Talk:Derbyshire

message: Mention should be made of Chatsworth house, and its role in films such as Pride and Prejudice. SheffGruff 18:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chatsworth House

message: In the hope that some natives of Derbyshire watch this page, would any of you know (or be able to check) whether William Jauderell is indeed buried underneath the Taxal Church, or if it is only his son Roger whose grave is marked by a 5' plaque on the sanctuary floor? Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 07:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: William Jauderell buried here?

message: "...some of England's most attractive scenery." Sounds a little biased to me. Jfingers88 19:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'd agree to nix or reword it Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think this is POV - a large part of the county is within a National Park (so must have very attractive scenery). The Peak District area of the county is also highly popular with tourists who visit the area for it's attractive scenery. Paul the Archivist 16:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: I noticed that Warwickshire was shown on the list of bordering counties. I have removed Warwickshire, because there is not actually a border between it and Derbyshire. There is a gap of a few miles. Ted Ted 17:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bordering counties 

message: Not impressed by this page .. I have boldly deleted the list of settlements ... it was as interesting as a tel. directory and goes against Wiki policy (<30% list). The list of places of interest might be of some use if heavily editted to remove stuff like Foremark Resovoir (I pick on this one as its "mine"). Hope I haven't offended but this county deserves a better article. I understand there is a move to create a Derbyshire wikiproject ... we need one Victuallers 12:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Being Bold

message: I'm trying to make this page a little more presentable and i don't know what to do with the list of football teams. A lot of work has gone into it and it is useful i'm just not sure the main derbyshire page is right for it. I was going to start a new page and just transfer it across, maybe to something like List of football clubs in Derbyshire. However there is no precedent. Anyway i'll check back and if nothing has been proposed soonish i'll remove the list and put it into prose. Dommccas 17:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great.  Looks much better now.  - Shrivenzale (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: List of football teams

message: Since someone tagged the trivia section with a 'discouraged' marker, I've now eliminated it.  Some of the contents I've integrated into the article with citation tags where appropriate (Overseal's claim to be centre of Britain in particular needs support, as would the similar claims made occasionally by just about every other Derbyshire settlement - although most of them settle for England).  I've also removed some of the more trivial details (such as what shows and films were filmed in Derbyshire).
Also (and I've not made this alteration yet as I'm conscious that I'm biased as a result of my total lack of interest in football), do we really need 21 football teams listed?  After all, just about every town in the UK has a local team, but only a relative few are really of national, much less global, significance.  I don't wish to offend members and supporters of the smaller teams, but I think this does make the football section disproportionately large in comparision to the other sections of the article (and in comparison to other sports), and Derbyshire isn't just about football.  Can we at least limit it to the more prominent teams such as Derby and Chesterfield?  - Shrivenzale (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia Section

message: Is it normal to have a link to a template from an article? Wouldn't it be more conventional to include the template itself at the bottom of the page with  and  (especially if the template contents can be minimised by default)? Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its that was cos of the way the article developed. At one time there was a red inked list actually in the article. Do change it Dave.... Victuallers (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Sorry about the huge delay. Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to [[Template:Derbyshire Places of interest]]

message: "The Derbyshire school system is comprehensive with no selective schools. There is selection by average house price in some areas." Is there really selection by average house price - are there any newspaper articles about this? (I'm staying in Derbyshire this weekend, I will ask the locals.) Wikimsd (talk) 08:26, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Derbyshire school system - Selection by average house price? 

message: Marple Bridge was not transferred to the Metropolitan Borough of Stockport in Greater Manchester.  The civil parishes of Mellor and Ludworth were transferred to Marple Urban District in Cheshire in 1936.  They subsequently passed to the Metropolitan Borough of Stockport under the 1974 reorganisation of local government.  Marple Bridge was part of Ludworth.  Skinsmoke (talk) 03:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Marple Bridge]] 

message: "Derbyshire can make some claims to be at the centre of Britain: a farm near Coton in the Elms has been identified as the furthest from the sea, whilst Rodsley and Overseal were the centres of population during the twentieth century."
I can see what it's getting at, but there's two problems with this.
Firstly, it's not clear.  There's no obvious connection between the two clauses, and what does "the centres of population" mean, anyway?  Following the link to the reference, it's an archived version of a parish website, and no longer exists on the current version.  It cites an article in the Daily Mail from 2002 that apparently refers to work by an academic (Daniel Dorling) at the University of Leeds.  From what I can work out, he said that Appleby Parva is the median point of the British population.  That's not at all clear from the sentence given (and doesn't match the claim above, though I don't have Dorling's original claim to hand).
Secondly, the explanation doesn't really match the claim.  There's a substantial difference between the median population point of Britain, or even the furthest point from the sea, and the most obvious meaning of "centre of Britain", which is geographical.  Derbyshire's vaguely in the middle of England, but with Scotland in the mix that point shifts a long way north.  The precise point will depend on what you include as "Britain" (Northern Ireland?  The Channel Islands?).
I think the sentence is misleading, and I'm not sure it's especially useful anyway.  I'm tempted just to remove it.  Any thoughts?  -- Shimmin Beg (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This comes up in other articles and a number of places claim to be the "centre of Britain" - there is no definite and agreed method of measuring the centre of Britain, so it's best to remove it unless it is particularly celebrated as being so; the claims about Rodsley and Overseal appear to be unsourcable, at least, I couldn't see anything to support the claim from a brief check on the web. AFAIK it's nonsense. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 21:32, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I did find an OS / BBC reference to clarify the "centre of Britain" story - it's not quite that, but the place that is "farthest from the sea" - added to the article. Jamesinderbyshire (talk) 00:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centre of Britain

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Derbyshire's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "OS":
From Sheffield: 
From Coton in the Elms: Ordnance Survey - MapZone
Reference named "BBC":
From Tom Stoppard: BBC John Tusa Interview (Audio 43 mins).
From Richard Arkwright: 
From Coton in the Elms: BBC report centre of England
From Longdendale: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/323866.stm BBC News | Sci/Tech | Peak viewing for ghouls
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Derbyshire]] 

message: :moved from User talk:MRSC
Have you looked at what data went? I suspect you are just guessing that the 3K of missing data is now in the template. Im not going to have an edit war, but you are deleting stuff, then being told that you are deleting stuff ... you revert that information without looking. Please ...... look. Don't reply to this or do anything please until you have looked at what you are deleting Victuallers (talk) 15:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you looked and compared the versions? MRSC (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Ummm that is what I am asking you to do. I have already looked at this. What do those numbers do? Victuallers (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Infoboxes are (supposed to be) reserved solely for essential information on a subject, not just a list of everything statistically related to it. What you say could be more suited to an article specifically about the geography of Derbyshire. And I think that the additions are fine in the lead section as they are significant and important enough but aren't very substantial, enough to need their own section. Rcsprinter123   (collogue) @ 23:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Lead paragraphs should summarise the information in the main text, and shouldn't introduce material not found in the body of the article. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather think practically and IAR. Rcsprinter123   (interview) @ 00:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a general statement but it doesn't shed very much light here. Do you mean that you believe it isn't practical to have the lead summarise the main text? "Ignore all rules" sounds appealing until everyone adopts it as a mantra and the arguments thus become endless.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that guidance - I was concerned I was putting in a few too many key geographic facts here, and the reference to Church Flatts Farm now takes on a more trivial nature. So I'd prefer to see new sections on Geography/Geology and Natural History, and I've long felt this omission is a major weakness of this page, so I guess some of these facts could be relevant there. On the subject of Infoboxes, I still can't see how to change Conservative to Labour in the Executive bit of the Infobox which I questioned last September. Can someone do that for me, please? Tnx.Parkywiki (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I grew up in the county, I haven't looked at or studied this article very much, and I'm surprised now to find that it doesn't currently have a geography section. I support creating one, which should also include information on geology and climate. See Dorset and Somerset, which are county articles with featured article status, for some guidance on article structure (I notice that they both split geography into human - settlements etc. - and physical, although a logical alternative could be to combine these within a general geography section). Also see Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements for general guidance - although Derbyshire isn't a settlement, the organisational principles are similar. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK - I've started to flesh one out on my own Userpage, covering Geology, Landscapes, Ecology, Botany, Zoology. For the moment it's all off the top of my head, so I won't add anything until it's fully checked and referenced - but feel free to steer me if you think this is the right or wrong way to go. I know my Derbyshire natural history very well - but not always the best way to do things in terms of Wikipedia! Parkywiki (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way to add info is to always build it from sources/references. I don't advise writing off the top of your head and then trying to add references - it can be very hard to find references to support pre-written info. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for making the split in the section - I'd pondered whether or not to do that. You're spot on about the folly of writing, then adding references later. In this instance I've spent my whole professional life interpreting Derbyshire geology and wildlife, so I was happy to put the draft together in my own user space and then add the key refs before dropping it into the main page, but that can be a hard task when you then can't trace a published reference to something you know to be factually correct. I hope I've included enough now following my initial draft for it to be a helpful addition, and that it'll encourage other elements to be added.Parkywiki (talk) 20:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: Having added a few more basic facts about the county to the introductory paragraph, my question is whether people think these would best be placed in an Info box, or be used as the start of a new section on Physical Geography? Parkywiki (talk) 19:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Infoboxes are (supposed to be) reserved solely for essential information on a subject, not just a list of everything statistically related to it. What you say could be more suited to an article specifically about the geography of Derbyshire. And I think that the additions are fine in the lead section as they are significant and important enough but aren't very substantial, enough to need their own section. Rcsprinter123   (collogue) @ 23:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Lead paragraphs should summarise the information in the main text, and shouldn't introduce material not found in the body of the article. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather think practically and IAR. Rcsprinter123   (interview) @ 00:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a general statement but it doesn't shed very much light here. Do you mean that you believe it isn't practical to have the lead summarise the main text? "Ignore all rules" sounds appealing until everyone adopts it as a mantra and the arguments thus become endless.... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that guidance - I was concerned I was putting in a few too many key geographic facts here, and the reference to Church Flatts Farm now takes on a more trivial nature. So I'd prefer to see new sections on Geography/Geology and Natural History, and I've long felt this omission is a major weakness of this page, so I guess some of these facts could be relevant there. On the subject of Infoboxes, I still can't see how to change Conservative to Labour in the Executive bit of the Infobox which I questioned last September. Can someone do that for me, please? Tnx.Parkywiki (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I grew up in the county, I haven't looked at or studied this article very much, and I'm surprised now to find that it doesn't currently have a geography section. I support creating one, which should also include information on geology and climate. See Dorset and Somerset, which are county articles with featured article status, for some guidance on article structure (I notice that they both split geography into human - settlements etc. - and physical, although a logical alternative could be to combine these within a general geography section). Also see Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements for general guidance - although Derbyshire isn't a settlement, the organisational principles are similar. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:20, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK - I've started to flesh one out on my own Userpage, covering Geology, Landscapes, Ecology, Botany, Zoology. For the moment it's all off the top of my head, so I won't add anything until it's fully checked and referenced - but feel free to steer me if you think this is the right or wrong way to go. I know my Derbyshire natural history very well - but not always the best way to do things in terms of Wikipedia! Parkywiki (talk) 15:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way to add info is to always build it from sources/references. I don't advise writing off the top of your head and then trying to add references - it can be very hard to find references to support pre-written info. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for making the split in the section - I'd pondered whether or not to do that. You're spot on about the folly of writing, then adding references later. In this instance I've spent my whole professional life interpreting Derbyshire geology and wildlife, so I was happy to put the draft together in my own user space and then add the key refs before dropping it into the main page, but that can be a hard task when you then can't trace a published reference to something you know to be factually correct. I hope I've included enough now following my initial draft for it to be a helpful addition, and that it'll encourage other elements to be added.Parkywiki (talk) 20:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Later

message: There is currently a proposal mooted to rename the Derby article, and for there no longer to be a primary topic of this name (as far as I can tell). The proposal is:
* :Derby → 
* :Derby (disambiguation) → 
To view this proposal or to express opinions based on naming policy see the article's Discussion page. This discussion may be closed after 15th July. Parkywiki (talk) 10:38, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to rename Derby article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Derbyshire. 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/20080228065832/http://www.le.ac.uk/ar/research/projects/eastmidsfw/pdfs/26deras.pdf to http://www.le.ac.uk/ar/research/projects/eastmidsfw/pdfs/26deras.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141012011358/http://www.nwcfl.com/clubhistory.php?id=12 to http://www.nwcfl.com/clubhistory.php?id=12
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) 04:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The 17th-century plague should be included in the history section. Kdammers (talk) 05:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History