Talk:Scheduled monument

message: How many Scheduled Ancient Monuments are there?  It would be nice to have a list of all of them on Wikipedia.  dbenbenn | talk 05:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been searching for online lists of the Scheduled Ancient Monuments in order to populate the categories here and at the commons. The English Heritage website seems to be fairly useless, but putting Scheduled Ancient Monument into the advanced search at Images of England gives 1011 results. Historic Scotland are better as they have a searchable database of Scheduled Ancient Monuments, of which they claim there are about 8000 in Scotland. The Royal Commision on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales has an online database called coflein—I haven't spent much time with this yet, but I couldn't work out whether or not everything in the database is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (I think not, but it doesn't say).    JeremyA 06:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

text: It would be quite a list. The usual number given is somewhere over 20,000. In 1993, Hunter and Ralston's Archaeological Resource Management in the UK (IFA/Sutton, p46) gave 13,000 in England, 5,300 in Scotland and 2,700 in Wales. Of these, only around 1,000 are in state hands and not privately owned. The number will have risen since then as more SAMs are created than are descheduled. It was estimated in the late 1980s that there were a further 60,000 sites of National Importance deserving scheduling and this number will certainly have risen since PPG 16. 10:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortunately,Wikipedia  is not paper. DGG (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: I have drafted the  navbox template, aiming to bring together scheduled monuments, listed buildings, monuments records, etc.  Comments suggestions and improvements from anyone interested would be welcome (on the template talk page). Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Navbox 

message: I am going to have a go at adding more references and citations for this article. At the same time, I was thinking of expanding it to include sections on criteria for designation, how a monument is protected and managed, and more depth on the legislation so that it follows a similar structure to the other articles on heritage structures. Does anyone have any comments? FGLawson (talk) 11:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be very useful. I'd also like to see a bit about the history of the protection of ancient monuments in the UK, which goes back to the 1880s (or thereabouts), and is much older than protection of buildings. Just looking through the article there, I spotted the reference to Rosslyn Chapel as a scheduled monument - strictly speaking only the basement and churchyard are scheduled, not the part in use. According to Scottish Historic Environment Policy, "A structure in use as a dwelling house cannot be scheduled as an ancient monument nor can buildings in ecclesiastical use" , section 2.10. It would be worth clarifying what can and cannot be protected under this designation, and whether this varies between the different home nations. I'll keep an eye on the article and maybe chip in when I can. Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:09, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating and references

message: The most recent Ancient Monument referred to in the examples section seems to be the Iron Bridge at Ironbridge, which is 250 years old. As there are now quite a few examples from as recently as the Cold War period, such as http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1020781, would it be possible to reach a consensus on adding a couple of more recent ones (preferably examples with their own Wikipedia article)? Ghughesarch (talk) 00:10, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the cruise missile complex at the former RAF Greenham Common? http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1021040&searchtype=mapsearch I've been WP:BOLD and added it for the time being Ghughesarch (talk) 00:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could the article do with (one or two) younger examples? 

message: Following a discussion at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Scheduled Monuments in South Somerset/archive1 about the number of redlinks on List of Scheduled Monuments in South Somerset (and potentially others I am hoping to take to FLC) I promised to ask for the comments of other editors about whether all scheduled monuments meet the Notability requirements for a wikipedia article? Any thoughts gratefully received.— Rod talk 21:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are  scheduled monuments inherently notable in wp terms? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Scheduled monument. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120501093448/http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/ to http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Scheduled monument. 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:
*Added archive http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121204113822/http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/ScheduledMonuments.pdf to http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/ScheduledMonuments.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/UKgovernment/Parliament/DG_077964
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/9/contents
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Would anyone happen to know what sort of sources exist that relate to the designation of scheduled monuments? The specific monument I'm thinking of is the Asthall barrow, which was designated on 16 May 1934 per the Historic England website entry (link). There must be some sort of book or periodical from 1934/5 which records such designations. Does anyone know what it is and/or where to find it? Pinging some of the main contributors to the article: , , , , , , , . Thanks, --Usernameunique (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The best I can come up with is a series of books published by HMSO, of which the relevant one appears to be 'Southern England: Illustrated Regional Guide to Ancient Monuments No.2.' by Lord Harlech. These were first published around 1936, although the only editions I can spot are from the 50s and 60s, which seem to be available for modest sums online. Unfortunately I don't have a copy, and it is not available at Archive.org (unlike volumes 1 and 3), so I don't know how much (if anything) it describes the process of scheduling at that point. The only really good early description of the development of the scheduling process that I have come across is far too early to be of use to you, being a 1907 review of the 1882 act (available at ). RobinLeicester (talk) 22:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources regarding designation 

message: It is not wholly clear what is meant by this opening line in the 'Heritage Protection Legislation for scheduled monuments' section: There is no positive distinction yet for a single method of registering sites of heritage. The long tradition of legal issues did not lead to a condensed register nor to any single authority to take care of over the course of the last 130 years. Might it be rephrased. Geopersona (talk) 06:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-phrase line on HP legislation