Talk:List of places in Yorkshire

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of places in Yorkshire article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Indexes

This alphabetical index of Wikipedia articles falls within the scope of the WikiProject Indexes. This is a collaborative effort to create, maintain, and improve alphabetical indexes on Wikipedia.IndexesWikipedia:WikiProject IndexesTemplate:WikiProject IndexesIndexes articles

Yorkshire High‑importance

	Yorkshire portal List of places in Yorkshire is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Prefix

As Yorkshire without any kind of prefix or addition (eg West Riding of Yorkshire, North Yorkshire, Yorkshire and the Humber) has only ever meant the historic and geographic county this list's only purpose can be to list all the places in that original county. Mickleton, County Durham may have County Durham in its title but it is south of the River Tees and therefore in the North Riding of Yorkshire. The fact that Wikipedia convention is to use ceremonial counties in the titles of pages is no reason to exclude a village within the geographic boundaries of Yorkshire from this list. The same would go for any settlements administered by the Lancashire, Greater Manchester or Cumbria authorities. Yorkshire Phoenix 15:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand the logic behind this. However Wikipedia is worldwide and therefore this list may cause confusion for many people from both the UK and overseas, who use it to locate places and then refer to it in error. Such as as those making up holiday visiting plans, or references to counties in which their friend or releatives live. The status of these towns having once been in Yorkshire is only of interest to a minority of people, usually Yorkshire folk and their descendants. I am interested, as a Yorkshireman, but I also like to see places listed in their actual currently designated county. Perhaps it may be more useful if this article was renamed as 'Historic Yorkshire place names' to differentiate it from the current local government / county designations? Richard Harvey 15:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your comment: 'the status of these towns once having been in Yorkshire..', I must point out that technically, those towns atill are in Yorkshire in so far as I can make out. The only differnece today is that they are administered by councils whcih also cover area out side of Yorkshire...the ceremonial county borders being based on nothing but administrative districts and nothing about which area a place falls in. I must say that places which fall in any of the three ridings ought to be included here, as being part of the simple are that is Yorkshire. It would be possible to have a separate list or lists for the places which fall in the administrative districts which cover various parts of Yorkshire and beyond, but I do not feel this list ought to be limited to those regions which fall under the control of an arbrotary region with the word 'Yorkshire' in it's title. Evil Eye 19:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As there is and never has been a Yorkshire County Council, or a ceremonial county by that name, Yorkshire on its own can only ever mean the historic county. Given that Mickleton, County Durham is run by Durham County Council but is in the historic North Riding of Yorkshire is explained on Mickleton's own page, I don't see how it being included in this list could cause any problems. If the context of the list were to be changed to show places in North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, East Riding of Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and the unitary authorities within or associated with them then that would be a major change from the stated title List of places in Yorkshire and the name would have to be changed to explain this. To do so, however, I feel would be to the detriment of Yorkshire's presence. Yorkshire Phoenix 16:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List purpose

The list is meant to show locations in the present East Riding of Yorkshire, North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire and I think that this should be explained in the heading as per the top of List of places in England indicates. If we also include historic places maybe they should be in italics or in a different section at the end so that people can recognise them as such. Keith D 17:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or we can split the article out into the 4 counties to end any confusion. MRSC • Talk 11:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would urge a split. I think split articles (which would actually stop this instance of WP:PLACE being breached) would allow greater detail and serve as s better list. Indeed List of places in Greater Manchester and List of places in London, as lists for modern boundaries, are some of the best examples and are in an alternative, gazetteer style. -- Jza84 · (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the list is split then there would need to be changes in template {{Infobox UK place}} for the way it generates the tag line at the bottom giving place links, unless this article just becomes a page with links to the 4 split articles. Keith D (talk) 13:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That shouldn't be a problem - I think I could work that one out. Infact that was an issue in the infobox, as there are some places in South Yorkshire, from the historic county boundaries of Nottinghamshire and (from memory) Derbyshire. It didn't make sense that a Yorkshire list be used for these places when they had the infobox transcluded. It is an additional reason (in my view) to support the split. -- Jza84 · (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Red links

Should the red links be deleted, or they there to encourage editors to write new articles? I know nothing about these places, so can not really help in writing the articles. I like to know something before searching for sources. --Bduke (talk) 00:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]