Talk:Culture of the United Kingdom/Archive 1

3227:. We are discussing only the lists of names after "Other contemporary British film directors include..." and "Well-known currently active performers include..." While there is no objective way to decide which directors and actors to include, long lists become nothing more than a wall of text that no one will read, serving no encyclopedic purpose. IMO, we should start with reverting to the shorter versions (69 names, rather than 105) then discuss eliminating the lists entirely in favor of well-sourced general statements and links to relevant articles. Example farms are seldom useful. - 3312:, or else the just blank 'shorter' then comes off as just whimsy for personal preference on length and intent to be cutting by personal faves. While the people putting in names also did not put forward a criteria, that they have already done the effort and the general desire for stability leads me to lean towards status quo and inclusion. So I'll suggest do not undo others work and risk starting edit wars without a better and clearly written criteria that people will then see. I do think the top line of the section could add a couple more see Also pointers, one to 3474:

the earlier list. They reverted. Another editor restored the earlier list and commented. They reverted and were blocked. Their only comments here have not discussed the issue, instead accusing me of "witch-hunt editing" and "denying {their) substantial and detailed edits". Their three blocks are for editing against consensus. I started this RfC because they refused to discuss the issue. They've ignored the ping for this discussion. Calling this a simple edit war is similar to the proud mom at the parade who beams that "Everyone is out of step except for

1009:

have a specific seating plan at the table which revolves around the person with the highest reputation such as our boss at work etc. Social occasions open up the chance for us to drink alcohol and relax after a hard week of work. We make casual conversation with our colleagues and light jokes with our bosses. Anyone who visits Britain couldn't prevent themselves from loving the way we behave. They would have a chance to interact with a variety of characters.

31: 709: 3110:: The list of notable directors/performers is just an unreadable wall of text and unhelpful for readers with so many names in it. Yes, the names you added are rather "well-known", but given how influential and popular British cinema/TV is internationally, we can't just add every British director/performer who is merely "well-known" or the list of names will take over this whole article. 1152:

other. Personally I feel this is the best as it maintains a neutrality that we've tried to establish. Elgar (and Britten) are historically the two most renowned composers from the UK, and while I preferred to leave just the text to cover the four countries, I could in some way understand if an image of either was used. Ideally though I'd leave the section neutral.

1325:

American / N.American accent, you also see it on how the shows are made and the content. One example is Court/Judge show (thought much toned down that American versions. there seems to be gelling of one Anglo culture mostly being forged by the U.S. An American/North american culture influencing the other english languish culture...U.K and Australia

3550:, what is the purpose of this name-dropping list? Just replace it entirely with a link to the relevant standalone lists. Any British director/performer who has actually made a great impact on British culture would already have been mentioned, along with their notable achievements and impact, somewhere else in the article anyway. 3473:

Had the other editor stayed logged in, they would have been repeatedly blocked for edit warring and the shorter list would currently be here. Their repeated logging in and out fueled an edit war for 6 months. I started discussion here, tagging them for their opinion. They did not respond. I restored

3458:

is back from their block, hopefully they will participate. "any and all choices that had no stated criteria seem equally whimsical and unsustainable." Agreed. Whether we keep the list as it is now or shorten it, it will be unsustainable with no stated criteria. Hence my vote to just remove this list

1218:

The article does a wonderful job of listing many modern media and how they affect the culture entirely. But I was wondering, that in all the media, British comics seemed to be missing in this category. We all have to respect how big the impact this genre had. Why not make an entire section dedicated

1008:

British behaviour in society. I, myself, have always been interested in the behaviour of people and how we act and react with one another. Every different country has form of social culture which they abide to. We don’t exchange gifts with the host at every social occasion we have been invited to or

589:

Well, for a start, cuisine, education and sport are all a bit thin. There is also very little on differences between England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and sub-divisions of each of them (Cornwall, say, or Tyneside). It would be worth checking whether each section is a proper summary of the

1151:

Seeking consensus for any possible composer image in article. Previously we had an issue with the article being too England centric which was rectified. In the music section, the opening part deals with music from the four parts of the UK and no image was used for any one partulcar country over the

1061:

Horrified at the long list of names in rock and pop music, I've pruned it back to the truly notable. It seems that over time people have just added their favourite artists, which I guess is how the likes of Bonnie Tyler, Cher Lloyd, The Sweet and Kim Wilde are rubbing shoulders with The Beatles and

320:

With my screen resolution the image of Shakespeare does not clash too much with that of the Beatles, though I can't alter my resolution to check it on other computers. Can someone with a larger resolution please check the placement of the image to make sure the text isn't all jiggered around those

3403:

Are you saying we should let the one editor continue adding more content that has been reverted by others, just so the one editor stops edit warring? That contradicts your second sentence: "it is supposed to be about consensus building based on rationales." And yes it should be "consensus building

1324:

I think info should be added about how U.S culture is influencing British culture. Since globalization in the late 1990's and especially since mid 2000 you can noticable see the influence of American culture on the U.K. The most noticeable is especially on TV, the amount to commercials voiced by a

1166:

I would like to add the photo of Thomas Tallis because he is considered one of Britain's greatest composers. The fact that Elgar is more well-known by most does not mean the photo of Tallis isn't suitable. Furthermore, Elgar (and classical music) are already represented in the sound files, whereas

1081:

Just a little bit about my revision... I have added a (distinctly British) hymn that has been sung in Britain for a long time in place of Greensleeves - which is distinctly English. I have added a Handel piece because of his importance to Baroque music as a whole (not sure why he was missed out!),

831:

I've just realised that this article often confuses the UK with England, Scotland etc - by that I mean it writes about things as though something happened in the 'UK' when often the event happened before the UK existed. I've tried to fix some of this. It gives a false impression if we make it look

185:

We will quickly encounter the problem of whether by culture we mean the anthropological/sociological-type concept of how we organise our society, or the artistic concept of literature, music, etc. I'd like to hear people's opinions on what we are aiming for here, and hence which headings we retain

480:

was a bit troubled to begin with, maybe I'll go interfere with that some other time). Middle English didn't become distinct in the 16th century, it's defined as lasting from the 12th through the 15th centrury. The question of when English literature "emerged" is a battlefield, and I did a kind of

263:

I assume it to be regional variations in culture. I started to write something about the south east, how it's overpopulated and the whole commuter culture that is invading the rest of the country from this region, but I didn't know how to word it so reverted my own edit. Other than that I don't

3161:

not here. This article is a summary of British culture and shouldn't go as in-dept as more specific articles. Also, please consider that Australian cinema is no where near as big or influential as British cinema. Thus, the level of notability for inclusion in the British cinema article should be

492:

I inserted T. S. Eliot as an important poet, I don't know if there are any current edit wars raging as to whether he's to be reckoned non-UK (=American). I think he belongs in this list, and he sure tried to be English, but please remove if considered appropriate. (What, immigrants don't fit? If

2020:

The popular music and cinema (under "currently-active" actors) sections currently have unnecessarily long lists of names. Walls of text like these are unhelpful and could turn off casual readers. I'm skeptical if some of these names "belong" - some don't seem to be on the same tier as the other

912:

Does anyone else here think that American culture is not the same as British? The United States is not a Commonwealth country, has a unique dialect of English, and was not colonized by the modern United Kingdom. Basically, part of what became the United Kingdom colonized what became part of the

758:

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as

488:

thought to have been the first English novel? How is that supposed to be useful to the reader? I've used the same space to mention a few important 18th C novels instead. I actually thought the original was fine, if the "erroneously" could be left out, but I see from the History that there is

2922:

Neither list was useful to begin with. Neither one needed to be expanded by 50%. Both are now pointless, indiscriminate lists where various editors can come and add their favorites to ever-growing lists that no one will ever read, which is fine because they certainly aren't encyclopedic.

2913:(sometimes logged in, but often under one of multiple IP addresses) has been adding multiple names to various lists of names in this article. They have been reverted repeatedly by multiple editors, only to return under a different IP address to restore the same names and add a few more. 493:

Eliot goes, Salman Rushdie should go too.) I also inserted G. B. Shaw, I'm guessing that's a faux pas, but he did spend most of his life and his entire dramatist life in London. All Americans, Irish and British out there, please remove any of these you wish, I'm not out to offend you.--

3192:

At the moment, there is a narrow consensus (2 to 1) to revert to the shorter list. While this ignores the multiple editors who have reverted Saiph121's additions (most while logged out) over the past 6 months, I'm sure we can easily document a clear consensus for a shorter list here.

3216:

Two lists of examples starting at "Other contemporary British film directors include..." and "Well-known currently active performers include..." have grown to considerable length (105 examples total). Should the lists be shortened or left at that length? 22:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

3478:

Johnny!" I am suggesting restoring the consensus version and discussing whether to expand, shorten, eliminate or reconfigure the list. Essentially, they were bold, they were reverted, they did not discuss, they logged out and started to edit war. I'm trying to bring this back to

628:

What is the correct term for the regional languages? Man vyi wants to call them autochthonous, but this ignores the fact that the Celts (and we are surely talking mostly about the modern Celtic languages such as Gaelic and Welsh) themselves displaced previous inhabitants (e.g.

1084:

and I have added a Brian Eno (featured in the list of living composers) piece to provide 'electronic' contrast to the other pieces. Elgar's Pomp & Circumstance march (whilst a beautiful piece of music!) was removed to broaden the idea of "British music" beyond patriotic

279:

I added a list the other day as a placeholder to give a structure in which others could add some content - there are clearly cultural variations between the regions, so it would be worth explaining them. Ditto the list of sociological issues as that need to be expanded. --

3707:

is 126kB. That's not to say they're better articles, but it does indicate this one does not need to be as long as it is. There may well be justifiable reasons for this article to be over 100kB, but we can't assess that until a thorough edit has been completed.

401:

for that one, he asked me to write it and stated in particular Vanbrugh in relation to the Restoration comedy. Knowing nothing about the subject myself I started the section off and don't really mind what gets edited out in the interests of accuracy. --

2021:

listed names so to speak. Lists like this tend to attract fans to indiscriminately add their personal favorite artists/actors, and that may have happened here. So if no one objects, I may start pruning these two sections. Feel free to help. Thanks.

2294: 481:

workaround. It's not because I want to quibble with saying that it happened in the 16th century and replace it with my own favourite theory, it's just that I think it very important to have Chaucer, a 14th-century writer, in this section.

233:

I've started a restructure to make the layout a bit more logical, starting with the language, moving on to literature, performing arts, broadcasting, and then other topics. I'll add in some placeholders for the sociological topics. --

1219:

to the British comic genre, or maybe just add them in the literature section. Lots of British comic book writers and artist really need to be included in this article and their recognition in British culture, like legendary

637:). Of course the modern Celtic languages have developed in their present form in their present regions, but then so has Australian English. In any case, the UN prefers the word indigenous to the word autochthonous. -- 298:

I've ben thinking about this, and I don't know how we're going to write about regional variations in culture, without relying too much on stereotypes. Perhaps that's too much of a big project for this COTW week? --

3162:

commensurately higher. So while it may be feasible to list all internationally "well-known" Australian actors/directors, it is certainly not feasible in the case of British cinema (same for American cinema, see

532:, and added a couple of my own. There is in fact no mention of "UK" or "United Kingdom" anywhere in the section. That doesn't look good, and I think it needs to be addressed, I'm sure voters would jump on it on 3268:

Speaking generally, the article has many long lists of notable people. I can't see the purpose of these lists, myself; they could be replaced with (e.g.) "Other prominent novelists from the UK can be found at

2987:

10) This is where the pattern breaks down. Sometimes we end up at AN/I before I revert the change again, other times it's DRN. Sometimes Saiph121 ends up with another block, other times it's another warning.

2295:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101129172958/http://www.walesonline.co.uk/tm_headline%3Ddragons--leeks-and-daffodils--our-national-emblems%26method%3Dfull%26objectid%3D13918897%26siteid%3D50082-name_page.html

1534: 3668:

There are several sections that could probably be condensed quite easily without affecting their quality. 'Regional accents', for instance, does not necessarily two paragraphs of examples when a link to

3359:

Yes, the "people" is one person, editing logged in and logged out, reverting (without comment) anyone who challenged their additions over a 6 month period. The lists are completely indiscriminate. -

2298: 1778: 3049:

It seems that SummerPhDv2.0 has been committing witch-hunt editing reversal against me and for a very long period of time, he kept denying my substantial and detailed edits from being published.

755:

is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Knowledge (XXG) policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

1884: 158:. Thinking about some of the differences between the UK and other countries and disspelling some of the stereotypes (bad teeth, football hooligans, roast beef) could also be worthwhile. -- 1904: 2502: 489:

contention about it. Perhaps the contributor who insists that calling RC the first novel is an error could say why? Do you say that RC is not a novel, or that it's not the first?

3308:- I do not see a policy that would be against this length and there are after all a lot of notables, even the rest of the section is an yet longer naming of movies. I also see 3571:

by about half the list of names to the shorter versions and work towards elimination. Huge long random lists of actors and directors are not needed on this article in my view.

508:

I intend to put this forward as a Featured Article candidate - does anyone who has taken part in the recent collaboration have any comment on the article before I do that? --

3378:- so the threat of a slow edit war is already ongoing? Then definitely let the longer list stand and stop warring -- turn it into a criteria matter or else let it go. It is 3425:, and that the discussion here is supposed to be about consensus building with rationales of policy and explicit crafted criteria plus cites to support what edits belong. 3085: 2640: 1386: 175:

I have started by chopping up the unwieldy overview section that comprised most of the content of the article. The resulting sections are fairly randomly placed for now. —

1535:

https://web.archive.org/20081016132738/http://www.telegraph.co.uk:80/sport/othersports/baseball/2799671/Major-League-Baseball-told-Your-sport-is-British-not-American.html

2851: 2847: 2833: 2692: 2688: 2674: 2562: 2558: 2544: 2362: 2358: 2344: 1962: 1958: 1944: 1702: 1698: 1684: 1574: 1570: 1556: 1436: 1432: 1418: 3520:

It would be unencyclopediac and unhelpful to the readers to allow the inclusion of every notable British director/performer as there are just too many and it would be

2314: 252:

What is this section for? It has no explanatory text, just a seemingly arbitrary and incomplete selection of counties, historical counties and government regions...

2158: 1662: 2299:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/tm_headline%3Ddragons--leeks-and-daffodils--our-national-emblems%26method%3Dfull%26objectid%3D13918897%26siteid%3D50082-name_page.html

1538: 1848: 1798: 1779:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120125224024/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk:80/news/article-23389580-london-is-the-world-capital-of-the-21st-century-says-new-york.do

143:

recently and appears to have blossomed, creating several spin-off articles. It's heavily focussed on Ancient Greece, but in terms of organisation is very good. —

1396: 3189:

Saiph121 is currently blocked from editing for editing against a clear consensus on another article. Just before that happened, they restored their list here.

1818: 881: 871: 105:

True, but hopefully they soon won't be. Part of the reasoning behind this article is that it will be the prelude to articles on each country within the UK. —

3635: 1885:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100415213741/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk:80/fashion/article-23746171-costelloe-is-head-and-shoulders-ahead-at-fashion-week.do

449:, is completely omitted from the Theatre section. I'd write about it myself but I really know nothing but what I've read in other articles. Some info from 2174: 681:

From the evidence presented in the article, I fail to see how this is the case. It's also quite unfair, i believe, to call the contributions "considerable".

1039: 221: 3429:; if already in edit war, then stop it and step back. Generally I'd give preference to over-inclusion and to a longer-standing status quo and to staying 2474: 1905:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101122114013/http://www.nidirect.gov.uk:80/index/government-citizens-and-rights/living-in-northern-ireland/bank-holidays.htm

2184: 1838: 1130:

I have replaced a photo of The Odeon in Leicester Square with a photo of Ewan McGregor. The previous photographs in "Cinema" were a tad England-centric.

678:"Considerable contributions to British culture have been made over the last half-century by immigrants from the Indian Subcontinent and the West Indies" 216:

concentrates on artistic concepts mainly because (I suspect) there are not enough Greek contributotrs to tell us much about Greek society today, whereas

2503:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110925164704/http://fabulousbuzz.com/2011/09/21/rosie-huntington-whiteley-at-london-fashion-week-springsummer-2012-photos/

933: 736:, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with 733: 3662: 2236: 2066: 2060: 1782: 333:

The Shakespeare image covers the lower half of a line of text on my screen, at 1024x768. Not to make anything illegible, it just doesn't look ideal.--

760: 752: 748: 725: 1894: 3514:

Rather than discussing whether the list should be shortened or not, I think it would be more useful to discuss a selection criteria so as to avoid

2276: 1888: 3422: 2660: 2506: 520:

Yes, I have a problem, which is making my head hurt, with the literature section. I have refactored and added to it, keeping the references to "

3673:

could direct readers to a much more comprehensive article, leaving only a summary on this page. Eleanor_of_Aquitaine 23:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

2518: 2288: 1908: 1032: 2216: 898: 764: 140: 3345:

FYI, the "people" putting in names is just one person who has been reverted by at least 3 other editors. Hence that is not the "status quo".

2926:

This notice is fair warning. Unless there is a consensus to the contrary, I will be restoring the shorter versions of those lists (buried in

2528: 2324: 929: 3084:

If you wish to discuss my editing, you will need to raise the issue on my talk page or, if you feel administrator attention is required, at

568:

My biggest problem is that the art section is so small. My knowledge of art is next to nothing though, unfortunately, so I can't expand it.

484:

The historical part is quite short (appropriately so), what on earth is the point of wasting two lines of it to say that Robinson Crusoe is

3317: 2641:

https://web.archive.org/web/20101102150224/http://www.u.tv/News/Halloween-fire-calls-every-90-seconds/15324334-54c7-4167-b118-40fd763bf701

2128: 1868: 1387:

https://web.archive.org/20091030154340/http://www.icons.org.uk:80/theicons/collection/the-pint-of-real-ale/features/types-of-beer-finished

950: 2916:

Over that time frame, the list at "Other contemporary British film directors include..." has grown from an already long 17 names to 24.

1197: 1177: 1016: 984:

Heh. Cool attitude. Do you have a cite for the research and the end? It sounds familiar, but I'm not sure were from/ how credible it is.

788: 2304: 413:

Right, I know Giano told you to put it in, I'm sorry if we seemed to conspire to fuck with your head. It was totally not intentional.--

2164: 2108: 1788: 1524: 1376: 810: 696: 47: 17: 1828: 3158: 2829:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2670:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2540:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2340:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

2315:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100916195216/http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2010/results

2148: 1236: 839: 2246: 1390: 961:

I've copy-edited the new material to sharpen it and give it an issue focus. The claim about recent research in the last para under

386:

instead. Their articles are poor :-( where Vanbrugh's is good (featured article), but they're more proportionate to mention here.--

3483:. They were bold, they will have been reverted, we can all discuss. End of edit war, build a consenus, implement the consensus. - 2644: 2159:

https://www.google.com/books?id=dMYXq9V1JBQC&dq=statute%20of%20anne%20copyright&lr=&as_brr=3&source=gbs_navlinks_s

1663:

https://web.archive.org/20100125100954/http://www.icons.org.uk:80/theicons/collection/the-rose/features/wars-of-the-roses-finished

2650: 2200: 2256: 1539:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/baseball/2799671/Major-League-Baseball-told-Your-sport-is-British-not-American.html

1298:. Note also that I think its better to just include the comics that takes place in Britain or had the British elements into it. 1849:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110128111505/http://www.cadbury.co.uk:80/contact/PressCentre/Brands/Chocolate/Pages/CremeEgg.aspx

1799:

https://web.archive.org/web/20091212021243/http://www.icons.org.uk:80/theicons/collection/jerusalem/features/and-did-those-feet

614:'Art' to Visual Art. it is a more precise definition and doesnt conflict with anything under that heading as far as I can see. 1397:

https://web.archive.org/20070510034022/http://www.icons.org.uk:80/theicons/collection/the-rose/biography/biography-of-the-rose

3313: 3025:

s edit with the summary "Stop edit warring." (Bennv3771 had previously warned Saiph121 on their talk page. That's step 7. -

2823: 2805: 2446: 2318: 2082: 1819:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090309035640/http://www.royal.gov.uk/TheRoyalResidences/BuckinghamPalace/BuckinghamPalace.aspx

548:(please remove them if separate Scottish and Welsh sections are created). Alternatively, I suppose I could instead refer to 2118: 1858: 1808: 1666: 3283: 2779: 2753: 2624: 2424: 2044: 1762: 1634: 1496: 1348: 2226: 2175:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160303225940/http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/web/essaybooks/earth/p_hutton.html

809:

do you think alcohol should be mentioned too? Like, it's only us and the Germans who seem that focussed on the beverage.

3704: 3643: 3610: 3154: 3125: 2894: 2735: 2605: 2405: 2266: 2098: 2005: 217: 122: 3599: 2475:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120708022226/http://londonoffices.com/news/the-shard-set-to-change-the-london-skyline-770

1400: 121:

To give the overhaul of this article some kind of focus I recommend a look at some of the other "culture of" articles.

3670: 3163: 2185:

http://www.webcitation.org/5zbRVYsAo?url=http://digital.nls.uk/scientists/biographies/alexander-graham-bell/index.html

1839:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120311232321/http://www.prideofbritain.com/contentpages/winners/2001/peter-benenson.aspx

3572: 3525: 156:

education, regional variations, names, clothing, housing, family arrangements and gender roles, external links, sport

3433:. At the moment any and all choices that had no stated criteria seem equally whimsical and unsustainable. Cheers 2237:

https://web.archive.org/web/20040312081747/http://www.halifaxtoday.co.uk/mk4custompages/CustomPage.aspx?PageID=39556

2210: 2138: 2067:

https://web.archive.org/web/20111118132607/http://www2.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/archives/2008/culturecapital.aspx

2061:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23389580-london-is-the-world-capital-of-the-21st-century-says-new-york.do

1852: 1822: 1802: 1783:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23389580-london-is-the-world-capital-of-the-21st-century-says-new-york.do

3270: 3124:

If that's the case, how about that you can just make a list of every British director/performer in another article

2795: 2330: 125:

has sections like "regional variations" and is quite well organised unlike the current hotch-potch on this page. —

38: 2984:

9) The discussion occurs, without much input from Saiph121, other than vague insistences contrary to simple facts.

3580: 2178: 1895:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100224061034/http://www.artslondonnews.co.uk:80/20100219-fashion-week-day-1-outside

1096: 3658: 3426: 2963:

2) Multiple IPs (Saiph121 logged out) repeatedly restore the changes, reverted several times by several editors.

2850:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2691:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2561:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2361:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1961:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1701:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1573:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1435:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

224:. I think we should try to do both, until we have enough material to spin out either arts or sociology or both. 2760: 2478: 2277:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/fashion/article-23746171-costelloe-is-head-and-shoulders-ahead-at-fashion-week.do

1889:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/fashion/article-23746171-costelloe-is-head-and-shoulders-ahead-at-fashion-week.do

2664: 2490: 2464: 2194: 2088: 1842: 925: 3657:

The culture of the UK is a large topic and a small article cannot be expected to cover it. Nevertheless, the

3071:

If you are asking for discussion of the lists, please clearly state why you feel the longer lists are better.

2661:

https://archive.is/20120907100302/http://www.prideofbritain.com/contentpages/winners/2001/peter-benenson.aspx

2507:

http://fabulousbuzz.com/2011/09/21/rosie-huntington-whiteley-at-london-fashion-week-springsummer-2012-photos/

2452: 1201: 1181: 1020: 3639: 3606: 2885: 2787: 2726: 2632: 2596: 2519:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120118043542/http://www.brc.org.uk/details04.asp?id=1091&kCat=&kData=1

2484: 2432: 2396: 2289:

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/government-citizens-and-rights/living-in-northern-ireland/bank-holidays.htm

2240: 2188: 2070: 2052: 1996: 1909:

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/government-citizens-and-rights/living-in-northern-ireland/bank-holidays.htm

1770: 814: 792: 692: 458: 2217:

https://web.archive.org/web/20121002214520/http://www.pgatour.com/2007/travel/07/16/trans_071607/index.html

1309: 1012: 917: 835: 784: 684: 472:

I fixed up the history bit on English literature some, I see it got a bit troubled in being shortened from

2783: 2628: 2529:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/sunday_times_university_guide/article2496158.ece

2325:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/sunday_times_university_guide/article2496158.ece

1137: 1092: 3628: 3515: 2440: 2076: 921: 3686: 3647: 3614: 3584: 3559: 3537: 3493: 3468: 3442: 3438: 3413: 3391: 3387: 3369: 3354: 3329: 3325: 3300: 3263: 3237: 3206: 3175: 3141: 3119: 3098: 3058: 3035: 3006: 2943: 2899: 2869:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2857: 2765: 2740: 2710:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2698: 2610: 2580:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2568: 2410: 2380:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2368: 2030: 2010: 1980:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1968: 1748: 1740: 1720:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1708: 1620: 1612: 1592:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1580: 1482: 1474: 1454:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1442: 1334: 1313: 1286: 1205: 1185: 1141: 1119: 1100: 1071: 1067: 1051: 1024: 902: 847: 843: 818: 804: 771: 744: 716: 667: 641: 462: 2786:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2631:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2431:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2129:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100829134620/http://www.iawf.org.uk/directory.aspx?page=5&dcatid=1000

2051:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1869:

https://web.archive.org/web/20110906053003/http://www.tennisfame.com:80/hall-of-famers/walter-wingfield

1769:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1133: 721: 688: 3454:"if already in edit war, then stop it and step back" Again, yes, that is what this RfC is about. Once 3449: 3434: 3398: 3383: 3340: 3321: 2919:"Well-known currently active performers include..." grew from an already unreasonable 52 names to 81. 2282: 1898: 3682: 3678: 3576: 1935: 996: 978: 859: 513: 407: 356: 326: 304: 269: 202: 163: 98: 3430: 3379: 2534: 2522: 2305:

https://web.archive.org/web/20141103033305/http://www.britishlegion.org.uk/get-involved/poppy-appeal

1914: 720:

is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under

3555: 3533: 3464: 3409: 3350: 3171: 3129: 3115: 2220: 2165:

https://web.archive.org/web/20111219092813/http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/knowledge/culture/nottinghill/

2109:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090601215440/http://www.welshicons.org.uk/html/hen_wlad_fy_nhadau.php

2026: 1789:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090904212247/http://www.royal-ballet-school.org.uk:80/history.php?s=2

1525:

https://web.archive.org/20090814094825/http://www.edfringe.com:80/area.html?r_menu=global&id=48

1377:

https://web.archive.org/20090408180723/http://www.gunpowderplot.parliament.uk:80/adults_plot_ac.htm

1047: 768: 638: 576: 537: 438: 370:

Hi, limeys, I dropped over because I saw Graham on Giano's page. Excellent recent idea to mention

321:

two images? If it's a problem either add more to the section or move the Shakespeare image up. --

190: 179: 147: 129: 109: 93:

etc links to the see also section at the bottom, especially seeing as they're mostly red links. --

83: 1829:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090717060941/http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/sovereignty.cfm

3713: 3700: 3375: 3137: 3054: 2817: 2149:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080706180809/http://news.independent.co.uk/media/article2537369.ece

1330: 1303: 1266: 1157: 1115: 1110:, revert your last edit to show that you understand the process, and it will be discussed here. 946: 560: 521: 497: 477: 473: 454: 417: 390: 371: 337: 256: 90: 3521: 2854: