|Kent has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article has an assessment summary page.|
I hope no one minds but I changed the coordinates, as the old coordinates pointed near the border of Kent, in fact possibly even the Greater London side of the border. The new coordinates point to somewhere near the middle of the county, which makes much more sense to me.
Carlwev 15:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Good work. Epbr123 15:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I have posted a comment on User talk:DinosaursLoveExistence ClemRutter 09:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC) And the response was User talk:ClemRutter#Kent Schools. Any comments, or is this a straight rv- on grounds given? ClemRutter 12:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think I missed what sparked this off. Kent does have some bona fide comprehensive schools, is someone saying it doesn't? Or is it just the number in question? --LiamE 14:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to delete the lot for now. This article is of GA status and we can't have giant chunks like this uncited and NPOV.
- In my humble experience there are schools in Kent (sorry Kent and Medway) that style themselves as comps. While the Hundread of Hoo school and Minister college (IIRC) are two that i know of set up as comp's in what the reader might understand a true comp to be. most of the others i can think of (Thomas Aveling, in Medway springs to mind) claim to be comps but are high schools (or secondary moderns as the editor in question put it).
- In the long term some sort of *robust, cited* comparison of the Kent's education system ie high schools and grammars, with few separate six form collages, and few independent school at both GCSE and A-level. until someone comes up with some bloody good stuff along these lines, this area would be rife with POV and origional research.
- hope everyone understands what i'm on about ; Pickle 20:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Featured Article 
Anyone fancy attempting for FA status again?
Just reading the failure points on the previous attempt, I think the MP's should be removed from the infobox. Although they represent areas within Kent, they do not represent Kent itself. The article is about Kent, not an accumulation of facts from everything within Kent. MortimerCat (talk) 13:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Coat of Arms 
Hallo, on the German version of Wikipedia the coat of arms of kent is discribed to have a historic link to the saxon coat of arms (today part of Northrhine-Westphalia and Lower-Saxony). Both have a white horse... Does anybody know more about it? --Westfalenbaer (talk) 19:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
GA Reassessment 
- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Kent/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
I am doing the GA Reassessment for this claim as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have reviewed the article and decided to keep it as a GA. It meets the GA Criteria. Reference  is a dead link and should be fixed but otherwise the article is fine and I will keep it as GA. H1nkles (talk) 02:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
River Medway 
The Environmental Authority described the River Medway as being 112 km (70 miles) long . As such, it would seem appropriate to describe it this way in the text, especially as the rest of the geography section of the article puts metric measures first followed by the older measures in parentheses. Is there any objection to this change? Michael Glass (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC).
- As this is an article about a UK-related subject, the measurements should be in the form imperial (metric). Mjroots (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I realise that there is controversy over the use of the metric system in the UK, so I don't want to be too dogmatic. However, the Manual of Style says, " [F]or the UK, they usually are metric units for most measurements, but imperial units for some measurements such as road distances..."  and the Times Style guide says, in part, "The Times should keep abreast of the trend in the UK to move gradually towards all-metric use...".  Nevertheless, in this case, a more immediate consideration is that the other measurements in the section are metric first, so having the River Medway the other way round breaks the style. Also - correct me if you feel I'm wrong - the preference for miles is for road distances, and as the Medway is a river, and the Environment Agency puts kilometres first, perhaps the preference for miles does not apply so much to natural features such as rivers.
So that's my two cents about the issue. However, if you still feel strongly enough to change the order, I hope you'll follow the policy which says, "Where footnoting or citing sources for values and units, identify both the source and the original units." . However, as it breaks the style of the section to change it, I hope you'll leave it as it is. Michael Glass (talk) 11:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- It's a battle not worth fighting. Footpaths are measured in km, it is only road signs that persist in using a measurement system that has not been taught in schools for at least 30 years. OS maps went metric in 1976, so you can't even measure the length of a river using the piece of string method, without dividing your result by 1.6093. --ClemRutter (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Save Rochester Castle 
Borders of Kent 
- Certainly did: roughly between Royal Victoria Gardens and Barking Creek. I used to know why, but I've forgotten now. I'll try to find out again. --Old Moonraker (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
- The fabled version, with no discernible element of truth whatsoever, is that it was ceded to the parish of Woolwich in payment of a debt owed by parish authorities north of the river. According to the tale, a fisherman of Woolwich came upon the body of a seaman on the Essex bank, and told the parish authorities. They refused to accept the charge of the burial (as they should have done), and so the cost fell upon the parish of Woolwich. Woolwich sued for their money, and won. The Essex party still refused to pay, and so, by decree of the royal court, a parcel of land was made over to Kent in recompense. A more prosaic explanation is that Haimo, eleventh century Sheriff of Kent, owned land on both banks and, to suit his convenience, his acreage on the north bank was included in "his" county. --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
The area in question is North Woolwich. The story on that article is that Haimo was granted land on both sides of the river to allow him to tax traffic. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Towns, Cities 
Discussion regarding the location of Medway 
Please see the discussion of recent changes to articles related to Medway here,