Talk:Lewes/Archive 1

message: re: Tom Paine. I don't think he was ever in post in Grantham, but in fact in Alford Lincolnshire, from which post he was sacked. His office was in the Windmill Hotel but he reported to the Horncastle office. After re-instatement (in Lewes) he did re-visit the area.
Stephen Kirby
Louth
Lincs
bob.cat@context.go-plus.net
I don't have a definitive reference, but it looks like he served as an apprentice exciseman in Grantham in 1762 and was appointed oto Alford in 1764 , from where indeed he got the sack for marking in his book that he had inspected goods, when infact he had only looked at the documentation accompanying the goods. Mintguy 10:07, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Various

message: Is it a silent 2nd 'e' as in Cowes or not? --JBellis 20:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2nd 'e' is not silent, so "Lewes" is pronounced like "LEWiss" or "LEWess". Cheers, --A bit iffy 21:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with that. It is normally pronounced 'Loo-iss' - is it ever pronounced 'Loo-ess'? Anywikiuser (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've replaced the diphthong  with a straight  Lonegroover (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The vowel in the second syllable is a schwa - so you can't readily distinguish between 'Loo-iss' and 'Loo-ess';  although the closest approximation would be 'Lewis' (as in the Hebridean island, but with a less light S), because the W is distinctly audible in the usual pronunciation.  The first syllable - which is strongly stressed - is definitely 'Loo' not 'Lyu'.  My claim to know this stuff is that I'll have lived here 30 years next month.  Who knows where the time goes? Molly Mockford (talk) 23:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation? 

message: Chichester was the original county town, where the diocese was and still is located.  Lewes is one of those recent towns which have gained eminenence, like the individual riding towns of Yorkshire.  Lewes owes its prominence to the splitting of Sussex, not the old intact form.  Let's not get revisionist here.  In another example, Bristol used to be part of Somerset until becoming its own county.  Before that, Taunton was the singular seat of civil government.  IP Address 10:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Bristol was historially a city and county in its own right as the city of Bristol, in the county of Bristol, a status it has regained since the abolition of Avon. DWaterson 02:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewes is not Chichester 

message: You should look at the History of Sussex article under the heading Jurisdiction which gives the correct history of the county. You will see that: 
*The county court had been held at Lewes and Shoreham until 1086, when it was moved to Chichester. After several changes the act of 1504 arranged for it to be held alternately at Lewes and Chichester
It then goes on to talk about the ecclesiatical governance, calling them Private jurisdictions:
*The chief ecclesiastical franchises were those of the Archbishop of Canterbury, of the bishop of Chichester, of the Saxon foundation of Bosham, where Bishop Wilfred had found the only gleam of Christianity in the county (Sussex was the last of the Saxon kingdoms to embrace Christianity), and of the votive abbey of Battle, founded by William the Conqueror. This abbey possessed, besides land in many other counties, the `Lowy of Battle,' a district extending for 3 miles (5 km) round the abbey.
* The see of Chichester was co-extensive with the county, and has altered little
* There were two archdeacons centred on Chichester and at Lewes; whose jurisdiction later became the basis for the division between East and West Sussex, the County Councils from 1888 having been based in those two towns
I don't think we can equate that with Bristol or Taunton, or anywhere else? English local governance has a lot of pecularities, almost all historical, never simple! Peter Shearan (talk) 10:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong conclusions

message: I have removed the content about today's fire at a fireworks factory because it's not really in Lewes. News reports are saying it's near Halland, so I'll move it to the East Hoathly with Halland article (the closest there is - actually, the factory seems to be in the middle of nowhere). A bit iffy 21:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fireworks factory fire

message: Quote:  "On 27 December 1836, an avalanche occurred in Lewes, the worst ever recorded in England."  Jooler has changed "the United Kingdom" to "England", saying "(probably worse avalanches in Scotland as they have more mountains)".  This sounds like guesswork to me!  I used to have a copy of the Guinness Book of Records (unfortunately, it was lost in the Lewes floods of 2000) which definitely referred to the Lewes avalanche as the worst recorded in the UK.  Does anybody else have a copy which includes this reference? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Molly Mockford (talk • contribs) 21:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avalanche 

message: I have just noticed that the date of twinning with Waldshut-Tiengen is wrong.  The twinning with Blois was certainly in 1963 - it was one of the earliest ever twinning arrangements.  However, the three-way twinning between Lewes, Blois and Waldshut-Tiengen was accomplished some ten years later.  Blois first twinned with Waldshut-Tiengen, and then Lewes completed the circle in 1974 (the 30th anniversary was celebrated in 2004).  I don't know what the full date was, but the charter hangs on the wall of the Mayor's Parlour;  trouble is, I don't know when I'll next be there to look at it!
I'll amend the year to 1974 (and also in the entry for Waldshut-Tiengen), but if anyone can supply the day and month this would be useful.
The entry for Blois and Waldshut-Tiengen will also need to be amended with the correct date on which their twinning agreement was signed.
Molly Mockford 11:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twin towns 

message: I have asked for a citation regarding the Papal effigy. I suspect that the effigy is a general pope rather than a specific historical figure. Without a citation, I am going to edit the reference to Paul V and replace it with "a Pope".
Glow worm64 08:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't because it isn't  "a Pope" - citation will come in time (in fact 10 seconds research 0it is in now). Jooler 11:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Curious.  I had always been under the impression that it was Pope Paul IV who was pope at the time of the burning of the Lewes Martyrs QuestingVole 12:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we in the Cliffe Bonfire Society are firmly under the impression that it is an effigy of Pope Paul V that we carry in procession, and explode at the firesite (contrary to popular belief, the effigy is not burned on the bonfire).  This is based on his being Pope at the time of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 - not at the time of the burning of the Martyrs, which took place half a century earlier in 1555-1557.  Molly Mockford 22:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

text: If you're not convinced, then come and visit us one November, and see for yourself! :-)  You will then be able to buy the programmes of the individual Bonfire Societies;  not all the Lewes societies burn a pope, but those who do, make it clear in their programme which pope it is, and why.  It may not have occurred to you that it would be extraordinarily offensive to our Roman Catholic community if we were to burn a generic pope, or a random one! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Molly Mockford (talk • contribs) 16:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pope Paul V

message: I would recommend that the current external link list be pruned as follows:
(a) Retain:
    Lewes Town Council
    Lewes District Council
    Lewes Bonfire Council *
    Lewes Football Club
    Friends of Lewes *
    Lewes Flood Action *
    Lewes Chamber of Commerce *
    Sussex Express
    What's On guide (NB - should be re-titled "Viva Lewes: what's on guide"
(b)  Remove:
    Lewes at the Open Directory Project
    John Harvey Tavern
    Priory School
    Lewes Footpaths Group *
    Lewes Sixth Form College
    Lewes bonfire photos & info
    Lewes Forum
    Lewes Information Website
    Harveys Brewery
    Friends of the Lewes Arms
    Phoenix Action
    Lewes Matters
    Lewes Bed and Breakfast Accommodation Group
    Lewes Bonfire Night Video
I must declare an interest here, in that that I am a professional web site designer in Lewes and have had (and in most cases continue to have) a professional connection (whether paid or pro bono) with the web sites which I have marked with an asterisk.  I am happy to provide my reasons for placing any given site in the Retain or Remove categories, if anybody wishes me to do so.
22:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, go for it. External links sections just seem to grow and need constant pruning, often radically. If you look at the external links in featured articles, you'll see that there are often very few. For example, Sheffield (perhaps the only UK place that has a featured article) only has two. In the case of Lewes, I would go so far as to keep only the following:
    Lewes Town Council
    Lewes District Council
    Friends of Lewes *
    Lewes Flood Action *
    Lewes Chamber of Commerce *
    Sussex Express
Hope this helps.--A bit iffy 07:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, done.  I've retained Lewes Bonfire Council as well as the half-dozen you recommend, since it isn't included in the Bonfire section, and I suspect that many visitors to the Lewes entry want that information.  But I'm open to be convinced!
--Molly Mockford 22:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds OK actually. Not sure why I missed Lewes Bonfire Council - on looking at it, it's got useful background info.--A bit iffy 22:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: Whatever you have, it seems a lot of them! I have just completed a rewrite of the Newhaven article, and this one suffers from much the same problems. One of those problems here is the overwehelming (almost 25% of the article) section on the Bonfire - interesting but not what happens on the other 364 days of the year! The main problem is that it is not laid out as recommended in The how to write about settlements] paper. If it had been, then there would have much more of what the reader of the article would have looked for: including the economy of the town, its governance; education, churches, culture, landmarks, sports et al. I shall be looking at this shortly, and hope that once I have the outline in place others more nowleable about the place itself can add their local knowledge. There is, I know, so much more to be said about the Bonfire Society (I know of a man who has written a thesis on it) that it almost seems a case for an entirely separate article, only referred to in this one. Peter Shearan (talk) 12:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: I don't know Lewes terribly well but surely Ann of Cleaves' house (or whichever of the 6 wives it was) deserves a mention, as does the incident when the prince rode down the hill on a wagon for a wager (or sosmething like that). I'm sure there's lots more historical stuff that could go in the article than there is a present
3tmx 17:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anne of Cleves House is mentioned in the History section although the article it points to is only a stub.--QuestingVole 15:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: The Lewes Bonfire Societies have, over the years, burned tableaux featuring just about every public figure you can think of - I see no need to list them all.  The tableau featuring George Bush had no connection with that of Bin Laden, and I think we should not attempt to draw a spurious connection where none actually existed at the time.  (Why do I always forget to sign the thing??) Molly Mockford 19:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical significance

message: Lewes is also important because of its assizes. It was also the place of the committal hearing for John Bodkin Adams, Britain's second worse serial killer (possibly 163+), and where he was later fined for fraud and drug offences.Malick78 14:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Court

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
*If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
*As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use th; for example, instead of (if such appeared in the article) using January 30th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
*Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant -  “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, MortimerCat (talk) 10:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: see my comments above re rewrite - and particularly the use of this Wiki recommendation on how to write about settlements Peter Shearan (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Automated peer review 

message: See above. I have already begun this by putting in the section on Notable People ... and by having a separate article for it. That is precisely what should now happen with the Bonfire Societies, again with a reference, although a great deal is already also in the Sussex Bonfire Societies article. Is there not a case for including the paragraph here within that article? It gives a pretty fair picture of the other societies and the way they operate. Peter Shearan (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite

message: Jooler for your comments. I have interspersed my own replies. I am so glad that you have taken time to put in your ideas! Once I have the rewrite in the open, as it were, I shall be so grateful for your own input. Peter Shearan (talk) 05:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thank you...