User talk:Adam37

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

Archived talk is separate

I welcome any message of thanks, point of view or critique.

Subdue that Peacock[edit]

My key How to write about UK settlements task!

Avoid Peacock Terms

Subdue Peacock terms into more verifiable and encyclopedic statements. As concerns UK Places see WP:UKTOWNS and WP:UKVILLAGES weasel terms and unverifiable and unpublished peacock phrases often need to be rephrased or erased and their publishers notified which typically involves identifying encyclopaedic terms such as "lively community", "beautiful", "great", "leading school", "thriving", "affluent", "within easy reach of" and "blighted by/ shabby/ run-down" unless strong scholarly (e.g. non-tourism focussed book) or governmental sources can be found to verify such content and it is worthy of a Global Encyclopedia article.

Essentially many articles otherwise descend into a beauty contest.

See my user page. Spread the knowledge (and therefore wikipedia).

Kevington[edit]

Thanks for your recent tweaks to some of the Onslows. Given the number of incoming links, I'm inclined to think a separate article on Kevington Hall is justifiable, but as I haven't any experience with British architecture articles (and their proper sourcing), I leave it to you to decide. Choess (talk) 14:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Sort of. Grade II* is borderline. Also, as it is a school building that was originally a grandiose (ie not just agricultural) manor house (one of c. 100 around the country) I suspect one article will be sufficient, especially as the names are rightfully about the same. On a separate point, given the dual use I see no reason not to cover it under a Amenities section in St Mary Cray. An internal link could be added there in Landmarks as well. That might be ample coverage. What do you think?- Adam37 Talk 21:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps I should have said "an article" rather than "a separate article"; it doesn't seem to be discussed except in your parenthesis at Denzil Onslow (of Stoughton). I think an article separate from St Mary Cray would be better; the focus could be the structure and its architecture, but with some background on the history of the manor (cf. here), which might overburden the St Mary Cray article. (The moreso as it's no longer being used as a school.) Choess (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Geographical name changes GAN[edit]

Hello Adam37,

Remember the GA nomination for Geographical name changes in Turkey? Well it was almost done but I forgot what happened and I just couldn't finish it off. I just wanted to tell you that I renominated it again and I would love it if you're willing to do a re-review. It's not going to take much really. The main issue (the lead) is now fixed and appropriate to GA standards. Let me know. Thanks! P.S. By the way it's Proudbolsahye...I recently changed my username to EtienneDolet. Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:31, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

The essence was good but the connotations, occasionally divisive terminology and conjugations would offend all but the most lax GA assessors I have come across. I am appalled by a few of the GA crew who rejected one of my own nominations, not just failing but demoted two grades and having to toil to even get it to WP:B class. It was not on a controversial subject. So I really am not going to stick my neck out sadly on this article.- Adam37 Talk 19:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Aw man and we were so close to getting it passed. All it needed was a better lead. Thanks anyways. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png For all the terrific work you've done expanding articles, such as Putney Bridge, you deserve a beer. All the very best, Pjposullivan (talk) 03:35, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

St Johns Woking[edit]

Thank you for the edits on St Johns Woking:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_John's,_Woking

The name of the village varies on signs and street names but local historians, older people, deeds to property, and usage in The London gazette:

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/52173/page/9

agree that it is written without apostrophe. This is also backed up by the peerage title of Baroness Anelay of St Johns, whose name is taken from that of the village and is written without apostrophe.

The village name, then, in the absence of convincing evidence otherwise, should I think be written without apostrophe as "St Johns". Since I know you are interested and experienced in grammar and place name spellings I'd be glad for you to consider this and make the changes if agreed?

Chris bore (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

True. See apostrophes in place names: orthographic reform links to it. I am keen to give clearer meaning to things, so St John's? But your point about a few centuries of English unclarity is almost convincing. However the telling factor is it could suggest two St John's churches in the village which is not true. All of your sources are not as officious or official as say, offices and councils of the public sector, which for better or worse, have great sway in orthography in Britain. In the last 5 years words have been broken up which never used to be and apostrophes added to many other place names. In the words of that nun on Sister Act 2, go with God, Crispy!?- Adam37 Talk 18:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Surrey cleanup listing[edit]

A trial run is available at Surrey. --Bamyers99 (talk) 14:23, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

That will help people participating most frequently in WP:SURREY. Thank you. - Adam37 Talk 14:14, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Watford Gap[edit]

Hi Adam. With this change you added a ref/note which doesn't actually make grammatical sense (the bit about the A5); would you mind taking a quick look and seeing what you meant? I've had a go, but i don't quite know what you wanted to say. Thanks, Cheers, LindsayHello 06:09, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Corrected now :-) The notability which another editor saw may be for its tourist credentials - the A5 is rich in history. By sad contrast the M1 has in places become a sad scar on the landscape (mentioned on talk to explain all the books on it for fear of upsetting the burgeoning motorway lobby as opposed to say alternatives such as a COMPETITIVE railway building alternative).- Adam37 Talk 20:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Medieval parishes[edit]

Category:Medieval parishes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hornsey, and whilst[edit]

Hi there.

  1. I've left a clarification request at Hornsey. I like what you've done but I don't think it quite works yet. Hope this helps.
  2. Where is "whilst" deprecated, please? I'm not greatly in favour of changing it and would love to read why we should! :)

Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 14:57, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments and I am glad to see a non-vagueness and opinion editor in what is the tricky domain of London's pattern of old established 'districts'. I'm adding plenty of the original maps and broader history of this area.
  1. I have now clarified what was meant about "larger than", it may well be the whole place will just become it's station doorstep properties, the way it is has shrunk. Let's hope more wards are named after it in future as it's obviously neutral and down-to-earth. - Adam37 Talk 16:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
  2. Please see How_to_write_about_settlements as to while or whilst so both are deprecated and I remember now I've used while wrongly once before. It's the same with although which I have come to agree is unencyclopedic text: contrast based on personal opinion.
Thank you very much for that. I think Hornsey is much clearer now. That sentence is maybe getting a wee bit long now but I'm not going to go and fiddle with it ... it might be fine, and no-one will benefit from me getting hung up about it! As for "whilst", thanks ... and gosh! I'm going to have to try to absorb all that a bit. I'll get back to you if stuck but for the moment, best wishes DBaK (talk) 18:38, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Cranleigh[edit]

The category Historic parishes in Surrey, which you added to the Cranleigh article, does not appear to exist, as it's a red link. (It sounds like a good idea, though.) JH (talk page) 16:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Historic parishes in England[edit]

Category:Historic parishes in England, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 19:56, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Craven Transport[edit]

That's a great addition you made to the Craven page, about it being free from motorways: Craven#Transport

However I did mention there - the route called A56-M65 - - but thank god the A56 valiantly struggled over into in Lancs before it got gobbled up. Do you think you could mention that the M65 comes the closest to Craven? I cant think how to phrase it, any ideas?

I've always been hoping people would add to my epic work but you're the first. Congratulations, Thanks Kildwyke talk page 05:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC).

You're very welcome: it so happened to top one of the four large land use categories that ONS uses. I would say the National Park status clearly agrees that it's nice the Dales resisted the idea of another trans-pennine expressway - it resists the connotation from that Pennines Passes map in the Craven article that the area is the only decent point at which to get from the North East to the North West. As to travel links, any decent map tells you all of Yorkshire, Cumbria, the Midlands indeed virtually all of England has rapid transport connections and a motorway within a few miles (albeit via odd roads and layouts), I would just point you towards wikipedia is not a travel guide, which means all of these connections should not be made the prominent subject of every District/Place on wikipedia, don't there go into too much fine print on roads/railways especially as these have their own articles. Other editors frequently make reference to that as it is quite right to avoid the encyclopaedia becoming the worst form of National Rail (ATOC[artels]) or Top Gear Travel Guide.- Adam37 Talk 13:38, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Clapham[edit]

Hi. Could you revisit the section in this article about Clapham South, please? Something's not reading quite right in it, and I'm not quite sure what it was that you were wanting to say when you amended it in the autumn. Thanks. Johnlp (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Complete. Thank you for your thank you afterwards. - Adam37 Talk 15:11, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Musgrave Baronets[edit]

Hi, just to explain my removal of your edits. Basically the Musgrave Baronets of Kempton are not descendents of the Musgrave Baronets of Hartley Castle. That Baronetcy started in 1611. The Musgrave Baronets of Kempton Park are from an offshoot of the family prior to then, back in the early 1500s. They go back through the Musgraves of Eden Hall and Harde Castle. Although this in itself does go back to Hartley Castle it is when they had the Lordship of Hartley and were the Sheriffs of Westmorland. if however you want to follow the family back to its origins you will end up around 1030c with Gamel of Musgrave (a Feudal Lord), the father of Wasculinus, who was either of German or Norman descent.

Thank you for the full overview, which is always hard to discover and prove outside of Westminster/Royal records as it is all so long ago. I understand the break in male lineage to a cousin. However the title itself underwent a period when it became of Kempton Park. Why is this not mentioned in the prose? Eden Hall did similarly become it seems the second or first home of the family for a few generations, before it was demolished in the early 20th century and is not mentioned, though has never been part of a title as far as I can see. Edenhall suggests it was rebuilt from a crumbling structure in grand 19th century stone or bricks following the baronetcy coming into the cadet branch of the family. It seems the higher numerical Musgraves Baronets therefore took on the mantle of leading Cumberland dignitaries from their 1-4th baronet Musgrave cousins. That seems categorical unless numbers have gone missing somewhere.- Adam37 Talk 09:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Back again, unfortunately my mains power went off before I could finish the above. Here are some family lineage dates:- Philip Musgrave 6th Baronet (b circa 1711 Edenhall - 5 July 1795 Kempton Park). Son of:- Sir Christopher Musgrave MP 5th Baronet Musgrave of Eden Hall (25 December 1688 - 3 January 1736. Son of:- Sir Christopher Musgrave MP (21 March 1661 - 2 July 1689). Son of:- Sir Christopher Musgrave MP (1631c - 29 July 1704) 4th Baronet of Musgrave Eden Hall. Son of:- Sir Philip Musgrave (21 May 1607 - - 7 February 1678) 2nd Baronet Musgrave of Eden Hall. Son of:- Sir Richard Musgrave (1585c - 1615, in Naples, Italy) 1st Baronet Musgrave of Eden Hall. Son of:- Christopher Musgrave (1553c - 15 October 1585, at Eden Hall). Son of:- Sir Simon Musgrave MP Kt (1510c - 30 January 1597, in Kirby Stephen), of Harde Castle. Son of:- Sir Edward Musgrave of Edenhall (1461 - 23 May 1542). I could go on further back, but that is pointless. Richard Harvey (talk) 09:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Quite sadly that is suggesting the article is neglecting to cover Eden Hall as well. They are the same five baronets as the Musgrave baronets of Hartley Castle as their birth and death dates are identical. So why is there no mention of Eden Hall in Langwathby or Kempton Park in Sunbury-on-Thames in that article. If the information by various earlier editors on the article page is correct you have actually proven that the Musgrave Baronets of Kempton Park are immediate descendents and main heirs of the Musgrave Baronets of Hartley Castle! - Adam37 Talk 10:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I think a lot of it is down to interpretation of documents, in that being a titular holder of the 'Baronet of Musgrave', whilst actually being resident of Edenhall or Kempton Park, has over time brought about a belief that there is actually a Baronetage of Eden Hall and Kempton Park. Unfortunately to get into the research required to prove there is actually such a Baronetage may encroach on [WP:OR|OR]. Richard Harvey (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2015 (UTC)