Talk:Canterbury

message: Someone might want to include this public domain 16th century map of Canterbury,
http://www.cts.edu/FacHomePages/images/Rural%20England/Image16.jpg
--Imran
Was the cathedral really damaged by a "lighting storm" or is that a typo? --Bill321  —Preceding undated comment added 16:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Is it me, or does that section read like it has been plagiarised from somewhere? Even if it hasn't been, it feels out of place with the rest of the article as (1) the article doesn't go into anywhere near as much detail about anywhere else in the city and (2) the style of language seems far too formal. Perhaps it should be a separate article?
St Thomas Hospital
I've never read such a dreadful piece of purple prose in all my life!  Can someone turn it into standard English and take out the floral twirls?
:I've moved it to its own page, The Hospital of St Thomas, Canterbury, with a link from here and marked it for cleanup. It reads like something pulled from Edward Hasted's survey of Kent 200 years ago so I don't think it's a copyvio. adamsan  18:26, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hospital of St Thomas 

message: I'm a Westgate.
My family's history is one of scalliwaggery and mischief, so it does not surprise me that the westgate was built 1) after crusades, which we took part in, and 2)finished right before wat tyler's rebellion.
good timing, plus a little hate for poll-taxes...
woops, we left the gate open.
"my bad, the town is taken over by a band of do-gooder civil rights activists...i mean -evil- civil rights activists.....heh-heh"
69.148.120.165 07:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Westgate Family 

message: While searching Google for info on Canterbury, I discovered that much of this article has been copied without attribution (and presumably, without permission) from http://www.vrcanterbury.co.uk/.
68.251.151.75 03:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you'll find, if you check the dates on the VR Canterbury site, and look back through the logs in Wikipedia before those dates, that the Wikipedia article contained that information before the VR Canterbury and it is in fact the VR Canterbury site that has copied the information without acknowledging it. If you notice at the bottom of the VR Canterbury page, it actually says at the bottom that it is GNU public license and is from the Wikipedia article on Canterbury. So Wikipedia has broken no copyrights, they are copying us not the other way around. Ben W Bell talk 08:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible copyright violation

message: Can editors please stop adding a figure of more than 100,000 for the population. That figure, with the citation, is clearly for the whole district - what Canterbury City Council would call Canterbury, Whitstable, Herne Bay and the surrounding villages. Anybody with any physical experience of Canterbury would know that the idea of there being more than 100,000 within the city itself is laughable.
If anybody wants to argue by using the 135,278 figure listed at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/pyramids/pages/29uc.asp, as has happened before, then first look at the other areas listed under Kent and you will soon see the breakdown is to district council level - ie Swale, rather than Faversham, Sittingbourne and the Isle of Sheppey, for example:
Ashford
Canterbury
Dartford
Dover
Gravesham
Maidstone
Sevenoaks
Shepway
Swale
Thanet
Tonbridge and Malling
Tunbridge Wells
Thanks Gretnagod 17:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population of Canterbury 

message: reference 7 links to a southwest train web page that doesn't mention Canterbury as part of the 2009 changes that will see fast trains linking kent to London. As far as I know, no mention of Canterbury has been linked to a faster train service in the future.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.12.228.63 (talk) 06:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  rail way service changes 

message: I think this source may prove useful to anyone trying to expand the article. Nev1 (talk) 00:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Source

message: It seems that from the main article there's a train station missing: "Today, Canterbury has two railway stations, Canterbury West and Canterbury East...Canterbury West station...Canterbury East...A fourth station in Canterbury was Canterbury South."  What's the third?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hutchie6 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, and North Lane was the Canterbury terminus of the Canterbury and Whitstable Railway when it first opened GTD 13:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Train stations 

message: Canterbury has been a city since time immemorial, and there are numerous sources confirming this. This was due to the presence of the Cathedral. Whilst it did gain a city charter in the 15th century (1448, to be precise) this gave the city the right to a Mayor. It did not grant city status to Canterbury, as this was something the city had already had for centuries. :-)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.93.77 (talk) 13:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for bringing this to the talk page, it's easier to discuss here than in edit summaries. The presence of a cathedral doesn't make a city. And even if it did, there was no cathedral in the Roman period. At best, using your criteria, the city can only be called a city since the 7th century. Calling Roman Canterbury a city is anachronistic. Canterbury may have been a de facto city from the 7th century with its cathedral, but until it was granted the City Charter in 1448 it wasn't legally a city. Nev1 (talk) 13:36, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So what about all the cities in, what is now the UK, that where called cities before they received a city charter? Also, what about the Roman definition of a city, or anything else. I don't think going back and retroactively removing city from the article prior to charter is correct. Canterbury Tail talk 14:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding Roman cities, John Wacher in his book Roman Britain notes that terms such as civitas, vicus, and urbs (just three of the many terms used to describe Roman settlements) do not have easy modern equivalents; however, he also notes that the administrative structure associated with a civitas (which Canterbury was) is closest to that of a town. As for settlements called cities before they were granted charters, the cases should be dealt with on a case by case basis (who called it a city, is it reliable, is it notable?). Was Canterbury called a city just because of its cathedral before its charter? If so, I guess it's fair to call it one, with a caveat in the article that it was the charter that made it official. Nev1 (talk) 14:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  City vs town 

message: A new edit  states "The city's newspaper, the Kentish Post, was founded in 1717 as the country's second oldest newspaper[18]. It became known as the Kentish Gazette in 1768[19]."
This is not correct. The Kentish Post is the 28th recorded English newspaper (others may have failed to survive or are still to be discovered). See R. M. Wiles, Freshest advices : early provincial newspapers in England, Ohio State University Press, 1965. The error is due to a mis-reading of the page cited from the Kent Messenger web site which means (I think) that the current Kentish Gazette is the second oldest newspaper still publishing, as the successor to the Kentish Post. 
It is definitely worth recording the start of the Kentish Post in 1717. I intend to modify the reference under "18th century–present" and move the KM references down to the section on "Newspapers".
I hope to create a new Wikipedia page for the Kentish Post.
Vidoue (talk) 11:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Kentish Post 

message: On Oct 2, 212.34.125.4  edited this section so as to include Vladimir.  In my
view, this was incorrect.  The whole set-up is quite complicated; there are different
types of relationship between towns; twinning, groups of "sister cities" or
similar, and towns and cities with "protocols d'accord" (whatever they are in this 
context!).  In the case of Canterbury, there is also confusion because of 
relationships entered into on behalf of the entire local authority (LA) district 
City of Canterbury, or on behalf of parts of that local authority (in particular, what
I'll call the "old city" of Canterbury).  
Note that the Canterbury page has suffered from this confustion before.  On
26 May 2008 Nev1 wrote: "I will reiterate again that this article is about the 
city not the district, so I have removed the towns listed as being twinned with 
the district". 
In preparing suggested changes to this section, I've worked from the City Council
webpages: http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/buildpage.php?id=2264 and 
http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/buildpage.php?id=1133, which offer reasonable
(and verifiable) sources.   Those pages suggest:
(i) the only city twinned with the "old city" of Canterbury is Reims;
(ii) Canterbury (whether the LA district or "old city", I don't know) has "protocols 
d'accord" with Tournai, Bergues, Saint Omer, Wimereux, Certaldo, Vladimir and Mohldal;
   
(iii) Canterbury (again, I don't know whether the "old city" or LA district) has a 
City to City partnership (whatever that is) with Esztergom;
   
(iv) the whole of the local authority district is linked through the Canterbury Three Cities
Association (sometimes called the Three Towns Association) with Bloomington-Normal, Illinois, 
USA and Vladimir, Russia.
   
Unless anybody has clear information about (ii) and (iii), I suggest that these
items should be omitted from all pages.  Since (iv) relates to the LA district, I suggest that
Vladimir should be removed from the Canterbury page and entered on the City of Canterbury
page.
Eebkent (talk) 14:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find any references for this twinning, so I've removed it. -- Marek.69 talk 18:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Twin towns section

message: In much the same vein as above, I have made a proposal at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_England#City_disambiguation that (I believe) outlines a sound rationale for some effective alterations to how we deal with cities and places within cities that share its name. I'm really hoping to gain a broad consensus for this proposal, so comments at WP:ENGLAND are welcome. --Jza84 |  Talk   11:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: On 14 Feb 2010, Bill321 (I think) wrote:
Was the cathedral really damaged by a "lighting storm" or is that a typo? --Bill321  —Preceding undated comment added 16:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: One of Canterbury's other more famous visitors was Gandhi, who famously helped rebuild part of the cathedral after damage cause by fire as a result of a lighting storm.
I'm not convinced that Gandhi "famously helped rebuild" the cathedral.  I hadn't heard that story myself, and the only references I can find on the web simply
copy the Wiki article.  Gandhi certainly visited Canterbury; there's
a photo in: 
http://library.kent.ac.uk/library/special/html/specoll/GANDHI.HTM
and a chronology in:
http://www.wikilivres.info/wiki/Chronology_of_Mahatma_Gandhi's_life/England_1931
which seem to prove that he visited on Oct 4/5 1931.  So that bit is verifiable.
If anybody can verify the "famous story", could they please edit a reference into the article?  If I don't hear anything, I'll keep the reference to the visit but remove any mention of rebuilding on grounds of absence of verifiability.Eebkent (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gandhi's visit 

message: This wasn't my post, but I don't see why the talking newspaper shouldn't have a mention and a link. 100 swubscribers isn't at all bad for a specialist activity of this sort.
I would suggest reducing the original posting
: A talking newspaper for the visually impaired is a registered charity and run by volunteers who serve as readers and editors. The "Canterbury and District Recorder" [] is recorded every Friday afternoon and memory sticks (which have taken over from the old cassettes) are duplicated and mailed out late on Friday afternoon. At present the Recorder has some 100 listeners.
to a shorter
: The Canterbury and District Recorder is a weekly talking newspaper for the visually impaired, distributed on memory sticks, It is a registered charity run by volunteers who serve as readers and editors.
Vidoue (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: To prove it's notable it would really need reliable third party references. Mere existence isn't sufficient. Canterbury Tail talk 12:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talking newspaper 

message: The article mentions 7 gates, but not all the names of the gates are entered.  I'm looking through my father's old slides & he has a gate name that is illegible.  I would like to find a complte list here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aebarschall (talk • contribs) 03:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  gates 

message: This page has no climate and weather section, which is unusual for the page of a significant place. Fig (talk) 14:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't really need it, the climate section of the Kent article is sufficient. Canterbury doesn't get any different weather to the rest of the county (apart from that two week period about 7 years ago when the east of the county got snow storms and the west was fine on and off.) Canterbury Tail talk 22:33, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Would be best to add a link to that then? Fig (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure that could work. I don't have a better idea. Canterbury Tail talk 14:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate 

message: We don't need to mention the Marlowe twice, it's not an advert. If the theatre in St Margarets Street the original Marlowe? I suppose the current Marlowe was the same business as the converted Marlowe? Maybe name other theatres? Penny Theatre? Marlowe Arena? And so on. Slightnostalgia (talk) 18:09, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What, still a mess? I blame Window Twanky. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:23, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theatre is a mess 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Canterbury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090515185746/http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk:80/archive/bigdig01.html to http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/archive/bigdig01.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120229060116/http://radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.2999 to http://radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.2999
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:14, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You look like a sockpuppet of banned User:Weathereditor. So maybe we should revert all your edits here? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:35, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Canterbury. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071027153214/http://www.thewholive.de:80/konzerte/zeige_konzert.php?GroupID=1&Jahr=1970 to http://www.thewholive.de/konzerte/zeige_konzert.php?GroupID=1&Jahr=1970
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Canterbury. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/mpdb/html/122.stm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 10:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Canterbury. 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/20080528121933/https://www.culture.gov.uk/CAP/proposals/Canterbury.pdf to http://www.culture.gov.uk/CAP/proposals/Canterbury.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100915003220/https://www.mdesignsolutions.co.uk:80/cgi-bin/ccs/index.html to http://www.mdesignsolutions.co.uk/cgi-bin/ccs/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080514152155/https://polofarm.org/chc/Pages/13/About-CHC.aspx to http://polofarm.org/chc/Pages/13/About-CHC.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928010901/http://www.kings-school.co.uk/document_1.aspx?id=1:31887&id=1:31658&id=1:31637 to http://www.kings-school.co.uk/document_1.aspx?id=1:31887&id=1:31658&id=1:31637
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/clarinet/002/006/001/002/004.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070714221442/https://www.kmfm.co.uk:80/canterbury/ to http://www.kmfm.co.uk/canterbury
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100509212915/https://www.canterburyhr.org.uk:80/ to http://www.canterburyhr.org.uk
*Added  tag to http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:-wIDc3KDokkJ:www.thelangton.org.uk/doDownload.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080623011034/https://www2.prestel.co.uk:80/rey/biog.htm to http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/biog.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080502165623/https://www.lycos.com:80/info/fiona-phillips.html to http://www.lycos.com/info/fiona-phillips.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080507191651/https://www.chrisbeetles.com:80/pictures/artists/Tourtel_Mary/Tourtel_Mary.htm to http://www.chrisbeetles.com/pictures/artists/Tourtel_Mary/Tourtel_Mary.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/buildpage.php?id=1133
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:01, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 14 external links on Canterbury. 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/20130122023406/http://www.roughguides.com/travel/europe/england/kent-and-sussex/canterbury.aspx to http://www.roughguides.com/travel/europe/england/kent-and-sussex/canterbury.aspx
*Added  tag to http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/schools/keysites/castle.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216122822/http://www.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/prisoninformation/locateaprison/prison.asp?id=304%2C15%2C2%2C15%2C304%2C0 to http://www.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/prisoninformation/locateaprison/prison.asp?id=304%2C15%2C2%2C15%2C304%2C0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080615061813/http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/index.aspx to http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/index.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080615061813/http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/index.aspx to http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/index.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207022656/http://themusickcabinet.co.uk/Canterbury_Waits.aspx to http://themusickcabinet.co.uk/Canterbury_Waits.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220215819/http://ledzeppelin.com/venue/university-kent to http://www.ledzeppelin.com/venue/university-kent
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071211071352/http://www.marlowetheatre.com/archive.asp?id=502 to http://www.marlowetheatre.com/archive.asp?id=502
*Added  tag to http://www.marlowetheatre.com/archive.asp?id=499
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080422211708/http://www.cantrugby.co.uk/history.htm to http://www.cantrugby.co.uk/history.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080426141530/http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/tourdefrance to http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/tourdefrance
*Added  tag to http://www.thetownguide.com/Canterbury/Index.asp?p=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080602085351/http://www.kent.ac.uk/about/statistics.html to http://www.kent.ac.uk/about/statistics.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kings-school.co.uk/document_1.aspx?id=1%3A31887&id=1%3A31658&id=1%3A31637
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.canterburyhr.org.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928010911/http://www.kings-school.co.uk/document_1.aspx?id=1%3A31978&id=1%3A31658&id=1%3A31637 to http://www.kings-school.co.uk/document_1.aspx?id=1%3A31978&id=1%3A31658&id=1%3A31637
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515185746/http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/archive/bigdig01.html to http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk/archive/bigdig01.html
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) 18:39, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Canterbury. 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/20100914211157/http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/history/libraries.aspx to http://www.canterbury-cathedral.org/history/libraries.aspx
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) 08:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have deleted the 115 killed cited to Margaret Lyle's book Canterbury: 2000 years of History and replaced the figure with the higher one (119) based on the CWGC's casualty list of civilian deaths through enemy action within Canterbury County Borough. All the CWGC listed deaths occurred within hostilities and does not include any who may have died of effects of injury after hostilities ceased in 1945.Cloptonson (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: WWII Civilian War Deaths

message: According to the article Roman Canterbury was "abandoned" and "gradually decayed", then "Jutish refugees" arrived and possibly "intermarried with the locals". In reality Germanic mercenaries were first housed outside the Roman town, but they revolted - burned the Roman town and took over the area. The ash layer of the burning is there, as are the post holes of the Germanic huts put into the ruins of Roman buildings. History is a violent (brutal) thing - it should presented as it was, not whitewashed.2A02:C7E:1CC3:8A00:CCEF:72E4:1F34:184B (talk) 10:48, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome to make changes as long as you're providing reliable sources along the way. Canterbury Tail talk 12:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article presents a sanitised version of the end of Roman Canterbury. 

message: Canterbury Tail the material added in the edit  may have a basis in . I am not sure whether that could be considered as a reliable published source as I did not find the publisher. The text does not look good using the term 'than many realise' and refering to underfunded individuals. I hope that helps.SovalValtos (talk) 08:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for this. Reading through that document and seeing the references and details on the authors, it seems it could be considered reliable. I think the edit needs to be reworked though along with the reference for it. The text of the edit is a bit undue, but the overall point seems valid and sourced. Canterbury Tail talk 08:23, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to both of you. I will rework the text and add some more references too. Then see what you think. Balance person (talk) 08:39, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poverty 

message: , and anyone else whom this may concern, I'm attempting to rescue this article which is currently under the cosh at GAR. This means that the article must be free of all major problems, which include especially uncited claims. The choice is to remove the materials, or to find sources. It is generally difficult to source old claims made in the spirit of WP:OR as these will have been inserted without sources in the first place. Usually the best thing to do is to remove what is not cited, and to look for basic facts that are reliably cited (using WP:RS), adding those in place of the old uncited materials. Obviously I can't do this if my edits are being reverted for whatever reason. The effect of restoring an old uncited claim is to put the article back into the unsustainable position that caused it to be brought to GAR in the first place. I'd be really grateful if you could assist me in my work (such as by finding sources); or at least, allow me to proceed with the rescue. If there's anything else you want explained, do feel free to ask. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:35, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Slightly surprised to get no reply, but gratified to see that the reversions have ceased, so it seems we can proceed normally now. There is plenty of scope for reliably cited materials to be added, but the immediate need is simply to have a "clean" and stable article for the assessment. Many thanks everyone. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:01, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing for GA Reassessment as above