This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Calstock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140729194902/http://www.magakernow.org.uk/pdf/placename_masterlist.pdf to http://www.magakernow.org.uk/pdf/placename_masterlist.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Calstock. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060525023700/http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=7630 to http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=7630
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051126042902/http://www.minebydesign.co.uk/calstock/calstock/parish_intro.htm to http://www.minebydesign.co.uk/calstock/calstock/parish_intro.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Roman fort
editCan anyone explain what the relevance of the diagram of a Roman castrum is to this article? I see it has been re-introduced for no discernable reason. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- I rather suspect it is because "A Roman fort, only the third known in Cornwall, was discovered next to the church in 2008". DuncanHill (talk) 16:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- I appreciate that but a generic diagram is not especially relevant to the article about the town. It appears, along with others, in the wikilinked article on Roman castra. A picture of the dig, for instance, would be more useful, or a diagram of what the actual fort looked like. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- Done: I replaced it by a map of the actual fort. Ontopofthehill (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Murgatroyd49 (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done: I replaced it by a map of the actual fort. Ontopofthehill (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
- I appreciate that but a generic diagram is not especially relevant to the article about the town. It appears, along with others, in the wikilinked article on Roman castra. A picture of the dig, for instance, would be more useful, or a diagram of what the actual fort looked like. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Local heraldry
editThere are some very nice graphics of heraldic shields in this section but in most cases, no clue as to the local relevance. Could someone with more knowledge on the subject add a note to each explaining the connection with Calstock, rather rhan just Cornwall generally? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:41, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Derivation of the name
editAn editor has supplied a derivation of the name from old Cornish and Old English words (Kelly and Stock). However the actual quote is:
The first part of Calstock is said to have been derived from the Cornish word for a wood – “Kelly” - the “stock” element being Anglo-Saxon for “place”. So “Calystock” or “Kellistock” might have meant “wooded place”.
It only claims it may be the derivation and there is no supporting evidence for this and the document is a self-published genealogical essay that doesn't cite any sources. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:12, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Civil War
editThe number of casualties in the battle for the bridge at Gunnislake is quoted as 240 but it is not clear whether this is the defending forces, the attacking forces or the total from both sides. Could someone clarify this please. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2021 (UTC)