Talk:Vale of York Hoard

Format references

We just can't have URLs...we need actual cites, such as author, title, location, date, and date accessed. {{cite web}} is good for this. hbdragon88 01:10, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Task complete. —Viriditas | Talk 10:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Reward for finders?

One thing I'm curious about, and which I'm sure would add interest to the article, is what, if anything, the Whelans got out of it. Without my having to research the Treasure Act 1996 or pursue any of the cited (or uncited) news articles, I'd like to know if they get any kind of reward at all, besides fifteen minutes of fame. --Eliyahu S ^Talk 11:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I think I'm right that the value is divided between the landowner and the discoverer (unless the discoverer was on the land without permission, in which case they get nothing). Ming the Merciless 11:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Relative size of hoard

Intro says "The hoard was the largest discovered in western Europe since 1840, when the Cuerdale hoard was found in Lancashire,[2] though the Anglo-Saxon Staffordshire Hoard, found in 2009, is larger." Surely it should be the largest hoard of Viking material as many other larger hoards (ie heavier hoards and hoards with more numerous items) from other periods have been found. Also, comparison with Staffs Hoard is misleading and irrelevant as it is Anglo-Saxon, not Viking. --Rhodian (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes the US link just went to the main page of the paper, & this seems out of line with other refs, so I've gone to "biggest Viking in Britain" per the BM. Johnbod (talk) 14:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Number of coins

Why on earth does it say (twice) that the hoard consists of more than 617 coins? Quite apart from the fact that 'more than' jars whenever it's used in conjunction with any number not ending in 0, how many 'more than' 617 is it? 618? 753? 16,221? Surely it's easier just to give the actual number. Draggleduck (talk) 01:41, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Since ref 4 says "617 coins and 65 other items", I've got rid of both "more than"s and added ref 4 to the second occurrence. Does that look OK? --GuillaumeTell 09:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vale of York Hoard. 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/20090917185602/http://www.finds.org.uk/wordpress/?p=339 to http://www.finds.org.uk/wordpress/?p=339

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) 06:50, 17 January 2018 (UTC)