Talk:Chichester Cathedral

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Notability / Sources[edit]

I am sure this cathedral is very nice and historical and everything. Is it unreasonable to expect some documentation by the contributing editors? -- KingNewbs (talk) 13:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)


Huge gaps in text cause by info box. Please LOOKI at the effect before saving! Amandajm (talk) 07:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


for all your little edits, Wetman! Could you take a look at Carlisle Cathedral as well? But please stop reducing pics, as the text is describing the details (eg the Purbeck marble shafts) which cannot be viewed in the tiny image. Most users do not know that thhere is an option to chose the size that one sees images. The sizing of images in art articles has been discussed, with most regular contributors wanting them larger, not smaller. (Unless there are a huge number, of course, eg Romanesque architecture where images are sized acording to the amount of info contained in the image, and whether detailed viewing is necessary). Amandajm (talk) 03:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I never reduce illustrations. In fact "My preferences" (upper right corner) are for 300 pixels. I don't inflict my choices for nice big illustrations on others but de-force px per the not-even-so-new-any-more MoS. I never invoke "most users" to press my own views. --Wetman (talk) 05:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a very fine line between "reducing illustrations" and "de-forcing px". If I may be so crass as to refer to yer average user, the effect, for them, is remarkably the same. If the MoS hasn't yet been revised about this matter, then it needs to be. Amandajm (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Capital Letters[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was: Capital Letters necessary. Organist and Master of the Choristers, Assistant Organist and Organ Scholar written with capital letters. Willwal (talk) 08:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

There have been conflicts between editors on the matter of whether Organist & Master of the Choristers, Assistant Organists and Organ Scholars should be written with a capital letter. If you think that it shoyld be, then put YesCAPS and your name, etc. If you think it shouldn't, then put NoCAPS, name, etc. Please also put why you think that there should/n't be capital letters on these titles. -Willwal talk to me Sunday 12 July 08:10 (UTC)

YesCAPS Willwal talk to me Sunday 12 July 08:12 (UTC). They are official titles and need to be headed with capital letters because of this.

YesCAPS Amandajm (talk) 03:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC). It is customary. It is the form used on other cathedral pages. I might say that the parts of the building are also often referred to with capitals, this always being the case if there is a distinctive name such as the Angel Choir and St Hugh's Choir at Lincoln and the Five Sisters at York.

Thank-you for your comments; it's been 2 months since this discussion opened, so I think that with the majority being YesCAPS, we can declare that the titles, Organist & Master of the Choristers, etc will be written with capitals. Willwal, Talk to Me 08:25 Sun 27 Sept.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The above section is meaningless[edit]

because the Manual of Style applies to all pages. Two editors with a poor grasp of this cannot opt the page out of the consensus arrived at by the Wikipedian community. Bear in mind that polls are evil.--Charles (talk) 09:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Little Boxes and....[edit]

....huge ugly impractical boxes! Someone just added a map to to info box and tipped the balance of what I'm prepared to put up with. Huge boxes full of spaced-out text (that could be within the article) take up all the right-hand space that could be used for pics and disrupt the entire layout for anyone using a wide screen.

Someone, (forgotten the name) against all my objections, came up with this horrible box which allows you to insert every single member of the staff and every possible dimension of the building. It is divided into three sections, the first of which has the unfortunate heading of "basic information" (whatever that is). We don't need this huge cumbersom template. The stuff should be written into the article.

Here is what I removed: precentor = The Revd Canon Tim Schofield canons = The Revd Canon Dr Anthony Cane, Chancellor The Revd Canon Ian Gibson Treasurer The Revd Canon Tom Inman Representative of the College of Canons The Revd Canon Derek Tansill Cathedral Chaplain The Revd Canon David Nason Priest Vicar other = Mrs Sarah Stonor Dr John Dalgleish Mrs Lesley Webster Lay Members of the Chapter Cdre David Mowlam RN Communar archdeacon = The Ven Douglas McKittrick organist =Sarah Baldock

Let me put it to you this way, the creators of the cathedral website do consider this info so vital that it takes precedence over the other information. Very few readers need to know this, or would find it interesting. The information can go somewhere lower down the article in a list of "current staff". Those who need to know a list of the canons will look for it on the cathedral's webpage where they will also find people's contact details.

Amandajm (talk) 09:41, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, all the info is already there, in a paragraph called "Dean and Chapter"! Amandajm (talk) 09:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not keen on boxes anyway, and putting in a map which contains little detail, is ugly and is easily found by clicking to the cathedral town seems quite unnecessary.--Charles (talk) 10:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
I completely agree with you. The well-meaning editor has added them to all the cathedrals. Amandajm (talk) 10:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The Chichester Singers[edit]

There is no proper reason for a 'Chichester Singers' section on the Chichester Cathedral article, seeing that there is no official affliation between Chichester Cathedral and The Chichester Singers. Even though they do perform some of their major concerts at the cathedral, that does not make them associated. Willwal, talk. 3 January 2011 22:23 UTC

I do not agree. As all their major performances are at the cathedral they are part of the music scene there. I see no reason to exclude them.--Charles (talk) 09:50, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
If you think that the Chichester Singers should have a section solely because they perform at the Cathedral, then I suppose there should be a section for Southern Pro Musica, St Cecilia Chorus, and other orchestras and choirs? As you can imagine, this would be pointless - why not mention the fact that Chi Singers perform regularly in the '5 Music' section, rather than starting a new section? Willwal, talk. 4 January 2011 10:28 (UTC)
The cathedral has a tradition of actively supporting all kinds of music both religious and secular. This includes the RSCM festival every year, free lunctime concerts, visiting choirs for evensong etc. We have a section mentioning pop/ rock musicians in the cathedral who are visitors. I think that Chi singers are particularly worth mentioning for a couple of reasons namely to demonstrate that there is wide variety of types of music performed at the cathedral (not just at the services of course) also it is the singers principle venue for all of their works, which I think seperates them out. However, I would certainly support a wider section that discusses all the music performed in the cathedral, Chichester Singers et al. in line with the cathedral tradition perhaps? Wilfridselsey (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. Perhaps a section called 'Regular performers'? Any ideas? But not a section for the Chi Singers solely. Willwal, talk. 4 January 2011 13:05 (UTC)
I like your introduction to the music section idea "The music at Chichester Cathedral is largely led by the organ and the Cathedral choir, as there are services daily and on special days in the calendar. There are visiting choirs from diocesan parishes and orchestras that perform at the Cathedral regularly." I think that we could change it to "The music at Chichester Cathedral is largely led by the organ and the Cathedral choir, as there are services daily and on special days in the calender. Outside the regular services the Cathedral also supports all kinds of music both religious and secular."
Then instead of the Chi Singers and Pop Music headers a Concerts and other music section maybe?(this would fit well with the Other burials header). Then could provide detail on visiting choirs, the RSCM festival, free lunchtime concerts, the Chichester festival, the singers, and the rest, including pop and rock. The cathedral is an important venue for music in the Chichester area, and that is because several of the deans as well as the organists have been keen to make that so. I think the article should reflect it, without being too wordy! What do you think? Wilfridselsey (talk) 16:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I see that the article Choir of Chichester Cathedral is due to be merged into the choir section, so this can be done at the same time.--Charles (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree with what Wilfredselsey proposes. However, I do not think that Choir of Chichester Cathedral should be merged with the choir section on the Cathedral's article. Perhaps this should be up for seperate discussion? Willwal, talk. 4 January 2011 18:55 (UTC)
OK I have changed the headings as per discussion, whos up for doing the rewrite? I am not around for a few days, but I am quite happy to help when I get back. Regards. Wilfridselsey (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I have completed the rewrite as per discussion here. I have kept the singers in, though trimmed them slightly, as with the exception of a few concerts (mainly abroad), they do all of their works exclusively in the cathedral. There are other artists who regularly visit the cathedral, identified above, but they perform elsewhere too.
I have kept all the pop stars in, but I am sure that there must be some more recent examples we could use? Any suggestions?? Wilfridselsey (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Adding a source to examine[edit] Shyamal (talk) 14:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chichester Cathedral. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:35, 27 July 2017 (UTC)