Talk:Yarm

message: Does anyone have a copy of Yarm's coat of arms that they can put on the page?  If not I can get it from the town council, but it'll be easier if someone has it already. - Andrewduffell 15:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coat of arms

message: To User:62.254.64.13
The North Yorkshire border I was referring to was not the administrative one (I know that Yarm is north of that) but the traditional one. Local government in Britain is subjected to such frequent and arbitrary reorganisation that it's generally better to use traditional borders. It should be stressed that the traditional counties were never abolished, they just don't correspond to local authority boundaries any more in some places. You say that Yarm is north of the North Yorkshire border, but you don't say what county it is in. It's either in County Durham or Yorkshire (remember we are talking traditional counties here — everywhere is in a county even if it's been taken out of its control and is administered by a unitary authority). I've always thought the border ran along the Tees right to the North Sea, hence places like Redcar, and Yarm, are in Yorkshire.
Also I wonder about your use of the word "alumni": as far as I am aware it is used with places of learning, not towns. I have never come across your meaning, and my dictionary doesn't include it.
I stand corrected on Teesside, I'm not quite sure what made me think Yarm wasn't in Cleveland.  I hope you can clarify some of these matters.  — Trilobite (Talk) 21:29, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see the term Alumni in Wikipedia and elsewhere. Its use here is incorrect. Also, Yarm IS is the North Riding of Yorkshire (historic county) whether you (anonymous user) like it or not. You should not revert accurate information.    Arcturus 11:53, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for conformation of what I had originally thought. I have reverted back to the North Riding. — Trilobite (Talk) 23:27, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: County

message: I think it's reasonable to have this link. It's a useful community facility and it does get used quite a bit. There's an equivalent one on the Ingleby Barwick page and someone has just put one on Thornaby. I haven't checked Billingham. I'll restore it in due course unless there are major objections. Arcturus 20:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: These so called Yarm sites appear all the time, and are totally unused by 99% of the community.  To link to it as a "Community Site" I disagree because it fails to meet that critera.  However it could be linked to differently.  The main reason it was removed was that, but also that it was added by an anon. user, and they were adding lots of links to pages which looked a bit like spamming Andrewduffell 23:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to www.Yarm.net

message: I don't see what the problem with this is. The bit in parentheses is just clarifying which riding the town is in, but the main entry still points to Yorkshire. Your edits   pointed it to North Yorkshire which is clearly wrong. Owain (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  For places in Yorkshire it makes obvious sense to clarify which Riding they are in.  At the moment some places just link to Yorkshire, others to the individual Riding.  It would be a good idea to standardise with the formulation used here.  Lancsalot 12:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I can disregard the "agreement" from your sockpuppet here. The section asks for the "Historical county".  This is 'Yorkshire'.  If you want to include the sub-division of Yorkshire then you should negotiate another field in the template, because North Riding is NOT part of the Historical county. - Andrew Duffell 13:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please stop this nonsense about sockpuppets.  Note that you have violated the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule and any further reverts will be reported.  Lancsalot 13:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From looking at your contributions it is not nonsense.  There has NO consensus been met on this at all, so request that you stop your vandalism of the page, and stop threatening to go "running to the teacher".  If we take into account that you are Owain are the same person then you have also broken the three revert rule.  Get over it, and enjoy wikipedia instead of vandalising it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewduffell (talk • contribs) 
This is a really petty argument between you both about small issue.  I think the best way to deal with this is to create an extra field in the template for sub-divisions. (DiegoGarcia 13:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It only really applies to Yorkshire and possibly a few other counties with historic subdivisions - such as Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Sussex, &c. This is a very uncontroversial edit and not worth the edit warrring and accusations of sockpuppetry that Andrew Duffell has instigated. Owain (talk) 13:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since North Yorkshire covers parts of all three ridings it's important information that shouldn't be excluded.  By all means add an optional category to the template for it: in the meantime it should appear in parentheses.  Yorkshire Phoenix 06:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yorkshire (North Riding)

message: I don't know where the meeting was held, but it was at one of the pubs in yarm.  Does anyone want to fill this in? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnduffell (talk • contribs) 00:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both the George & Dragon and the Black Bull pubs in Yarm have a sign saying that the inital meeting was held there.They even show the same date !  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibnewshound (talk • contribs) 14:21, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stockton-Darlington railway meeting

message: There currently exists what appears to be a typo that states that the town has a major who has ceremonial grazing rights. One assumes that it should be a mayor but can someone verify and alter if necessary? --SmartShark (talk) 23:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Major?

message: I've corrected the name of the Catholic church in Yarm to Ss Mary & Romuald - see Diocese of Middlesbrough web site .Could You restore link to the entry for St Mary & St Romuald but with its correct name, Ss Mary & Romuald.Thanks Ibnewshound (talk) 15:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have renamed the church article to remove the ampersand, so the link works now. Keith D (talk) 17:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Church

message: The following quotation from the History section includes both a citation and a demand for a citation: 'under the Local Government Act 1972 it became part of the district of Stockton-on-Tees in the new non-metropolitan county of Cleveland.[citation needed]'. Should the demand not be removed? (RJPe (talk) 14:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: History citation

message: How can Walter Skirlaw build Yarm bridge in 1270 as bishop of Durham when he was bishop of Durham from 1388 until his death in 1406?  The bishop of Durham in 1270 was Robert Stitchill.  Stuffed cat (talk) 19:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look into this when I get a chance.  There is a plaque on the bridge that may shed some light.  I suspect the dates may have been written down incorrectly. Andrew Duffell (talk) 20:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the plaque today, and it says 1400, so I've updated the article.  Thanks for pointing this out Sc. :) Andrew Duffell (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Yarm Bridge dates

message: I noticed that my edit regarding the referendum has been reverted despite being reliably sourced, relevant and proportionate Could I ask why? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It wasn't a referendum. It was a no binding "parish poll" - basically an opinion poll. Andrew (talk) 22:43, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Referendum

message: Substituted at 11:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider this article now meets the C-class standard.  Hope you all agree, thanks.  143.159.18.65 (talk) 00:28, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yarm. 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/20161023083617/http://www.jameswharton.co.uk/ to http://www.jameswharton.co.uk/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:10, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified