Talk:Middlewich

message: #A bit more minor tidying up, and perhaps this should be put in for "Good Article" status at least. may be it would easily achieve that, in which case, it can then be re-assessed. 
 DDStretch  (talk) 20:54, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment Report 

message: This page has way too many links at the bottom, especially compared to other town pages. A fair portion of them look like link spam. Any suggestions on which should be kept and which should go before I start culling them. I think the pubs and bars is unnecerserry as well as the estate agents bit. I think the facilities should also be incorporated in to the external links section. Ydam 14:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. See Wikipedia:External links for some guidance.  You're right about the pubs too - Wikipedia is not a travel guide (see WP:NOT)--JBellis 15:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've trimmed down the links a fair bit(I took out all the links to maps for one) but it still needs more work. I'll do that a little later. Ydam 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, I've seriouslly trimmed down the external links now as well as doing a bit of tidying up. Not sure the h2g2 link should stay but I've left it for now. I welcome any suggestions on any links that should go back in. Ydam 10:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: Anyone else think this article should be nominated for good artcle status? It's got plenty of references and pictures and plenty of facts. Ydam 13:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  There is still significantly more information which needs adding.Salinae 20:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't see why that should stop it from reaching good article status though. Everything can be improved but that doesn't make this a bad article.
*Anything can be improved, as you say. Just depends on how significant the missing information is considered to be. Good articles need to "address the major aspects of the topic". Does this article do that? ---- Eric 22:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article Status

message: Are there any refs to the Bull Ring being developed as a Roman theatre rather than an amphitheatre?
I can find the following after a quick google search to support amphitheatre
* Middlewich Amphitheatre Design Wins Awards
* Amphitheatre is well worth the money
* Corrida de Middlewich!
and nothing to support theatre.  It would be good, given that it's referred to so often as the Amphitheatre to at least have a ref to back up the name.
FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH
Yes, I'm well aware of the various misinformed references by the various local Councils and Press to the Bull Ring redevelopment as a Roman ampitheatre, which still persits today. However, when options were put forward for the redevelopment, Congleton Borough Council's Planning Department produced two sketches: one involved refacing the then existing wall with Roman mosaics and the other involving demolition of the wall to open up the view towards Hightown and replacing it with a convex curved set of steps. Being a member of both the Town & Borough Council at the time, I suggested that in view of the recent success of the Roman Fesitival and interest in the Town's Roman Heritage that a variation of the steps theme be considered and produced a "back of an envelope" sketch of a Roman Theatre. 
The Borough Council then prepared a third sketch based on this and all three were dispayed in Middlewich Victoria Building (the Town Council offices) in 2001 and visitors were invited to vote on their preferred choice. The Roman Theatre sketch was the most popular choice, however when the Borough Council announced the result they misstated it as a Roman Ampitheatre, i.e. a fully  enclosed eliptical arena, however, being semi circular, it clearly is not that! One of my last tasks as a Middlewich Borough Councillor in 2002 as a member of the Joint Town, Borough, County & Heritage Panel was to approve the awarding of the grant for the Bull Ring redevelopment.   
I recall a press article by local historian Brian Curzon shortly after the official opening, criticising the Council for getting the name wrong. Its style is clearly that of a Roman or Greek Theatre and was what I had in mind when I conceved the idea. My recent amendments to the entry merely reflect this.
Cllr John Brown, currently Borough Council Ward Member for Holmes Chapel (e-mail: clrjbrown@aol.com)
: I've thought it was a bit of a strange name, given that it is definitely not an amphitheatre, however I've seen examples elsewhere where similar structures are called amphitheatres. Thanks for explaining the background to this. Salinae 23:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Theatre vs Amphitheatre

message: Interesting to see the page has been semi-protected. Didn't expect a Cheshire town page to be a vandalism target. --SunStar Nettalk 02:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:Northwich. Richard W.M. Jones 10:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism?? 

message: Reviewing this article against the good article criteria, I can't say it meets them. the article is a **good start**, and has most of the sections of a good city article. But most sections are just stubs within themselves, with very little actual content.
The lead section should adequately summarize the article. The geography section is unreferenced, and also contains no information about the climate. The history section is very well-developed, but the prose can be choppy at times, and it's divided awkwardly into several sections. The history section should tell the story of the city from the time it is first established to present day. Instead, it seems to deviate into some discussion on salt production (which might better be suited for the economy section), to two uncited sentences on historical townships, to population changes, and then finally gets back into the 19th and 20th centuries. I think it might be better to include fewer subsections here, and just tell the story of the town.
Promote the demographics section (should be just after history). Expand this and provide more references. Where did this demographic data come from? Simply saying 'data from the 2001 census' is not sufficient; whose census, provide a link to the census on the web, if available.
The landmarks section would best be moved to a 'culture' section as a subsection on 'cultural attractions'. Describe some of the main cultural attractions in the city, and include photos. 'Places of interest' can be moved into this section as well.
Media & sports should probably also be subsections under 'culture' as well.
'Economics' - change to 'economy' and expand beyond its two sentences. 'Retail/commerce' can come under the 'economy' section as well. As a matter of fact, most of the subsections under 'present day' should be moved to other areas - I have yet to see such a section in any article on any city, yet. What is the purpose of the picture of a seat in the Roman theatre? A single seat? Huh? the stage might be better here,...
'Transport' should be a main section unto itself. 'Schools' should also be in a main section as well, probably call it 'education'.
You might move the 'in literate' main section to a subsection under 'culture'. More should probably be written here than just reproducing two quotes.
It might help to review WP:CITE for tips on including and formatting inline citations, as well as the good article criteria and manual of style.
Hope this helps! Good luck! Dr. Cash 04:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review - 1st nomination

message: I have made a few, mainly minor modifications, either little errors or amendments to fit (so far as I read it) the WP:MOS.  If you don't like any of them please revert or replace them.  I think it's pretty good now but here are a few suggestions which might make it even better.
*Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements#Introduction states that in the lead the population is "required" (I know it's in the infobox, but that's what they say).  Also in the lead it might be worth including that it is in the borough of Congleton.
*"History" They don't like the use of "The" in titles and subtitles so it might be a good idea to get rid of them. They also don't like slashes (/) so perhaps a dash or an "and" between Nantwich Road and St Annes (should it be Anne's) might be better.
*In "Politics and administration" maybe a bit more linking the hundreds with the present administration; date of becoming part of the borough of Congleton, wards, parishes - that sort of thing (with citations).
*"Demographics" needs more citations.
*"Notable residents" - they prefer prose in this section rather than a list.  I got GA for Runcorn with a list here but I have since re-written it in prose and I think it looks a lot better - they also want citations.
*"Further reading" - if you can find ISBNs for the later books, it's worth adding them.
Then I should be surprised if you didn't get GA - or at least an "on-hold" for a few minor tweaks.  Good luck (and I hope you get a British assessor this time). Peter I. Vardy 15:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Towards GA 

message: Great work, I only have two issues with this:
* Excessive subdivision: subdividing is great -- helps break the article into convenient chunks, and helps you find things through the ToC.  Too much subdividing though makes the article too fragmented and difficult to read, and the ToC becomes unusable as it's so full!  Single paragraphs don't need their own subheadings, and I don't think it's worth subdividing any section with six or less paragraphs.  I don't think that any of the second level subheadings are justified here, though an argument could be made for them in the history section.
* Very minor one: there's a reference in the introduction -- the intro should be a summary of the rest of the article, so any claim made there should also be elsewhere in the article, in depth, and with references.  The population figure should therefore also be mentioned in the demographics section, along with the reference.  It could perhaps be in the context of an additional sentence or two on population change (presumably the village has grown over time?).
I can see other areas where the article can be improved, but I don't think they should stand in the way of this getting Good Article status.  Joe D (t) 15:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review - 2nd nomination

message: There's a lot of well-organised, well-referenced information in this article. Generally the level of detail felt appropriate, though some areas (as noted) need more or less. The images let the article down somewhat; there were no really striking images, and several of those used are rather dull or irrelevant to the section they are located in. A light copy edit would be useful; in particular, there are lots of weak phrasings (eg "a number of", "currently") throughout, many one sentence paragraphs, and occasional punctuation problems. Although there's a long list of section by section comments, most of the concerns are fairly minor and easily fixed.
Lead - All incorporated
*There is repetition between paragraph 2 and paragraphs 3 & 4
*"The town's population at the last census was 13,101" -- perhaps too specific; should the census date be given?
*"Middlewich lies on the confluence of a number of natural and man-made features: the Rivers Dane, Croco and Wheelock; the Shropshire Union and Trent and Mersey Canals; and the A533, A54 and A530 roads." -- clumsy, and do roads have confluences?   
*"These good motorway and road links" -- previous sentence doesn't mention motorways
*"a removal of manufacturing jobs" -- removal doesn't seem the right word
*"In part to address some of these issues" -- very vague, best deleted?
History
*The history feels rather thin prior to the 20th century; perhaps some material from the subpages could be reinserted? The 20th century section possibly could be condensed slightly. I'd also suggest splitting the section into at least 2 or 3 subsections for ease of reading, though I note a previous GA review suggested removing subheadings.
*Several statements in this section could use probably use specific references, with some paragraphs unreferenced
*"It is also supposed that" (para 1) -- vague phraseology
*"In Whittaker's History of Manchester it is asserted that the Cornovii took Kinderton as their capital" -- Kinderton not previously mentioned
*The section on the 20th century doesn't go into the industrial development/decline mentioned in the lead, nor the growth of tourism
Governance - All incorporated
*Not sure why this needs subsections. I don't know what the specific guidance on this point is, but in readability terms, perhaps the Civic history section could be amalgamated into History?
*Civic history -- "later it became part of the Northwich hundred" -- what date? Why mention the Encyclopaedia Britannica? 
*Political representation -- could expand to include eg European parliament. What layer of government do the two wards refer to?
Geography - All incorporated
*More references would be useful for the geography section
*Repetition of the material on rivers in two places
*Some repetition of words reads a bit oddly eg lies ... lies ... sits ... sits
*"Middlewich also sits on the Middlewich branch of the Shropshire Union Canal, the main route of which joins Wolverhampton with the River Mersey at Ellesmere Port, and the Trent and Mersey Canal which joins the Bridgewater Canal at Preston Brook (which gave access to the River Mersey at Runcorn) to the River Trent in Derbyshire." -- I found this hard to follow. Perhaps it could be broken into several sentences?
*"The high ground in Kinderton is also the start of the ancient Roman road of King Street, and the Roman fort at Harbutt's field which has a dominating view of the river and the area of Roman salt workings." -- Reads oddly; perhaps swap the start of the road and the fort?
*Climate section is rather sketchy, with no numbers
*Missing information on elevation
Demography
*Needs to start by repeating the total number from the lead. Where (approx) does this place Middlewich in terms of UK? of Cheshire?
*Proportion of children should be stated
*How does owner occupation & the car use compare with average?
*There is no mention of elderly, nor of ethnic mix
Economy
*Can you give a breakdown of %ages working in various industries? - Don't have this info
*How many people are employed at British Salt? - Added
*Is the Ideal Standard factory the largest single employer?
*Why is this section illustrated with the Roman theatre? Would probably be better moved to Culture.
*Paragraph 2 needs references, and feels a bit pointed (Nantwich, for example, still has much of the old shopping centre). - Done
*"There are a number of shops" -- vague. Perhaps better to rephrase along the lines of "The two main shopping streets are Wheelock and Lewin Streets..." What types of shop are there? - Rewritten
*Mentioning the supermarkets is probably enough, without giving locations
Transport 
*The historical information here might be better under History. There's also some overlap with Geography, and it would feel more intuitive to put them back to back here, but that's not the order recommended in Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements
*Short paragraphs could do with amalgamation
*Shortest canal claim could do with a reference
Communal facilities
*I've not seen this section elsewhere. It would seem more usual to divide it between culture and sport, though I'm not sure what section Health usually goes under.
*The short paragraphs need amalgamating, and variation to prevent so many paragraphs starting with Middlewich would be useful. 
Culture
*Need a reference for "highly regarded" (para 1) - There already is the ref - mudcat
*The coverage of the Roman festival seems disproportionate to the better known folk festival
Places of interest
*This is sadly thin, and largely repeats sites mentioned elsewhere. It should either be expanded greatly or amalgamated with Culture
Religion
*This should be expanded to cover more than just a list of churches, eg what proportion of the population attend church? What proportion of the population is of a non-Christian faith, and what facilities are there for non-Christian faiths? - Added information on percentage pop religious, percentage Christian and facilities for non-Christian faiths. I doubt if information on proportion of pop attending church is available for Middlewich.
Education
*The historical information might be better under History
*How does Middlewich do compared with national averages on exams?
Notable residents
*Some statements could do with references
See also - Removed
*The style guide suggests that this should not duplicate items mentioned elsewhere
References
*Page numbers should be given for book references
External links
*This seems to have a fairly appropriate selection, though perhaps the Middlewich Community Church should be deleted
*The Congleton borough council page has moved
Images
*Could a representative image be placed in the top of the infobox (per eg Runcorn)? - Done';
*Lead image (St Michael and All Angels) is a bit dark/dull, as is Image:Middlewich -Narrowboats.jpg
*Several illustrable sections lack images eg Geography, Places of interest, Education, Notable residents
*A sketch map of the town would make the river/road/canal etc information easier to follow
*Captions should probably not include date unless significant - Done
*I'm not sure about the policy on galleries -- it might be preferable to place the useful images in the article and start a Commons gallery for those that can't be accommodated. If the gallery is retained, duplicate, poor-quality or less-relevant images should be thinned out. - Removed
*Image:Middlewich Population.svg needs axes - I don't have enough SVG skills to add them - the image is hand written not from a package
Hope this is helpful and not too overwhelming -- as I said above, I think the majority of issues are very easily fixed. Espresso Addict 01:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review for the Cheshire WikiProject 

message: Hello, 
Any chance of reducing the infobox image to 240px to bring the infobox inline with the rest of the UK? Also, I'd be inclined to include a caption on the image's content, say like Glodwick, Chester, Manchester, Wormshill etc. I think this would help, -- Jza84 · (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I may have done it. Feel free to mprove upon it if it isn't as good as it could be.  DDStretch  (talk) 18:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great stuff! -- Jza84 · (talk) 20:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the title of the picture to reflect the view (I'd originally captioned the picture for the History of salt in Middlewich page. Salinae (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: From the perspective of the writing, prose, and manual of style, this article is very good and overall meets the GA criteria. I think the lead section provides a reasonable summary of the article, although it would be nice if a brief description of "wich town" could be added, so that readers not familiar with the terminology don't have to click on the link to understand it. The history section is well written and informative, though a citation would be nice for the 1980s development information.
In the geography section, two things. First, it would be good to begin the section with, "Middlewich is located at ____." Use the  template to provide the exact coordinates, and link them to google maps. While the link is at the top of the page, it would be good to have an additional reference to this in this section, to give the reader a more specific frame of reference right there. Second, many city articles also have a table with monthly high/low temperatures, as well as monthly precipitation figures. It might be good to add this, which would make the section a little bit longer and give the article a bit more depth.
:*Added the  template. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Added a climate chart. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 03:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: *I've added a bit about tourism to the Economy section. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 01:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: *I've moved the Transport section to be consistent with the WP:UKCITIES guidelines. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

text: *Merged the Culture and Community facilities sections into a new Culture and community section. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

text: *There's not much that can be done with this, Leighton Hospital is simply the closest Hospital to Middlewich, so it's not really part of some local infrastructure. Similarly for electricity (National Grid (UK)).  I'll add something about the water and sewage company being United Utilities. Salinae (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

text: The article is very close to GA, but the order of sections is still troublesome, as it puts information in very odd places where they are not related to each other. Demographics & Religion should be close together, as they are related. Culture and community should be promoted, probably right after demographics/religion. Landmarks should probably appear close to the culture section. Governance, Education, and Transport are all not as important as the other sections and should appear near the end in the order of sections. Although I do see that WP:UKCITIES does have governance near the top, right after history, so I could accept that. But the other sections need to be reordered so that their content and topic areas flow better within the article and actually make sense. Dr. Cash (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Religion renamed to Religious sites, and the demographic information it contained moved to the Demography section. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Culture and community moved as suggested. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

text: *I believe that the ordering of sections is sensible now, while still remaining consistent with the WP:UKCITIES guidelines. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review

message: Not sure these have been spotted before, but there is this and this from Vision of Britain and this and this from British History Online which could be utilised here as source material. I'm specifically thinking of a "historic population" table in Demography (see Stretford) and expansion of material under Geography (like that of Oldham#Geography). Hope this helps guys! --Jza84 |  Talk   04:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't spot that you were doing this, so I added a new population growth table based on the data I found; I'll add in your earlier data. We could pretty easily get Excel to produce a new graph if we wanted to keep both though (I don't see any reason why we shouldn't) couldn't we? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can do it in Excel (originally it was) but it was tagged as an image that should be in SVG format - hence the new version. I'll see if I can patch the new data into the SVG and update it. Even if we only use the table, the image should be consistent. Salinae (talk) 07:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added data to picture, merged into table. Salinae (talk) 07:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional sources 

message: http://www.ukwilduk.co.uk/ was added and then removed as vandalism.  I'm not so sure though, since 
http://www.ukwilduk.co.uk/Middlewich%20Cemetery.html is actually a link to the burial records for Middlewich cemetery.  If it belongs in Wikipedia is another matter.... Salinae (talk) 21:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The link isn't vandalism, but it is spam - a link to a wildlife shop. The problem with the burial records is that the page you mention isn't a link to burial records, it's a copy of the burial records. But is it an accurate copy, or completely invented? Who knows. So that one fails on on the criteria of reliable sources and wikipedia is not a directory. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it, because no attempt was made to justify its inclusion, and I gave some detailed advice to the person who added it if they wished to re-include it.  I did press the wrong button on twinkle when I deleted it, and so it got counted as vandalism, but I agree with Malleus that in the form it was added, it was linkspam, whose reliability is not known and no justification was offered for its inclusion. (So calling it vandalism is an error, for which I apologise.)  DDStretch  (talk) 23:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Done. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 12:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Middlewich cemetery

message: Not sure if it's worth mentioning in the article, but it used to be thought that there was a medieval castle at Kinderton, however the theory has since been dismissed. See here for a few more details. Nev1 (talk) 22:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks worth adding to me, so I've done it. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the link might not tell the whole story, Lawrence's History of Middlewich (1895) says "Then commenced the erection of Kinderton Castle, of which not the slightest trace now remains." (my emphasis) It then goes on to tell a story about Queen Margaret visiting the 'castle'.  That the earthworks are not thought to be part of a medieval castle doesn't mean that there wasn't a castle there. Salinae (talk) 22:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but after Cathcart-King in his index of castles dismissed the site as a castle, it seems that historians have given up on there being a castle in Kinderton. I was doing some reading for a new article (list of castles in Cheshire) and the only source I could find that talked even briefly about Kinderton Castle was from Husain (1973), Cheshire Under the Norman Earls 1066–1237. Salter in his 2001 gazetteer of castles in Lancashire and Cheshire does not list one at Kinderton or Middlewich I'm afraid. It might be that historians have "conveniently" forgotten about it since they don't have a likely site, but Salter listed Northwich Castle and it's not known where that is. Nev1 (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is from Lawrence - "This ancient place has disappeared from the face of the earth as completely as the ruins of Condate. Part only of the moat remains, but it formerly enclosed a parallelogram of several acres, in the south west angle of which is a large circular mound, probably raised to support the keep. It may interest the reader to know that the castle is said to have been replaced by a large quadrangular fabric of timber and plaster; the upper story is described as having been decorated with imaginary portraits of the long line of barons rudely painted round the exterior of the building. This also has passed away. At the time we treat of, the castle was in full pride of its strength, and its wall and towers of red sandstone frowned grimly on the flat expanse of country around, whose best protection it nevertheless was, during several centuries. Early in the morning of Midsummer eve, 1459, a mounted party was seen crossing the Bridge which spanned Kynderton moat, and issuing forth into the Vale of Cheshire. It was long since so brilliant an array had been seen in those parts; Queen Margaret herself headed it, attired for the chase." Of course Lawrence thought that Middlewich was known as Condate, rather than Salinae, and it does seem strange that a sandstone castle could disappear completely. Of course, seing as Thomas Venabies slayed a dragon in Moston, you never know :-) Salinae (talk) 22:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that a week in the laboratory often saves an hour in the library (or Google) - a quick web search brought up this "There was a similar, and even rarer, book The Queen's Badge, written about Kinderton Castle at Middlewich. This describes it as built of red sandstone with towers and turrets and as a magnificent and impressive place. There is no evidence at all that such a structure ever existed except in the imagination of writer, a Miss Francis Wilbraham. It was all imagination in a work of fiction but Lawrence's History of Middlewich 1895 quotes it as fact." (see http://victorian.fortunecity.com/rushdie/730/stories/round14.htm) Salinae (talk) 22:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good find. The only loose end remaining is whether the imaginary castle's worth mentioning. Probably not, but it is interesting. Nev1 (talk) 22:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are traces of a medieval structure there (http://www.cheshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F8248FF4-9969-49EF-B553-E8A7F3D597C5/0/Spring_1996.pdf#page=3), and Kinderton Hall is mentioned in accounts of the Second Battle of Middlewich.  Might be better putting on the History of Middlewich page, if I ever get the chance to do some more! Salinae (talk) 22:47, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Castle

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Middlewich. 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/20080526135213/http://politics.guardian.co.uk:80/hoc/constituency/0,,-841,00.html to http://politics.guardian.co.uk/hoc/constituency/0,,-841,00.html
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 02:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Middlewich. 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/20090612051729/http://www.cheshire.gov.uk:80/NR/rdonlyres/557CE4C8-0741-46C3-964C-1D971FC462A4/0/Cheshire_Business_Parks_Brochure_200511.pdf to http://www.cheshire.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/557CE4C8-0741-46C3-964C-1D971FC462A4/0/Cheshire_Business_Parks_Brochure_200511.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927064301/http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/2006/2/22/266022.html to http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/2006/2/22/266022.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071011151116/http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/2006/10/25/279259.html to http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/2006/10/25/279259.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071011172205/http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/1999/9/22/228089.html to http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/1999/9/22/228089.html
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 12:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Middlewich. 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/20111003043127/http://www.midfest.org.uk/2006Festival/Festival%20info.doc to http://www.midfest.org.uk/2006Festival/Festival%20info.doc
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070926231946/http://www.nhs.uk/England/Dentists/LocalSearchResults.aspx?pc=cw10&addr= to http://www.nhs.uk/England/Dentists/LocalSearchResults.aspx?pc=cw10&addr=
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 20:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Middlewich. 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/20090517000027/http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20080634_en_2#pt2-l1g3 to http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20080634_en_2#pt2-l1g3
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130801122236/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/tmean/17.gif to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/tmean/17.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071006021745/http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=88138&messages=18 to http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=88138&messages=18
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.congleton.gov.uk/default.asp?t=219
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://archive.thisischeshire.co.uk/1999/11/3/227041.html
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) 16:02, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 15 external links on Middlewich. 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/20061213085431/http://www.roman-britain.org/tribes/cornovii.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/tribes/cornovii.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060509034543/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/salinae_cornoviorum.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/salinae_cornoviorum.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927062454/http://www.cw10residents.co.uk/shopping/standard/images/1212_76_file_finalntsbypassdtp9.pdf to http://www.cw10residents.co.uk/shopping/standard/images/1212_76_file_finalntsbypassdtp9.pdf
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/65eCfApaD?url=http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/ss/17.gif to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/ss/17.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130719222449/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/rr/17.gif to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/rr/17.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070809125155/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/dl/17.gif to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/dl/17.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070705082009/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/daf/17.gif to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/daf/17.gif
*Added archive http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20031222005406/http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/census2001/KS_LA_E%26W_part1.pdf to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/census2001/KS_LA_E%26W_part1.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.middlewich.org.uk/what%27s_on.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060519035442/http://www.stmarysrcmid.school.cheshire.org.uk/ to http://www.stmarysrcmid.school.cheshire.org.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927064145/http://www.thisischeshire.co.uk/news/middlewichnews/display.var.1009753.0.school_is_100_not_out.php to http://www.thisischeshire.co.uk/news/middlewichnews/display.var.1009753.0.school_is_100_not_out.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060906154243/http://www.middlewich.org.uk/roman_middlewich.htm to http://www.middlewich.org.uk/roman_middlewich.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060509034543/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/salinae_cornoviorum.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/salinae_cornoviorum.htm
*Added archive https://archive.is/20060901004419/http://www.cheshirehistory.org.uk/Papers/Salt.htm to http://www.cheshirehistory.org.uk/Papers/Salt.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820054304/http://www.congleton.gov.uk/?t=468 to http://www.congleton.gov.uk/?t=468
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) 01:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Middlewich. 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  tag to http://onlineservices.congleton.gov.uk/minutes/mgConvert2PDF.asp?ID=1071
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050923191625/http://weather.yahoo.com/climo/UKXX1253_c.html to http://weather.yahoo.com/climo/UKXX1253_c.html
*Added  tag to http://128.242.55.67/Wimboldsley/index.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) 23:29, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Middlewich. 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://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/averages/19712000/ss/17.gif
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5ln6hYLxD?url=http://www.congleton.gov.uk/pool/16032005103584.pdf to http://www.congleton.gov.uk/pool/16032005103584.pdf
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5oI8R54fs?url=http://www.congleton.gov.uk/pool/0/051120071052.pdf to http://www.congleton.gov.uk/pool/0/051120071052.pdf
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) 07:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Middlewich. 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/20080509100511/http://www.wheelockgenealogy.org/Translation.pdf to http://www.wheelockgenealogy.org/Translation.pdf
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) 09:12, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Middlewich. 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  tag to http://pastscape.english-heritage.org.uk/hob.aspx?hob_id=74705
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071028064803/http://www.congleton.gov.uk/?t=880 to http://www.congleton.gov.uk/?t=880
*Added  tag to http://www.upmystreet.com/local/transport/l/CW10+9BH.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) 17:20, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)