Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria/Archive 2

2984:

list would trigger my memory; also "such as" could be thought to imply value judgement of relative importance). There is benefit to having this in print besides having it on a map. (2) PLEASE if it is not against policy to mention, in each of the disambiguations, all of the others. I know this can lead to infinite cycles in simplistic mechanized search software, but that is not a prohibiting consideration. I have some local questions and comments I will throw in here. (1) I gave the name of the local pub in Carleton as the Castle Arms. I have a nagging feeling it was Castle Gardens. Anyone know? (2) Anyone know the acreage of the Ministry of Pensions site at Norcross, the number of employees, when it left, how long it took to put up? (3) I think members of the Halle family (orchestra fame) lived in Poulton, (4) a topic of historical speculation was a tombstone in the Poulton churchyard with a skull and crossbones on it, (5) Morecombe marshes were used for practice flare dropping during the past two years of war, making nights as bright as day (and some of my schoolmates went out collecting magnesium from unburnt flares, (6) girders were put in the sand on the beaches to prevent landings, (7) Fleetwood was a main entry point for food fish -- the fleet based there in peace time + Icelandic fleet + one or two North Sea fleets, (8) the cinema in Poulton made a great contribution to morale for many of us. (9) there is mention of the Fylde (not very flattering and probably unfair) early in a novel by Sir Walter Scott, but I do not remember which. (10) info on local wild life (I remember moorhens on ponds). (11) Any info on local Home Guard? (12) preservation of "O'ert Weeeer" dialect?

3110:

is juxtaposed with obvious hitherto unrecognized inferences. But apart from that, I agree I must not stray. 2. Your wanting the comments about cinema in another Wikepedia site supports my point about wanting to avoid going from page to page when it can be avoided. Will do, if only as placeholder and prompt to others. 3. As regards settlements, one ideal would be to have all settlement names that anyone might ever want listed in all variant forms. Names of parishes and boroughs obviously are needed. It would be odd to omit settlements that have Wikepedia articles. But should Norcross, Great Carleton, Lesser Carleton be included? I would opt for Norcross, but not qualified forms of another name unless they are of substantial and distinct settlements (value judgement?) I will get a detailed map of the area, make a list, and see how long it is. Maybe Ordnance Survey has some categorization that could provide criterion. I meant strung out items rather than one item per line and forgot the latter is the connotation of list, here. Inevitably, Knowledge (XXG) pages will be downloaded and searched mechanically (if not already) and the evolution of standard contexts (I am NOT advocating WikiML) would help.

1605:- after the article space, the portal space is meant to be of more interest than any other (category space and book space are also fairly reader-facing). Effectively, the main page is a portal. As such, our question for inclusion in the portal has to be "is someone interested in Cumbria going to be interested in this article subject?" The answer, fairly clearly, is yes, as far as I am concerned- I can justify this if anyone doubts it. As for the second misunderstanding- it's not a question of "including every ship and submarine that was built at Barrow"- it's a question of including every good or featured article on Cumbria. When we have a large number, we could then cut it down to only featured articles. When, in the distant future, we have many, many featured articles on Cumbria, it could be cut down to only the most central and important articles. However, right now, when we have only a handful of articles, I think these selection criteria are appropriate. 2895:

don't think it necessarily helps a reader to have to scroll down a page to find the info on their particular town of interest. Endless amounts of sub-stubs consisting of one or two unreferenced sentences can be a problem and I can see an argument for consolidating those (although I think I would ultimately be against it, personally). I don't think that argument applies to these articles though. There are reliable sources out there on the history of the Fylde settlements, as well as modern sources on other aspects, it's just a matter of getting it into the articles, which of course takes time. I have been working on

692:) is currently attempting to promote the Cumbria portal to Featured status, so I've left a note at their talk page in case they have an opinion about this. By the way, if anyone's interested in helping out with the portal, the best way would probably be to write some good articles that it can showcase. I'm not sure about this issue; it seems to be similar to what people should be tagged for a project, which isn't particularly easy to decide either. If there was a Barrow-in-Furness project, I think there'd be a decent case for all the entries in 1661:

within the broad topic area or by quality. Ideally the latter although as you identify there can be a progression towards that. In an ideal world we'd be able to do that dynamically by interrogating the tagging the underlying data, and providing the consumer the tools to do that easily. Given the current state of the Knowledge (XXG) presentation model we can't do that so the model depends on arbitrary selection of entities with a lack of consistency around justification.

31: 3261: 2217:

answer is that it has probably checked your articles but they didn't score enough to feature in the search results. But as they were already tagged with the project banner, does it matter? I wouldn't advocate stopping using the bot as the vast majority or new articles are not produced by editors of this project so without the bot they are unlikely to come to our attention.

2263:

result. If you want to see the full list of articles it has found then click on the archives link. I think currently it archives after 14 days, again I think it can be amended if we want it to be. On the improved articles there's absolutely nothing stops us from having a section on the project page for these but I think it would have to be manually populated.

2853:

faster, particularly with the intermediate level of Over Wyre for many of these. Going from page to page and back, up and down a tree of entries, is time consuming and frustrating. My concern with regard to this set of entries is paralleled by several others, and I wonder if this is an issue that has cropped up before and, if so, where it stands.

2641: 3499:

don't think that collectively we can add much to articles on people from L&C and to tag them as being of interest to the project smacks of points scoring in terms of articles included; not because this project can make meaningful contributions to those articles - which I believe is the reason for this project.

1195:

As for the cherry-pick issue- of course it was cherry picked. I cherry picked any recognised article related to Cumbria for use in the portal. That's the point of portals; that's how they work. Would you criticise the main page for cherry picking only featured articles for the today's featured article section?

3225:

1. My point about going from page to page referred to discussion pages -- it is more convenient for me to keep my comments about Lancashire in one place. 2. I have to emphasize that I only have the margin to provide information -- not to edit the actual articles. Not laziness, just limits of time and

3109:

1. My list of questions/comments was for possible use by people who are constructing histories of the area, for them to investigate. 2. Knowledge (XXG) cannot avoid straying into original research when two or more contributors with verifiable knowledge known to each individually but not to the others

1750:

IMO HMS Cardiff doesn't meet that need. It's connection with Cumbria is minimal in the overall context of shipbuilding in Cumbria and doesn't need the attention of this project. If, for example and I stress for example (this is not an attempt at developing guidelines), it was the last ship built by

1351:

I did not choose contents of the portal based on them being tagged for this project. Instead, I ran an AWB scan of all GAs and FAs with the words "Cumbria" or "Lancashire" then filtered them manually to judge which were appropriate for portal inclusion. As such, I also have a list waiting to go up on

1238:

I do not personally intend to at this time; I am giving thought to the issue. It may not alarm you to find out that I do not consider "I still feel the link is tenuous" to be a groundbreaking argument. I am happy to discuss the issue, but it would be nice if it was a discussion rather than a repeated

1029:

Having now actually read this thread, I am still equally completely unimpressed with the conclusion. The ships mention Cumbrian towns in the first sentence, frequently, and a good article would discuss the construction- exactly paralell with people born in a place, or any other products produced in a

855:

We seem to have got off topic here, whether other projects tag ships with related names is their business and doesn't really have any bearing here. The remit for poject and portal are different and exclusion from one does not necessitate exclusion from the other. There is no clear consensus here yet.

2983:

states: "The rest of the Fylde is rural, containing villages such as ...". If it is feasible to give a COMPLETE list here, at least of villages that have articles, I think that would be VERY helpful (e.g. I might be trying to remember in which village a class mate at Baines' lived in, and seeing the

2894:

If there is enough information out there to create a decent sized article, then it's worth keeping them separate, even if there info isn't yet in the article. My bias here is that I have worked on several of those mentioned and created one of them, but that is my opinion regarding articles anyway. I

2220:

I'm not sure any project has an automated method of flagging substantially improved articles. Most it just seems to be a request posted on the project talk page for a re-assessment to be conducted. That's something we could do or make use of a more specific page dedicated to assessments (we have a

2216:

template scores another 20 then it deducts points based on other rules mostly to do with it being an article about people. It doesn't look too difficult to change the rules (famous last words) but if there is to be a chnage we need to discuss it here. I think that for your articles the most likely

2180:

that isn't the bot displaying the new articles with a strikethrough, that's me. The bot lists are straightforward and unstruck. I'm editing the bot results to strike through the entry once the articles have been tagged with the project banner and/or assessed. It might not the best process but was

2122:

I've completed a rewrite of the article and it's currently a Good Article candidate. In the long run, I'd like to take it to FAC as well, so I'd be grateful of any suggestions from people here. My prose often needs a bit of work, so any assistance would be great. I intend to add a plan of the castle

696:

to be tagged, but I am less sure about their relevance to Lancashire and Cumbria. The link for many will only be tenuous; it's not like someone who is born in the region and then grows up there as the ships will likely disappear elsewhere. I will also ask what we have to offer to these articles? The

3498:

The project scope only mentions people connected to the counties. Does this mean we want to tag as within scope everyone who is from Lancashire or Cumbria or only those who have had a significant effect on the history, politics etc of the counties? Personally I'm in favour of the latter only as I

2952:

The standard procedure, which seems to work, is to have a separate article for every settlement, large or small (or very small). This allows for each to have an infobox, a map showing the precise location, and maybe a photograph. I'm know this has been discussed at length, although I have no idea

1729:

A WikiProject is a collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific topic or family of topics within Knowledge (XXG); and, simultaneously, a group of editors who use those pages to collaborate on encyclopedic work. It is not a place to write encyclopedia articles directly, but a resource

1194:

As I tried to demonstrate, I do not feel that a the link of a Barrow built ship is tenuous at all- Barrow is very proud of its ships, and, as I hope I demonstrated, the ships are of massive econonmic, historical, political and social importance to the Furness area, and therefore Cumbria as a whole.

883:

Which is why I started by being neutral about portal. If it's an issue ifor the portal it needs to be discussed at the portal, not here. But in relation to this project in my opinion it's a case by case decision to be made about ships but there needs to be a connection stronger than 'laid down in

809:

If I may, I believe ships affiliated with towns often spend time "visiting" these places. This involves lots of ceremony i.e. awarding "freedom of the city" etc. In America this tradition is even more prevalent, such as in war time when the ship with become a rally point for a cities population. So

457:

Following the recent floods, Wordsworth House has gained particular media attention, which means there'll probably be a knock-on effect on the article. Unfortunately, it's in rather a poor state at the moment so it would be good if we could get it into shape for the public. (Also, I've added a link

2879:

to refer to the article on each village. I accept that a number of stub articles make this more difficult and the section referring to the village may be longer than the village article itself (I've seen this elsewhere) but the individual articles should be left as the seed from which someone may

89:

There are still over 550 articles under our scope that have not yet been given an importance rating. I will try and do some myself but I can not possibly deal with over 550 of them. So if anyone has a coulple of minuties to spare then please do a few. I and the rest of the WikiProject team will be

2868:

I think it is advantageousv to have separate articles with cross referencing, settlements have an inherent notability and therefore merit their own article. An article on the borough/district etc can contain short sections on each village in the area but if the village article is reasonably well

2819:

I am experimenting with ways to contribute to Knowledge (XXG). I took time out from technical concerns to edit several pages that relate to my experience of living in Lancashire 1941-1945. These were relevant to Ministry of Pensions (where my father worked), Cleveleys, Rossall School and Carleton

1857:

once the information has been provided on the main page. I think that will revelutionise the wiki pages for lancashire and encourage people to add details into wach page. Any comments would be very welcome any further additions to the lists please list them in your reply! For examples of the page

608:

which is in scope and I agree it should be, but for the individual members of either this list or the category, unless their connection with either county is stronger I think should be left out. One of the early decisions made by this project was that sports players either born or playing in the

2852:

Is the present separation of Carleton, Cleveleys, Thornton, many other villages and the Fylde advantageous? Moving the material for these villages into the Fylde page, comprising separate sections, with links to Blackpool and Fleetwood would make access to information about the overall area much

2158:

The bot does not seem to be doing its job properly. When it finds a new article it displays it overwritten with a strike-out. And it does not pick up everything; I've recently written four new articles on churches in Cumbria and Lancashire, and added the project banner to the talk page, but it

1664:

In this context the debate is whether Cardiff realistically fits within the grouping, Cumbria. If it does, is there an adequate volume of material in that grouping to justify filtering it in any way. Personally I think that the justification for inclusion is very weak. It's your portal, you're

1660:

Knowledge (XXG) has both consumers of content and producers of content, those can reasonably be the same people but the issue is around how they approach an entity. As you state the portal is aimed at the consumer mode, it's used to group entities around a topic area, and filter entities either

1148:

I presented my arguments a matter of minutes ago. The consensus here is currently not consistent with my position, no, and that's why I'm bothering to present my arguments. It would be nice if you could actually address my arguments if you feel that they are weak rather than continuing with this

2262:

any of these processes, I just fell into doing them because it gives me some satisfaction to know that this project has assessed 100% of all articles tagged as being relevant to it. One thing I don't have any control over is how long before the bot archives off the new articles from the search

1901:

for an example of developed sections including historic information). I like the suggestion of putting this information on talk pages so it can be struck off; it would give prominence to the guideline which perhaps isn't as well known as it could be considering a lot of thought was put into it.

557:

Hi team, I was contemplating a rewrite of the article on Brougham Castle (it's already been expanded enough for DYK and I'll nominate as soon as I think of a hook) but the images available are a bit poor. Flickr draws a blank for free-use images and geograph has only a couple which aren't great

1574:

Essentially adoption by any project implies that the supporters of that project have the potential to add something to the article, in this case I don't see anything that they can bring. Build and fitting out are fairly regularly carried out at different places, not frequent but not unusual.

1971:

Ahh ok that sounds a plan! i didnt realise there was a structure already out there! i think im going to start editing the villages around me and get them off the stub marker! I plan to go take some pics of a few of them and get churches and architectural buildings and parks to upload on here!

2243:

Thanks for the very detailed reply. I now understand why it has been set up in the way it is. My thoughts were just that it might be interesting for project participants to see what new articles had been recently created, and which articles had been substantially improved. But that rather

1263:. I'm still unsure about the tagging, but consensus seemed to have emerged when I said there are no particularly strong arguments for including the article. But consensus can change; there's no need for an RfC: let's us common sense rather than bureaucracy. There is a link between the HMS 1030:

certain place (for instance, CGP revision guides are printed in Millom- if we had an article, and we should, they would definitely fall under our scope here). Secondly, as was noted above, this project is about "the history, geography and politics of the counties"- the ships are

2661:

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as

2313:

I have submitted an article for Peer review a few weeks back and nothing has been done! who do i talk to about this or could anyone else give who ever is supposed to be doing the reviews a prod to get on with it please, as im very keen to get the article reviewed Many thanks

3006:, so that our readers can verify it. You don't necessarily have to cite things that are common knowledge, but much of the information you're talking about is not common knowledge and isn't easy to verify without proper sources. I noticed the changes you made to the 697:

point of tagging for a project is surely to allow members to keep track of important articles and watch out for vandalism. A project doesn't have to offer expert knowledge, but if we can help perhaps we should tag them? Or would they weight the project to heavily?

1619:

I'm sorry, I've assumed that you're familiar with information management concepts, so didn't think it was appropriate to detail that filtering and grouping is a presentational and consumer supporting function. Notwithstanding that I would hesitate to dismiss the

363:) 23:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC) Yes i sure think we should get some GA/FA topics! i dont know much about Blackburn but i will have a good look at Preston as i know it fairly well! will have a look at the discussion on Preston and see what needs adding and editing! 3764:

On the project main page I've inserted the code to try out a bot for recognised content. Until it does its first run that section will be blank. Please don't revert my edits until there is some content and we can discuss whether we like it or not. Thanks

234:

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the

1267:

and Cumbria, but "partially constructed" is slim. If there was a ceremony of something like that in Barrow-in-Furness celebrating their role in the construction, then I think that would be a good argument for tagging. Also, what harm does tagging do?

1034:

to these issues in the Furness area, which could even be argued to serve as the central locus of Cumbria/Lancashire combined. A quick read of our article on Barrow will illustrate well how instrumental the shipbuilding has been in the region- it was

1746:

is equally as important and requires the same attention from this group of editors. If an individual ship needs attention because its connection with the county is significant then it may fall within the project scope but that is a case by case

2427: 2644:. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at 275:

is a top importance for our WikiProject so I would like to see some action from you our members to try and get this article to GA. It is only in need of a few tweaks. I am looking forward to all of your contributions. Get editing the

3010:

article, and have been meaning to look at them more closely. It's great to have personal/general knowledge of a topic, it definitely helps with knowing what information to use or look for, but we have to be careful of straying into

481:

Thanks to the efforts of two editors we have dozens of new stub articles on hamlets and small settlements in Cumbria. Many are lacking infoboxes so if anyone(s) wants a task to improve these, there are plenty to go around.

3175:

I'm not sure I understand this conversation but there are ways to cross reference common topics. As Dr Greg says categories are the commonest and probably the easiest. I don't really see the purpose for an article such as

2078:

Maybe this will help: DASHBOT only examines already articles already tagged with your wikiproject template, it does NOT tag new articles. If your project is ever interested in tagging more articles with a bot, please see:

1575:

Similarly including it in a portal implies that the article has something significant to justify it or editors approaching the article through the portal can add something to it. I don't see that happening in either case.

3194:

to me it looks very ugly. And I really don't understand the point about the cinema in Poulton making readers got from page to page, the only place for a description of, and the effect of, that cinema is in the article on

1893:, the guideline for writing about settlements in the UK. It contains a little more info, but essentially you've got the right structure. Each section can be expanded with historic information, for example a section on 3728:

article and the Grade II section could woth pruning be made into a Blackpool article if there isn't already one. Perhaps it could be pruned to Grade II* Listed buildings but I'm sure that would be very large. Just a

2159:

hasn't picked them up. Can anyone fix it; or should we stop using a bot and update the section manually as we produce new material? There is also no way that I can find to flag up substantially improved articles.--

3015:(eg. basing what we write on out own memories). You've asked quite a lot of questions above, some of which might be more appropriate at the particular talkpage for relevant articles, or you may get more joy at the 2430:

I'm not sure how to update it as I prepared it manually with some help from AWB. Perhaps a complete rewrite every so often is the way to go. I've taken the liberty of adding the link to the project main page as

585:. It's only connection with Cumbria is that it was laid down at Vickers in Barrow, but fitting out took place on Tyneside. I have two issues with this article being listed as within the scope of this project. 1013:

Wow, what?! The ship's built there are Barrow's only real claim to fame, and Barrow is the second largest town in Cumbria. Anyone from the Furness area would recognise the importance of these ships to Cumbria.

3068:

and then add the info to the article. I'm interested to hear about a cinema in Poulton, as that could be added to the article. If you have any more info on that I'd love to hear it, although probably best at

1925:

I've seen several editors acheive the desired effect this way. Stick all the headings into the article as unseen comments then as you want to 'create' a section just remove the comment markers and away you

884:

Cumbria'. If we look at the project page it's more about the history, geography and politics of the counties. Part of that is the industrial output which includes ships but IMO as a topic as a whole i.e.

1484: 631:

I agree. In my view, there needs to be a stronger connection with these counties than just being built there. (On that basis, I can't really see any justification for inclusion in the portal, either.) --

2979:

I accept the present structuring and recast my original question as a hope that within this structure, two details can be added (and it is possible one or both are there already and I missed them) (1)

896:

I think the answer is nothing, so let's drop them an concentrate on the core stuff. Blackburn for example had a peer review last November, has that been acted upon? Has the article gone for GA yet?

2182: 76: 71: 59: 1259:, so let's leave spurious suggestions of bias and the like off the table. Maybe more ships built in Barrow-in-Furness need to be tagged; just because they all aren't isn't a reason not to tag HMS 228: 2204:. I'm not 100% with explaining the rules but I think the bot is better at spotting stubs, which is what new articles are more likely to be than more developed articles. It looks for the words 2523:

article has been substantially rewritten and expanded. Could someone look it over to see if there are any glaring omissions. I'd like to think it might make GA one day so suggestions welcome.--

1508:

We were discussing it- if you've lost interest, stop discussing it. This RfC was a bad idea, especially when the issue was already being discussed here, and encompasses a great number of pages

2916:, populated places are considered notable enough to merit an article of their own. Not everyone agrees with this, but that's often how deletion discussion go. You might be interested to read 2017: 152:

on the Wikimedia Toolserver. This is a list of articles tagged for this project which have been viewed the most since the start of November. Stats will be archived at the end of each month.

3476: 2491:

The recent changes page itself is automatic. It's the watch all list of the articles in the project that isn't. Manchester's is bot generated with manula additions. Yorkshire, who knows!

1897:

can include details of how the railway system came to a town. This is just one example, and isn't strictly necessary; it's the depth of information I'd expect from a very good article (see

1544:, and I don't see that having changed now. I'd be inclined not to include it, the link is pretty tenuous, ships have little to do with their build location after launching and fitting out. 2626: 1113:

Regardless of whether that is true (and I don't really see why it is) "bias" is a useless term. I have strong arguments, or I have weak arguments. Whether I am "biased" is not important.

2185:). If nine months in, there is a better or more prefered method let's change but I think that we need to remember that the bot is there to identify to the project new articles which 693: 605: 2597: 558:

quality, so I was wondering if anyone here had some decent photos? It's a long shot, but you don't get if you don't ask. It would be great if we could find some images which do this

2294:

that puts a tick and the word done against the entry. Coupled with an edit on the project page to indicate what the message means, I must say it looks neater to me. Thoughts?

173:

Just a nudge that I've been expanding this article. I'd like it to become a GA, but my editting time is compromised at the moment, so any help from others would be most welcome.

2925: 2061: 2820:(where it was located), Carleton where we lived, Baines (no Wiki entry, but mentioned on page about Poulton-le-Fylde) where I went to school. I could not provide references. 47: 17: 201: 2921: 1688:

what you're talking about. I can't follow what you're saying. I really don't want to cause offence, and I'm sure what you're saying has value, but I just don't understand.

3634:

claims that "Lancs" can be used as an abbreviation for the city of Lancaster. I've never heard of such usage (I've only heard it for the whole county), has anyone else? --

2953:

where, but I am sure this is the consensus. Maybe have a look at the Category "Villages in Suffolk", and click on a few of the links, to see how other counties do it.--

1163:

My apologies I did not see your latest post up there. From reading the above I believe a summary of the views expressed by those here, that are counter your views, are:

1578:

Stepping back a little from the specific I'd ask what your criteria for inclusion in the portal are, in general. Once that's clear then there is a standard to assess

530: 944:

As it's been 10 days since the last comment and no support has been made for inclusion, I suggest closure and removal of the article in question from project scope.

2091:

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for

2033: 1040: 2564: 2177: 1828:

Transport - Roads, Trains, Ports, Docks, Aviation, (even if they have closed down they can be documented that the settlement once had a train station for example)

1665:

setting your selection criteria but if you're dependent on such tenuous connections I'd question whether you have enough material available to justify the portal.

3199:

unless the building itself merits its own article e.g. because it's listed. Yes specific examples relating to the cinema could occur all over the place e.g. in

775:

Why? Where they were named after seems even more tangential than where they were built. At least the construction of the ship was important, the name less so.

223:

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by

2196:

If it's not picking up articles then it probably needs the rules amending. It works on points scoring, current requirement is 15 points as per these rules -

3044:

article, although it may be better to keep it as prose rather than a list. I'm not sure how many settlements we're talking about. We do also have lists like

1166:

The link is tenuous, many ships are made at Burrow's Vickers (Cardiff was only started there and was actually finished in Tyne & Wear re; ceremonies etc)

1957:

They're all in the right order and from the edit screen you can see at a galnce which areas have been covered and which remain to be done (if appropriate)

1643:

I'm sorry, I really don't know what you're talking about. Whatever lexical field you're using, it's not one with which I'm familiar (as I think you said).

1560:

In What way would WikiProject tags bring anything to an article normally? And what does that issue have to do with the separate portal issue, if anything?

3148:

I think if you listed every single settlement within the Fylde, it would be quite a long list and difficult to render in prose. Don't forget there exists

2334: 1657:

OK, we're both making assumptions here about what the other understands, it's clearly getting in the way so I'll go into my thinking in a bit more detail.

1384:

Point is I've lost interest in this, let others discuss it at RFC, then we'll take a look at the results in a month, no reason this has to be sorted now.

435:

and have warned the editor in question not to vandalise. Thanks for bringing this to our attention, and please do so again if you notice something amiss.

296: 268: 3152:

which ought to include (with its subcategories) all Fylde-related articles, assuming the articles have been adequately categorised in the first place. --

2917: 3422: 3331: 3126: 2836: 2461:

Yes, that sort of thing. The GM and Yorkshire are done "automatically" though. Don't ask me how, I can only just find the letters on the keyboard.--

2402: 2222: 2912:, but they are generally what decide whether or not we have an article on something. You'll see at that main page there is not mention of places. 2622: 2593: 732: 3725: 2785: 2080: 1804:- Name of village and brief intro ( include the settlement template which gives option of a photo and postcode, dialing number details, etc, 1585:

Essentially a portal is a means fof filtering and grouping information, here just needs to be some clarity about how coarse that filtering is.

1800:

I have recently edited some of the west lancs villages and i think that we should all be formatting them out to a similar flow for example:

3570: 3045: 2197: 919:

the portal. Let me know when consensus is formed. However I note that no one here has shown support for inclusion in either case thus far.

416: 3440: 2399: 403:

The Kendal Town F.C. page came up whilst i was wandering aroud Wiki and apparently an Austria Chap called Adolf Hitler plays for them.

2781: 2695:

article. I'm new to Knowledge (XXG) and the editor who's been helping has been out of contact for a while so I'd appreciate comments

3335: 2793: 1127:

Don't take offence, consensus currently disagrees with your argument, I recommend you start an RFC to draw in support if any exists.

149: 2776:

a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for

2789: 3460: 689: 1751:

Vickers in Barrow or a major accident occurred during its construction that affected Barrow I would be of a different opinion.

589:

It's connection is marginal at best (as an anology should we include any aircraft built or partially built at BAe Salmesbury?)

3718: 2099: 2044: 3789: 3774: 3753: 3738: 3712: 3684: 3666: 3651: 3617: 3601: 3586: 3554: 3535: 3508: 3488: 3445: 3396: 3382: 3368: 3353: 3323: 3272: 3250: 3238: 3216: 3169: 3130: 3084: 2993: 2962: 2939: 2889: 2862: 2840: 2809: 2762: 2727: 2704: 2681: 2611: 2576: 2553: 2532: 2500: 2470: 2444: 2413: 2389: 2366: 2346: 2323: 2303: 2272: 2253: 2234: 2168: 2147: 2132: 2106: 2086: 2073: 2054: 1981: 1966: 1919: 1883: 1790: 1763: 1697: 1679: 1652: 1638: 1614: 1596: 1569: 1555: 1525: 1503: 1483:

An RFC isn't a negative thing, you said you wanted to discuss, so discuss it. Also there is category for the discussion of "

1474: 1455: 1400: 1379: 1361: 1346: 1277: 1248: 1229: 1204: 1185: 1158: 1143: 1122: 1108: 1094: 1068: 1023: 1001: 975: 953: 935: 905: 885: 865: 826: 784: 754: 706: 666: 648: 625: 571: 545: 524: 491: 471: 444: 424: 372: 322: 308: 289: 253: 213: 190: 161: 135: 117: 102: 2718:

at GAN as I think it meets the Good Article criteria. and the project doesn't have many GAs particularly the settlements.--

2538: 3327: 2671: 2655: 2646: 3378: 3234: 3188: 3122: 3049: 2989: 2858: 2832: 2319: 1977: 1879: 1834:

Economy - So what keeps the place going? are they a shopping district, holiday resort, market town, farming village, etc

368: 2357:

Does this project have a "Watch All" page? If it does how can I access it? If it doesn't wouldn't it be a good idea? --

1840:

Noteable people - People that would be of interest to other people or celebrities who may have lived in the settlement.

1738:

is crucial to any study of Cumbrian history and politics and something we should collaborate on. However just because

1213:

I have taken on board what you've said; however I still feel the link is tenuous. Do you plan to deselect the article?

1627:

I'm afraid that I find your argument for inclusion fairly unconvincing. But it's your portal, and clearly your rules.

1601:

There appear to be two fairly fundamental misunderstandings about portals in that post. Firstly, the portal space is

604:

Personally I don't think that all these vessles should be within the scope of the project. There is a list article

3698: 3204: 724: 38: 3574: 2999: 2606: 2060:

I don't know what the thoughts are on taking this up but for it work well we would have to tag all articles into

2013: 1998: 1825:

Architecture - Listed Buildings and buildings of importance in the settlement (each one should be sub categoried)

1322:

Correction: Per your link, 93gregsonl2 only tagged Cardiff for WP:L&C after J Milburn added it to the portal.

227:

but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at

157: 113: 3226:

stamina. 3. I welcome such feedback as link to Homefront morale. 4. I could not find Poulton-le-Fylde on map in

3177: 3662: 3597: 2958: 2249: 2164: 1898: 1328:

Also Nev1, you're the one whom first mentioned J Milburn pushing for FP status, I was unaware of this at first.

3407: 2742: 420: 3200: 3435: 3374: 3310: 3230: 3118: 2985: 2854: 2828: 2315: 1973: 1875: 1436: 1052: 364: 3387:

This is a out of date topic now. Another user made extensive revisions to the article and removed the PROD

3114: 2928:. If you look at the relevant talkpages for those proposals, you'll see some of the continuing arguments.-- 2824: 1781:. I'm not sure who's watching the article, so thought I'd leave a note here as well. All opinions welcome. 412: 3707: 3701:

regarding the main image for the article, if anyone's interested in helping to decide which one to use. --

3612: 3079: 2934: 1778: 1169:

That you may have cherry picked this article to raise the status of a portal you are currently authoring.

966:

That sounds fair enough to me; there don't seem to be any particularly strong arguments for including it.

209: 3724:

I suggest Listed buildings in Lancashire‎ is far too broad in its scope for a single article. There is a

3339: 3070: 1717:

As the one who started all of this let me reiterate my main reason for making the original suggestion.

360: 285: 98: 609:

counties were not necessarily within the scope of the project and i think the same should apply here.

3484: 3007: 2663: 2601: 153: 109: 2696: 2022: 1890: 1516:

article. This discussion strikes me as redundant busy-bodying to start with, and the RfC doubly so.

355:

articles under our scope that has gone to GA/FA. Don't you think we should do something about this?

3780:

The bot has run (now that I set the parameters up correctly), comments on the content, layout etc?

3680: 3658: 3593: 3523: 3464: 2954: 2700: 2245: 2160: 1754:

My point about suspicion of cherry picking was made against the project not any individual editor.

1693: 1648: 1610: 1565: 1521: 1357: 1244: 1200: 1154: 1118: 1104: 1064: 1047:

when Labour will not build ships, and the Conservatives will. Equally, a ship launch is absolutely

1039:

economically and politically. You'll note that Barrow's politics is entirely defined by the ships-

1019: 683: 541: 3064:. If you're looking to improve relevant articles, the only thing to do really is to find out from 2633:(revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the 2563:

For anyone who is interested in helping clean up articles there is now a link on the project page

3519: 3430: 3268: 3254: 3181: 3149: 3060:! For your other questions on actual facts, if you're looking for your own interest, I'd try the 2201: 1668:

Anyway, I expressed an opinion in response to the RFC that was raised. So I'll leave it at that.

1499: 1451: 1396: 1342: 1225: 1181: 1139: 1090: 931: 822: 742: 582: 459: 244: 3180:, better would be for each place to have an article, even a one line stub and be categorised in 3052:. As for your second question no. 1), it's the Castle Gardens, which illustrates my point about 2212:

and scores 10 for finding them or 20 if in the lead para. Being tagged with a Lancs or Cumbria

559: 3373:

Unsure but i cant see anything wrong with the article in regards to references as it has many!

3040:

Regarding your first question 1), I see no reason why all settlements couldn't be mentioned in

1777:

As the current image at the top of the article is a bit dull, I've started a discussion on the

1366:

Ryan, you've missed the point. The point is that accusing someone of bias isn't going to help.

3702: 3643: 3607: 3566: 3472: 3456: 3348: 3306: 3161: 3074: 2929: 2908:

I notice that you're fairly new around here Michael. I don't know if you've read up about our

2678: 2658:. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th. 2381: 2092: 1859: 1771: 640: 205: 1725: 3468: 3196: 2896: 2773: 2692: 1059:

event. The idea that the ships are not important to Cumbria/Lancashire is almost laughable.

600:, we could be guilty of cherry picking in an article just because it happens to be rated FA. 451: 356: 281: 94: 3293: 2544:

New article to Featured list in less than a month. Congratulations to all those involved.

2259: 2006: 748: 597: 3785: 3770: 3749: 3734: 3582: 3550: 3531: 3522:) is currently not working, therefore any articles need to be manually tagged. Thanks to 3504: 3480: 3392: 3364: 3212: 2885: 2805: 2755: 2723: 2589: 2582: 2572: 2549: 2528: 2496: 2466: 2440: 2409: 2362: 2342: 2299: 2288: 2268: 2230: 2143: 2115: 2069: 1962: 1759: 997: 949: 901: 662: 621: 551: 517: 487: 318: 304: 183: 131: 3065: 3061: 3057: 3016: 3012: 3003: 2780:

and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of

3671:

I have; I've also see it used as an abbreviation for the university (see, for instance,

2797: 1582:

against. Do you anticipate including every ship and submarine that was built at Barrow?

3676: 3542: 3292:

While all contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, content or articles may be

3280:

A search for references found no published (gBooks) references for this article. Fails

2777: 2654:

and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at

2128: 1992: 1915: 1907: 1786: 1689: 1644: 1606: 1561: 1517: 1470: 1375: 1353: 1273: 1240: 1196: 1150: 1114: 1100: 1060: 1015: 971: 861: 780: 702: 679: 613: 567: 537: 467: 440: 108:

I've just done over 100. A lot of them are villages which can be rated Mid-importance.

3285: 3281: 3053: 2909: 2617:

Lancashire and Cumbria articles have been selected for the Knowledge (XXG) 0.8 release

2023:

There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles

2873: 1675: 1634: 1592: 1551: 1488: 1440: 1385: 1331: 1214: 1170: 1128: 1079: 920: 811: 737: 400:

Don't know if this is the right way to go about this but it's not really my problem.

241: 3260: 1853:

Maybe a list of each 'topic' could be posted into each village discussion area and

3636: 3426: 3343: 3154: 2880:

one day expand them. I am very much against reducing stubs to redirects as well.

2738: 2374: 633: 267:

article has been under peer review for some time now, and we now have a reply. See

2651: 2567:

that links to a bot generated page of articles tagged with various cleanup needs.

731:

are tagged for the project which their name is associated with (in that case, the

3526:

for identifiying about 2 dozen untagged articles that fall within project scope.

2428:

Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lancashire_and_Cumbria/WatchAll

2225:). Personally I'd just go for calls on this page as it's one less place to look. 343:

to GA. If you are serious about our WikiProject then please start improving both

2899:

and it is my hope to get neighbouring settlement articles to a similar standard.

90:

very gratful. Any problems just write it here and we will sort ot out together.

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3781: 3766: 3745: 3730: 3578: 3546: 3527: 3500: 3388: 3360: 3208: 2881: 2801: 2749: 2719: 2568: 2545: 2524: 2492: 2462: 2436: 2405: 2358: 2338: 2295: 2264: 2226: 2139: 2065: 2034:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria/Archive 2/Unreferenced BLPs

1958: 1755: 1075:

I recommend you start an RFC, as the author who plans to take the portal to FP

993: 945: 897: 658: 617: 616:

I don't have any issue with this as portals and projects have different aims.

511: 483: 314: 300: 177: 127: 3316:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

3227: 3041: 2980: 2715: 2634: 2520: 2330: 2124: 2103: 2083: 2051: 1911: 1903: 1782: 1466: 1371: 1269: 967: 889: 857: 776: 698: 563: 504: 497: 463: 436: 384: 344: 336: 277: 272: 264: 1730:

to help coordinate and organize the writing and editing of those articles.

236: 1867: 1863: 1671: 1630: 1588: 1547: 126:

All articles now assessed (and I'm going to have a drink to celebrate!).

2670:

to extend the reach of Knowledge (XXG) worldwide. Please help us, with

2621:

Version 0.8 is a collection of Knowledge (XXG) articles selected by the

1837:

Demography - If available how many people lived there in the last census

657:

Having no involvement in portals, I was staying out of the way on that.

3421:

for a peer review to help improve it further. For the Peer review, see

3418: 3411: 1995:, which occasionally gives your project maintenance-related listings. 389: 348: 340: 239:. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! 3475:

it's confusing as to what is a subcategory of what. The discussion is

3545:

has started generating the lists formerly compiled by AlexNewArtBot.

2625:

for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were

3518:

The bot used to list new articles that may be within project scope (

2404:

It's a way of keeping track of changes to articles in the project.--

1866:

as you will get the idea of the layout plan, also the talk pages on

295:

Someone has kindly conducted a peer review, the comments are here -

3631: 202:

Talk:November 2009 Great Britain and Ireland floods#Requested move

167: 2064:. Easily done with something like AWB but do we want to do it? 2920:, which is a proposed guideline, and these two failed propsals: 2667: 2028:

The unreferenced living people articles related to your project

1822:

Religion - Churches, priorys, local monuments (include parishes)

229:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria/Popular pages

3207:

but any occurance like that should link to the prime location.

2178:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria#New articles

1051:

news in Barrow- as in, on the level of special editions of the

2650:

with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's

2642:

Lancashire and Cumbria articles and revisionIDs we have chosen

2018:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject_Cricket_articles/Unreferenced_BLPs

1831:

Geography - Includes the location map for surrounding villages

1721:

What I have to say only applies to the Project not the Portal.

351:. When this WikiProject was created in September we have had 25: 2223:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria/Assessment

1742:

is important doesn't mean that it automatically follows that

3259: 2848:

Are several short entries better than a consolidated entry ?

2741:

regarding a shuffle of some material and titles relating to

1255:

The suggestion that J Milburn is cherry picking articles is

1684:

I'm sorry. Read into this what you will, but I really have

224: 3672: 2869:

developed then the section should be fairly short and use

2598:

Knowledge (XXG):Featured portal candidates/Portal:Cheshire

3494:

Project scope - (living) persons from Lancs & Cumbria

2025:, so it is important that these articles are referenced. 810:

consensus is removal of the Wikiproject and portal, yes?

2926:

Knowledge (XXG):Notability_(populated_places)_(failed)_2

2627:

selected based on their assessed importance and quality

3334:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

3002:, which makes it very important to cite information to 1849:

Leisure - Any sport or social clubs, sport centres, etc

1816:

Local Facilities - Shopping areas, library, museum, etc

1329: 1326: 1323: 1256: 1076: 694:

List of ships and submarines built in Barrow-in-Furness

606:

List of ships and submarines built in Barrow-in-Furness

432: 18:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria

3299:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

2922:

Knowledge (XXG):Notability_(populated_places)_(failed)

1352:

the Lancashire portal, whenever I get around to that.

462:

article, so traffic should be permanently increased).

2337:, it doesn't look like it's too far off GA at least. 93:

PS: I apologise for my spelling, I am just dreadful.

3048:(which is sortable by district) and categories like 2062:

Category:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria articles

596:

included in the project. It just seems to me that,

3073:, to keep the threads here more project-focused. -- 2258:No problem, I would like to point out that I don't 1078:, your opinion could be viewed as slightly biased. 531:

Knowledge (XXG):Portal peer review/Cumbria/archive1

3744:I just looked and there is a Blackpool article.-- 3606:Ah, thanks very much! (only just read this...) -- 2782:Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions 1819:Education - Schools in the settlement or locally 3184:. As an aside I have to say I am not a fan of 1370:was why I asked you to leave them to one side. 1041:Barrow and Furness (UK Parliament constituency) 2998:Hi again Michael. One of our core policies is 2335:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review/Bank Hall/archive1 2333:? If so there are some reveiw comments here:- 1889:That is pretty much the layout recommended in 1536:A point raised in the previous discussion was 297:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review/Blackburn/archive1 2918:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (populated places) 2098:If you have any questions or concerns, visit 2043:want this wikiproject to participate, please 1843:Media - Local Newspapers, Radio stations, etc 1808:This should then be followed by these topics: 280:article now guys. We will get to GA. Thanks. 8: 3423:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review/Cliburn/archive1 2677:For the Knowledge (XXG) 1.0 editorial team, 2200:, the explanation of what the rules mean is 1538:does inclusion bring anything to the article 3693:Main image for Blackpool North Pier article 2123:as soon as I get round to scanning one in. 2012:Here is an example of a project which uses 2005:, of unreferenced living people articles ( 1439:. I wont be commenting, others can decide. 1487:", so it's not really over the top is it. 1055:. I went to one myself a few years ago- a 313:Has anyone acted on this peer review yet? 2193:need assessing as well as them being new. 2284:I had a look round and found a template 894:what do we have to offer these articles? 592:We don't have all ships in the category 503:If anyone fancies a clean-up challenge, 263:Just incase you haven't noticed but the 3305:notice, but please explain why in your 2790:this project's listing in one big table 2640:We would like to ask you to review the 1987:Unreferenced living people articles bot 3726:Grade I listed buildings in Lancashire 3455:I'm attempting to rename the category 2081:Category talk:WikiProject tagging bots 1932: 886:Shipbuilding in Lancashire and Cumbria 735:), but not for where they are built. — 581:We have a project FA rated article on 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2691:I've just made a major update to the 1948: 7: 3571:Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde 3046:List of civil parishes in Lancashire 2244:conflicts with what you are doing.-- 2198:User:AlexNewArtBot/LancashireCumbria 612:HMS Cardiff is also featured on the 3541:Update 17:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC). 3294:deleted for any of several reasons 3275:because of the following concern: 2181:something agreed on early on (see 2045:add your project name to this list 1938: 1540:. At the time the conclusion was 892:was spot on earlier when he asked 24: 3417:Hello everyone, I have nominated 2176:If you mean the results shown at 888:, not individual ships. I think 507:is certainly the place to be. :) 3429:useful, thankyou and good luck. 2656:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Version 0.8 2647:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Version 0.8 2596:. To join the discussion, visit 1946: 577:Ships (partly) built in Cumbria 29: 3719:Listed buildings in Lancashire‎ 3461:Category:Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1942: 1940: 1934: 1485:WikiProjects and collaborations 2705:11:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC) 2682:23:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 2612:22:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 2433:Section 10 Monitoring articles 2372:What is a "Watch All" page? -- 2138:Congrats on getting it to GA. 2100:User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects 2093:User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions 1936: 1846:Culture - Local Annual Events, 1149:slightly odd meta-discussion. 406:Thought I'd let someone know. 1: 3697:I've started a discussion at 3239:15:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC) 3205:List of cinemas in Lancashire 3000:Knowledge (XXG):Verifiability 2841:16:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 2772:I have created together with 2539:Listed buildings in Rivington 1954: 1952: 1944: 1930: 1910:) 00:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1461:An RfC over a project tag... 827:20:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC) 785:21:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 755:20:41, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 707:20:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 667:17:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 649:16:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 626:16:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC) 572:21:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC) 472:14:55, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 445:19:05, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 425:19:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 323:09:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 309:08:58, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 214:18:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC) 191:00:12, 12 November 2009 (UTC) 3509:14:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC) 3489:19:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC) 3397:14:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3383:10:26, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3369:15:22, 4 December 2010 (UTC) 3359:Resolved by another editor. 3354:14:01, 4 December 2010 (UTC) 3217:21:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3170:20:04, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3131:13:48, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3085:00:49, 7 December 2010 (UTC) 3050:Category:Towns in Lancashire 2994:22:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC) 2963:16:55, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 2940:16:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 2890:15:36, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 2863:00:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC) 2810:20:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 2559:Articles tagged for clean up 2221:currently empty page called 2009:) related to your project. 546:18:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC) 373:01:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 290:23:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 271:. As you should know by now 254:00:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 162:18:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC) 136:20:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC) 118:02:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC) 103:20:41, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 3446:16:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC) 3338:allows discussion to reach 3319:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 3302:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 2768:WikiProject cleanup listing 2763:21:06, 7 October 2010 (UTC) 2728:09:49, 3 October 2010 (UTC) 2672:your WikiProject's feedback 2668:Knowledge (XXG) for Schools 2577:16:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 2554:10:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC) 1950: 525:23:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC) 492:08:57, 5 January 2010 (UTC) 3806: 3699:Talk:North Pier, Blackpool 3536:10:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC) 3178:List of place in The Fylde 2652:articles with cleanup tags 2347:09:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 2324:08:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 2273:17:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 2254:17:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 2235:17:19, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 2169:16:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC) 2148:08:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC) 2133:22:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC) 2107:22:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC) 2087:05:18, 19 March 2010 (UTC) 2074:17:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 2055:08:07, 17 March 2010 (UTC) 1982:10:05, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1967:08:59, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1920:00:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1884:23:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 1791:19:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 1764:15:59, 14 March 2010 (UTC) 1698:23:21, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1680:22:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1653:21:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1639:21:17, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1615:19:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1597:10:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1570:09:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1556:09:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1526:01:28, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1504:23:08, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1475:23:01, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1465:? This seems unnecessary. 1456:22:53, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1401:23:11, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1380:22:50, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1362:22:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1347:22:19, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1278:17:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1249:17:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1230:17:21, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1205:17:16, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1186:16:58, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1159:16:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1144:16:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1123:16:40, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1109:16:37, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1095:16:35, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1069:16:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1024:16:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 1002:09:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC) 976:19:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 954:19:06, 11 March 2010 (UTC) 733:North Carolina WikiProject 3790:07:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC) 3775:18:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC) 3754:12:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC) 3739:12:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC) 3602:19:36, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3587:17:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC) 3324:proposed deletion process 2798:the index of WikiProjects 2501:19:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC) 2471:18:24, 21 June 2010 (UTC) 2445:17:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC) 2414:10:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC) 2390:20:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 2367:14:29, 14 June 2010 (UTC) 2304:09:29, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 2014:User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects 2001:provides a list, updated 1999:User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects 1744:any ship built in Cumbria 936:13:06, 1 March 2010 (UTC) 911:Ok well for the record I 906:08:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC) 866:02:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC) 339:to GA we should then get 3713:16:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 3685:20:15, 22 May 2011 (UTC) 3667:19:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC) 3652:19:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC) 3630:The disambiguation page 3618:16:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC) 3555:17:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC) 3459:as it is ambiguous with 3425:, you may also find the 2623:Knowledge (XXG) 1.0 team 2533:09:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC) 1899:Sale, Greater Manchester 1239:restatement of views... 225:http://stats.grok.se/en/ 3311:the article's talk page 3201:Homefront morale in WW2 2592:has been nominated for 1099:I really don't follow. 3673:the university website 3264: 2594:Featured Portal status 2426:You mean like this? - 1734:I entirely agree that 536:Comments appreciated. 3336:articles for deletion 3273:proposed for deletion 3263: 3071:Talk:Poulton-le-Fylde 2910:notability guidelines 2737:Views are invited at 335:I think after we get 259:Blackburn peer review 42:of past discussions. 3626:Lancs for Lancaster? 3561:New featured content 2786:the tool's wiki page 2664:One Laptop per Child 2398:These are examples. 1435:I've started an RFC 1032:absolutely essential 915:the Wikiproject and 723:American ships like 598:acting in good faith 3524:User:Peter E. James 3465:Carlisle (district) 3451:Carlisle categories 3189:Geographic Location 2815:Tentative additions 1624:aspect so casually. 3760:Recognised content 3463:. But as there is 3375:Bankhallbretherton 3328:deletion processes 3269:Kirkby Branch Line 3265: 3255:Kirkby Branch Line 3231:Michael P. Barnett 3182:Category:The Fylde 3150:Category:The Fylde 3119:Michael P. Barnett 2986:Michael P. Barnett 2855:Michael P. Barnett 2829:Michael P. Barnett 2316:Bankhallbretherton 1991:Your project uses 1974:Bankhallbretherton 1876:Bankhallbretherton 1496: 1448: 1393: 1339: 1222: 1178: 1136: 1087: 928: 819: 594:Barrow-built ships 583:HMS Cardiff (D108) 460:William Wordsworth 365:Bankhallbretherton 150:popular pages list 3647: 3567:User:Belovedfreak 3473:Carlisle, Cumbria 3457:Category:Carlisle 3352: 3251:Proposed deletion 3165: 3134: 3117:comment added by 3013:original research 2844: 2827:comment added by 2761: 2714:I have nominated 2610: 2385: 1860:Banks, Lancashire 1796:Settlement Format 1772:Carlisle, Cumbria 1489: 1441: 1386: 1332: 1215: 1171: 1129: 1080: 921: 812: 644: 523: 477:Cumbria geo stubs 415:comment added by 380:(for the moment) 189: 82: 81: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3797: 3710: 3705: 3650: 3648: 3645: 3641: 3615: 3610: 3469:City of Carlisle 3443: 3438: 3433: 3346: 3321: 3320: 3304: 3303: 3197:Poulton-le-Fylde 3193: 3187: 3168: 3166: 3163: 3159: 3133: 3111: 3082: 3077: 3066:reliable sources 3004:reliable sources 2937: 2932: 2897:Poulton-le-Fylde 2878: 2872: 2843: 2821: 2760: 2758: 2746: 2710:Rivington at GAN 2693:Milburn, Cumbria 2604: 2388: 2386: 2383: 2379: 2293: 2287: 2189:be in scope and 1495: 1492: 1447: 1444: 1392: 1389: 1338: 1335: 1221: 1218: 1177: 1174: 1135: 1132: 1086: 1083: 927: 924: 818: 815: 753: 751: 745: 740: 647: 645: 642: 638: 522: 520: 508: 452:Wordsworth House 427: 396:Kendal Town F.C. 252: 188: 186: 174: 85:Importance scale 68: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3805: 3804: 3800: 3799: 3798: 3796: 3795: 3794: 3762: 3722: 3708: 3703: 3695: 3644: 3637: 3635: 3628: 3613: 3608: 3563: 3516: 3496: 3453: 3441: 3436: 3431: 3415: 3332:speedy deletion 3318: 3317: 3301: 3300: 3258: 3191: 3185: 3162: 3155: 3153: 3112: 3080: 3075: 2935: 2930: 2876: 2870: 2850: 2822: 2817: 2770: 2756: 2748: 2735: 2712: 2689: 2629:, then article 2619: 2602:Espresso Addict 2590:Cheshire portal 2586: 2583:Portal:Cheshire 2561: 2542: 2517: 2382: 2375: 2373: 2355: 2311: 2291: 2285: 2156: 2120: 2116:Brougham Castle 2032:be found here: 1989: 1855:striked through 1798: 1775: 1493: 1490: 1445: 1442: 1390: 1387: 1336: 1333: 1219: 1216: 1175: 1172: 1133: 1130: 1084: 1081: 1043:. It is Labour 925: 922: 816: 813: 750:majestic titan) 749: 743: 738: 736: 641: 634: 632: 579: 560:stunning castle 555: 552:Brougham Castle 534: 518: 510: 501: 479: 455: 410: 398: 333: 261: 240: 237:toolserver tool 221: 198: 184: 176: 171: 154:Small-town hero 146: 110:Small-town hero 87: 64: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3803: 3801: 3793: 3792: 3761: 3758: 3757: 3756: 3721: 3716: 3694: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3659:Peter I. Vardy 3627: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3621: 3620: 3594:Peter I. Vardy 3592:And from me.-- 3562: 3559: 3558: 3557: 3515: 3512: 3495: 3492: 3452: 3449: 3414: 3410:nomination of 3405: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3400: 3399: 3342:for deletion. 3322:will stop the 3290: 3289: 3257: 3248: 3246: 3244: 3243: 3242: 3241: 3220: 3219: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3062:reference desk 3029: 3028: 3027: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3022: 3021: 3020: 3017:reference desk 2970: 2969: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2965: 2955:Peter I. Vardy 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2849: 2846: 2816: 2813: 2769: 2766: 2743:WP:UKDISTRICTS 2734: 2731: 2711: 2708: 2688: 2685: 2618: 2615: 2585: 2580: 2560: 2557: 2541: 2536: 2516: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2504: 2503: 2480: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2393: 2392: 2354: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2310: 2307: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2246:Peter I. Vardy 2238: 2237: 2218: 2194: 2161:Peter I. Vardy 2155: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2119: 2113: 2112: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2096: 2089: 1993:User:WolterBot 1988: 1985: 1953: 1951: 1949: 1947: 1945: 1943: 1941: 1939: 1937: 1935: 1933: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1922: 1851: 1850: 1847: 1844: 1841: 1838: 1835: 1832: 1829: 1826: 1823: 1820: 1817: 1814: 1797: 1794: 1774: 1770:Lead image on 1768: 1767: 1766: 1752: 1748: 1732: 1724:To quote from 1722: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1669: 1666: 1662: 1658: 1628: 1625: 1586: 1583: 1576: 1545: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1478: 1477: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1252: 1251: 1233: 1232: 1208: 1207: 1189: 1188: 1167: 1072: 1071: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 983: 982: 981: 980: 979: 978: 959: 958: 957: 956: 939: 938: 881: 880: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 870: 869: 868: 840: 839: 838: 837: 836: 835: 834: 833: 832: 831: 830: 829: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 791: 790: 789: 788: 787: 764: 763: 762: 761: 760: 759: 758: 757: 727:North Carolina 714: 713: 712: 711: 710: 709: 672: 671: 670: 669: 652: 651: 614:Portal:Cumbria 602: 601: 590: 578: 575: 554: 549: 533: 528: 500: 495: 478: 475: 454: 449: 448: 447: 431:Oh dear, I've 417:81.108.220.205 397: 394: 393: 392: 387: 332: 329: 328: 327: 326: 325: 260: 257: 220: 219:Pageview stats 217: 197: 194: 170: 165: 148:We now have a 145: 142: 141: 140: 139: 138: 121: 120: 86: 83: 80: 79: 74: 69: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3802: 3791: 3787: 3783: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3772: 3768: 3759: 3755: 3751: 3747: 3743: 3742: 3741: 3740: 3736: 3732: 3727: 3720: 3717: 3715: 3714: 3711: 3706: 3700: 3692: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3664: 3660: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3653: 3649: 3642: 3640: 3633: 3625: 3619: 3616: 3611: 3605: 3604: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3576: 3572: 3568: 3560: 3556: 3552: 3548: 3544: 3540: 3539: 3538: 3537: 3533: 3529: 3525: 3521: 3520:AlexNewArtBot 3513: 3511: 3510: 3506: 3502: 3493: 3491: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3458: 3450: 3448: 3447: 3444: 3439: 3434: 3432:Crouch, Swale 3428: 3424: 3420: 3413: 3409: 3406: 3398: 3394: 3390: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3372: 3371: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3355: 3350: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3329: 3325: 3314: 3312: 3308: 3297: 3295: 3288: 3287: 3283: 3278: 3277: 3276: 3274: 3270: 3262: 3256: 3252: 3249: 3247: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3229: 3224: 3223: 3222: 3221: 3218: 3214: 3210: 3206: 3202: 3198: 3190: 3183: 3179: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3167: 3160: 3158: 3151: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3086: 3083: 3078: 3072: 3067: 3063: 3059: 3055: 3051: 3047: 3043: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3018: 3014: 3009: 3005: 3001: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2982: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2972: 2971: 2964: 2960: 2956: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2941: 2938: 2933: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2906: 2905: 2904: 2898: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2875: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2847: 2845: 2842: 2838: 2834: 2830: 2826: 2814: 2812: 2811: 2807: 2803: 2799: 2795: 2794:by categories 2791: 2787: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2767: 2765: 2764: 2759: 2753: 2752: 2744: 2740: 2732: 2730: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2717: 2709: 2707: 2706: 2702: 2698: 2694: 2686: 2684: 2683: 2680: 2675: 2673: 2669: 2665: 2659: 2657: 2653: 2649: 2648: 2643: 2638: 2636: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2616: 2614: 2613: 2608: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2591: 2584: 2581: 2579: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2558: 2556: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2540: 2537: 2535: 2534: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2514: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2483: 2482: 2481: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2446: 2442: 2438: 2434: 2429: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2400: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2391: 2387: 2380: 2378: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2364: 2360: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2321: 2317: 2308: 2306: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2290: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2261: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2251: 2247: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2219: 2215: 2211: 2207: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2179: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2153: 2149: 2145: 2141: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2130: 2126: 2117: 2114: 2108: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2094: 2090: 2088: 2085: 2082: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2071: 2067: 2063: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2053: 2048: 2046: 2042: 2037: 2035: 2031: 2026: 2024: 2020: 2019: 2015: 2010: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1994: 1986: 1984: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1969: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1955: 1928: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1909: 1905: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1874:plan! cheers 1873: 1869: 1865: 1861: 1856: 1848: 1845: 1842: 1839: 1836: 1833: 1830: 1827: 1824: 1821: 1818: 1815: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1805: 1803: 1795: 1793: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1780: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1749: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1670: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1629: 1626: 1623: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1603:reader facing 1600: 1599: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1587: 1584: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1546: 1543: 1539: 1535: 1534: 1527: 1523: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1501: 1497: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1476: 1472: 1468: 1464: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1438: 1434: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1359: 1355: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1330: 1327: 1324: 1321: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1300: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1266: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1253: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1206: 1202: 1198: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1168: 1165: 1164: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1042: 1038: 1033: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1003: 999: 995: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 977: 973: 969: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 955: 951: 947: 943: 942: 941: 940: 937: 933: 929: 918: 914: 910: 909: 908: 907: 903: 899: 895: 891: 887: 867: 863: 859: 854: 853: 852: 851: 850: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 842: 841: 828: 824: 820: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 799: 798: 797: 786: 782: 778: 774: 773: 772: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 765: 756: 752: 746: 741: 734: 730: 728: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 715: 708: 704: 700: 695: 691: 688: 685: 681: 678: 677: 676: 675: 674: 673: 668: 664: 660: 656: 655: 654: 653: 650: 646: 639: 637: 630: 629: 628: 627: 623: 619: 615: 610: 607: 599: 595: 591: 588: 587: 586: 584: 576: 574: 573: 569: 565: 561: 553: 550: 548: 547: 543: 539: 532: 529: 527: 526: 521: 515: 514: 506: 499: 496: 494: 493: 489: 485: 476: 474: 473: 469: 465: 461: 453: 450: 446: 442: 438: 434: 433:sorted it out 430: 429: 428: 426: 422: 418: 414: 407: 404: 401: 395: 391: 388: 386: 383: 382: 381: 379: 375: 374: 370: 366: 362: 358: 354: 350: 346: 342: 338: 330: 324: 320: 316: 312: 311: 310: 306: 302: 298: 294: 293: 292: 291: 287: 283: 279: 274: 270: 266: 258: 256: 255: 251: 250: 248: 243: 238: 232: 230: 226: 218: 216: 215: 211: 207: 203: 195: 193: 192: 187: 181: 180: 169: 166: 164: 163: 159: 155: 151: 144:Popular pages 143: 137: 133: 129: 125: 124: 123: 122: 119: 115: 111: 107: 106: 105: 104: 100: 96: 91: 84: 78: 75: 73: 70: 67: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3763: 3723: 3696: 3638: 3629: 3569:for getting 3565:Congrats to 3564: 3517: 3514:New Articles 3497: 3454: 3416: 3330:exist. The 3326:, but other 3315: 3307:edit summary 3298: 3291: 3279: 3267:The article 3266: 3245: 3156: 3147: 2913: 2851: 2818: 2771: 2750: 2739:Talk:Preston 2736: 2713: 2690: 2679:SelectionBot 2676: 2660: 2645: 2639: 2630: 2620: 2587: 2562: 2543: 2518: 2432: 2376: 2356: 2312: 2283: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2190: 2186: 2157: 2154:New articles 2121: 2049: 2040: 2038: 2029: 2027: 2021: 2011: 2002: 1997: 1990: 1970: 1956: 1929: 1924: 1894: 1871: 1854: 1852: 1807: 1806: 1802:Introduction 1801: 1799: 1776: 1743: 1740:shipbuilding 1739: 1736:shipbuilding 1735: 1728: 1716: 1685: 1622:contribution 1621: 1602: 1579: 1541: 1537: 1513: 1509: 1462: 1433:RFC started: 1432: 1431: 1367: 1264: 1260: 1056: 1048: 1044: 1036: 1031: 1012: 916: 912: 893: 882: 726: 686: 635: 611: 603: 593: 580: 556: 535: 512: 502: 480: 456: 408: 405: 402: 399: 378:Top Prioties 377: 376: 352: 334: 262: 246: 245: 233: 222: 206:Simply south 199: 178: 172: 147: 92: 88: 65: 43: 37: 3442:My contribs 3408:Peer review 3113:—Preceding 2823:—Preceding 2774:Smallman12q 2637:algorithm. 2309:Peer Review 2050:Thank you. 1858:layout see 1325:Timestamp: 917:weak oppose 411:—Preceding 357:93gregsonl2 282:93gregsonl2 95:93gregsonl2 36:This is an 3729:thought.-- 3481:Tassedethe 3437:talk to me 2914:In general 2206:Lancashire 1891:WP:UKTOWNS 1872:strike out 1045:apart from 1037:everything 992:Tis done. 200:Move? See 3677:J Milburn 3543:TedderBot 3427:talk page 3340:consensus 3271:has been 3228:The Fylde 3042:the Fylde 2981:The Fylde 2778:WolterBot 2716:Rivington 2697:Crossview 2635:WikiTrust 2521:Rivington 2515:Rivington 2353:Watch All 2331:Bank Hall 1895:transport 1779:talk page 1690:J Milburn 1645:J Milburn 1607:J Milburn 1562:J Milburn 1518:J Milburn 1512:than the 1354:J Milburn 1257:incorrect 1241:J Milburn 1197:J Milburn 1151:J Milburn 1115:J Milburn 1101:J Milburn 1061:J Milburn 1053:local rag 1016:J Milburn 680:J Milburn 562:justice. 538:J Milburn 505:Rivington 498:Rivington 458:from the 385:Blackburn 345:Blackburn 337:Blackburn 278:Blackburn 273:Blackburn 265:Blackburn 77:Archive 4 72:Archive 3 66:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 3639:Dr Greg 3577:status. 3157:Dr Greg 3127:contribs 3115:unsigned 3008:Carleton 2837:contribs 2825:unsigned 2631:versions 2377:Dr Greg 2214:geo-stub 2039:If you ' 1870:for the 1868:Tarleton 1864:Tarleton 690:contribs 636:Dr Greg 413:unsigned 3704:Beloved 3609:Beloved 3419:Cliburn 3412:Cliburn 3344:Jeepday 3076:Beloved 2931:Beloved 2784:). See 2733:Preston 2687:Milburn 2329:Was it 2210:Cumbria 1813:History 1726:WP:PROJ 1686:no idea 1514:Cardiff 1265:Cardiff 1261:Cardiff 1057:massive 1049:massive 729:(BB-55) 390:Preston 349:Preston 341:Preston 331:Preston 39:archive 3657:No. -- 3309:or on 2289:done-t 2041:do not 1747:basis. 1463:really 913:oppose 196:Floods 3782:NtheP 3767:NtheP 3746:J3Mrs 3731:J3Mrs 3709:Freak 3632:Lancs 3614:Freak 3579:NtheP 3547:NtheP 3528:NtheP 3501:NtheP 3389:NtheP 3361:NtheP 3209:NtheP 3081:Freak 3058:WP:OR 2936:Freak 2882:NtheP 2802:Svick 2757:Talk 2751:Jza84 2720:J3Mrs 2569:NtheP 2546:NtheP 2525:J3Mrs 2493:NtheP 2463:J3Mrs 2437:NtheP 2406:J3Mrs 2359:J3Mrs 2339:NtheP 2296:NtheP 2265:NtheP 2227:NtheP 2140:NtheP 2118:again 2104:Okip 2084:Okip 2066:NtheP 2052:Okip 2003:daily 1959:NtheP 1756:NtheP 1510:other 994:NtheP 946:NtheP 898:NtheP 744:(talk 659:NtheP 618:NtheP 519:Talk 513:Jza84 484:NtheP 315:NtheP 301:NtheP 185:Talk 179:Jza84 168:Bacup 128:NtheP 16:< 3786:talk 3771:talk 3750:talk 3735:talk 3681:talk 3663:talk 3646:talk 3598:talk 3583:talk 3551:talk 3532:talk 3505:talk 3485:talk 3477:here 3471:and 3393:talk 3379:talk 3365:talk 3349:talk 3286:WP:V 3284:and 3282:WP:N 3235:talk 3213:talk 3164:talk 3123:talk 3054:WP:V 2990:talk 2959:talk 2924:and 2886:talk 2874:main 2859:talk 2833:talk 2806:talk 2796:and 2724:talk 2701:talk 2666:and 2607:talk 2588:The 2573:talk 2565:here 2550:talk 2529:talk 2519:The 2497:talk 2467:talk 2441:talk 2410:talk 2384:talk 2363:talk 2343:talk 2320:talk 2300:talk 2269:talk 2250:talk 2231:talk 2202:here 2183:here 2165:talk 2144:talk 2129:talk 2125:Nev1 2070:talk 2030:will 2007:BLPs 1978:talk 1963:talk 1916:talk 1912:Nev1 1908:talk 1904:Nev1 1880:talk 1862:and 1787:talk 1783:Nev1 1760:talk 1694:talk 1676:talk 1649:talk 1635:talk 1611:talk 1593:talk 1566:talk 1552:talk 1522:talk 1500:talk 1494:4314 1491:Ryan 1471:talk 1467:Nev1 1452:talk 1446:4314 1443:Ryan 1437:here 1397:talk 1391:4314 1388:Ryan 1376:talk 1372:Nev1 1368:That 1358:talk 1343:talk 1337:4314 1334:Ryan 1274:talk 1270:Nev1 1245:talk 1226:talk 1220:4314 1217:Ryan 1201:talk 1182:talk 1176:4314 1173:Ryan 1155:talk 1140:talk 1134:4314 1131:Ryan 1119:talk 1105:talk 1091:talk 1085:4314 1082:Ryan 1065:talk 1020:talk 998:talk 972:talk 968:Nev1 950:talk 932:talk 926:4314 923:Ryan 902:talk 890:Nev1 862:talk 858:Nev1 823:talk 817:4314 814:Ryan 781:talk 777:Nev1 725:USS 703:talk 699:Nev1 684:talk 663:talk 643:talk 622:talk 568:talk 564:Nev1 542:talk 488:talk 468:talk 464:Nev1 441:talk 437:Nev1 421:talk 409:Ry 369:talk 361:talk 347:and 319:talk 305:talk 286:talk 269:here 210:talk 158:talk 132:talk 114:talk 99:talk 3675:). 3573:to 3253:of 2792:or 2674:! 2260:own 2208:or 2191:may 2187:may 2036:. 2016:: 1926:go. 1672:ALR 1631:ALR 1589:ALR 1580:fit 1548:ALR 249:man 242:Mr. 3788:) 3773:) 3752:) 3737:) 3683:) 3665:) 3600:) 3585:) 3575:FL 3553:) 3534:) 3507:) 3487:) 3479:. 3467:, 3395:) 3381:) 3367:) 3313:. 3296:. 3237:) 3215:) 3203:, 3192:}} 3186:{{ 3129:) 3125:• 2992:) 2961:) 2888:) 2877:}} 2871:{{ 2861:) 2839:) 2835:• 2808:) 2800:. 2788:, 2754:| 2747:-- 2745:. 2726:) 2703:) 2600:. 2575:) 2552:) 2531:) 2499:) 2469:) 2443:) 2435:. 2412:) 2401:, 2365:) 2345:) 2322:) 2302:) 2292:}} 2286:{{ 2271:) 2252:) 2233:) 2167:) 2146:) 2131:) 2102:. 2072:) 2047:. 1980:) 1965:) 1918:) 1882:) 1789:) 1762:) 1696:) 1678:) 1651:) 1637:) 1613:) 1595:) 1568:) 1554:) 1542:no 1524:) 1502:) 1473:) 1454:) 1399:) 1378:) 1360:) 1345:) 1276:) 1247:) 1228:) 1203:) 1184:) 1157:) 1142:) 1121:) 1107:) 1093:) 1067:) 1022:) 1000:) 974:) 952:) 934:) 904:) 864:) 825:) 783:) 747:• 739:Ed 705:) 665:) 624:) 570:) 544:) 516:| 509:-- 490:) 470:) 443:) 423:) 371:) 353:no 321:) 307:) 299:. 288:) 247:Z- 231:. 212:) 204:. 182:| 175:-- 160:) 134:) 116:) 101:) 3784:( 3769:( 3748:( 3733:( 3679:( 3661:( 3596:( 3581:( 3549:( 3530:( 3503:( 3483:( 3391:( 3377:( 3363:( 3351:) 3347:( 3233:( 3211:( 3121:( 3056:/ 3019:. 2988:( 2957:( 2884:( 2857:( 2831:( 2804:( 2722:( 2699:( 2609:) 2605:( 2571:( 2548:( 2527:( 2495:( 2465:( 2439:( 2408:( 2361:( 2341:( 2318:( 2298:( 2267:( 2248:( 2229:( 2163:( 2142:( 2127:( 2095:. 2068:( 1976:( 1961:( 1914:( 1906:( 1878:( 1785:( 1758:( 1692:( 1674:( 1647:( 1633:( 1609:( 1591:( 1564:( 1550:( 1520:( 1498:( 1469:( 1450:( 1395:( 1374:( 1356:( 1341:( 1272:( 1243:( 1224:( 1199:( 1180:( 1153:( 1138:( 1117:( 1103:( 1089:( 1063:( 1018:( 996:( 970:( 948:( 930:( 900:( 860:( 821:( 779:( 701:( 687:· 682:( 661:( 620:( 566:( 540:( 486:( 466:( 439:( 419:( 367:( 359:( 317:( 303:( 284:( 208:( 156:( 130:( 112:( 97:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria/Archive 2 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index