarify and resolve this apparent internal contradiction. Something along the lines of, "At just 335ft, it is the shortest UK pleasure pier with a promenade." Unless that is, someone knows of a shorter one.

John Yeadon

Thanks for bringing that issue up. Your suggestion is a good one to address the issue. We should see if we can find some reliable sources to put the item to rest. You also raise an issue of what is a proper "pleasure pier".
I would encourage you to get a username so your contributions are properly recognized. We look forward to your continued participation! Thanks again for posting. --Paul E. Ester 14:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Southern California fishing piers

Hers's an article that lists most, if not all, of the fishing piers in Southern Califonria [1]. BlankVerse 07:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
  • User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
  • User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 20:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 23:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afriad) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 15:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wigan Pier

Wigan Pier does not fit the definition given in the Pier article, but is notable for its historical and literary associations, and partly because it is NOT a pier in the same sense as most of those covered by this project. It does now have the start of what could be a good article of its own. The question I've asked here is, Should Wigan Pier be tabled on the Pier article, and if it should, do we need to expand the initial definition? Do feel free to join the discussion. Regards, Lynbarn 12:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geolinks-coord Issues

The Project page suggests using a Geolinks template. The Geolinks templates may be superseded by recent changes in the coord template which provide a list of mapping services when the geographical coordinate is clicked on. Please participate in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Geographical_coordinates#Geolinks-coord_Issues and consider changes to your guideline. I notice that recent versions of the Geobox template emit coord-style coordinates and locator maps. (SEWilco 17:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC))