Maps and Cathedrals. 

Please stop adding maps to those already lengthy cathedral boxes.  They are superfluous.  Every cathedral is in a city. Every city has a map.  Putting maps for the cathedrals themselves is overkill. 

It's like this:  if a significant person is mentioned within the context of an article, then we link that person's biography.  We don't give the dates of the person's life, unless they are absolutely relevant to the text of the article e.g. "the architect John Bloggs died in 1455, leaving the spire incomplete."  If john Bloggs has his own article then we don't write "John Bloggs (1402-1455) built the spire".   

Similarly, if a person wants to know where Chichester Cathedral is, within Sussex,  they will look at Chichester. 

The problem is that maps and lists in the right hand box take up space that is much better utilised by pictures.  Cathedrals are visually among the most important works of art that have been created.  Great long lists of cleargy and specifications don't need to be in the right hand box, any more than the map does.  The lists can go anywhere else in the article.  But the right hand side, particularly within the first paragraphs of the main body of text, is the prime space for illustrating the building, its history, its style and so on.  Cathedral websites,  (well-done cathedral websites) never give lengthy lists of people on the home page.  They give a link to where you can find that stuff if you want it.  They also give a link to "how to find us".  They don't attempt to put a map on the home page. 

Jamming a map in, to take up space where there could be a plan of the building or a photo of the interior, is not useful.