Talk:Holy Trinity Church, Hastings

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Holy Trinity Church, Hastings. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hastingschronicle.com/1856/11/27/holy-trinity-church/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.hastingschronicle.com/1857/07/22/holy-trinity-church-starts/
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6Dus2kPHo?url=http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/listed-buildings/ to http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/listed-buildings/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/StatisticsPage/default.aspx?StatsCounty=EAST+SUSSEX

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) 08:36, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Holy Trinity Church, Hastings. 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/20110728080046/http://www.sussexparishchurches.org/content/view/213/34/ to http://www.sussexparishchurches.org/content/view/213/34/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100504101818/http://www.sussexparishchurches.org/content/view/322/40 to http://www.sussexparishchurches.org/content/view/322/40/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/caring/listing/listed-buildings/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/StatisticsPage/default.aspx?StatsCounty=EAST%20SUSSEX

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) 03:32, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Considering an encompassing page - 'The America Ground'

I'm considering putting together an article covering the area that this church lies in the centre of; that of what was known as 'The America Ground'. I have a page on my local history Wiki here: http://wiki.historymap.info/Category:America_Ground that could form the basis of such an article.

Any feedback as to whether such a page would be useful to other wikipedians gratefully received. --Roypenfold (talk) 11:02, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

@Roypenfold: Yes, I think this would make a suitable Wikipedia article provided it is suitably focused within the wider context of Hastings' history and is based on reliable sources by the Wikipedia definition.

In relation to the article on the local history site as it stands: this is my assessment of the sources you've used:

• Definitely reliable by Wikipedia standards: Hastings of Bygone Days and the Present; Historic Hastings; Tamarisk Town; articles from Hastings & St Leonards Observer
• Reliable if used carefully: maps, such as the one lodged at The Keep that is referred to on that page.
• Possibly reliable by Wikipedia standards: Nathan Dylan Goodwin (personal websites are not normally reliable, but I know he has written at least one local history book which has been published by a reputable publisher, so material on his website may qualify based on this policy (Self-published material ... [is] largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.) I can't assess the website because it's blocked at work, but if he quotes his sources it is more likely to be acceptable. If the statements in question are repeated in one of his books, use that as the source instead.
• Unlikely to be reliable by Wikipedia standards: 1066Online. While the local history section is very informative and detailed and I can't see any errors, the editorial process and the sources used are not clear. Questions to consider include: is it user-generated content, or have the pieces been written by a local historian, researcher etc.? Is there editorial oversight to approve text, correct errors etc.? What sources were used? If you wanted to use any material from 1066Online's local history section in a Wikipedia article, I would strongly recommend asking the experts at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard.
• Not reliable by Wikipedia standards: h2g2. Discussed at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard (see this link); considered unreliable as user-generated content.

In conclusion, there are enough reliable sources to write about the America Ground (I have found references to it in at least two other Hastings-related books that I either have or have made notes from in the past, in addition to the reliable sources mentioned above). My suggestions: don't lift-and-shift directly from the local history site; write based on the reliable published sources; pitch at a level where the article is accessible both to people already interested in Hastings and people who have never even heard of Hastings; and refer to these useful guidelines created by the UK Geography WikiProject on how to write in a Wikipedia-suitable way about various types of place. (I have found these invaluable.) Happy to assist further. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 14:01, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

@Hassocks5489: Many thanks for the feedback - I've been using my personal wiki as a place to 'collate' my various bits and pieces of research, together with as acting as a 'scratch pad' - I find it helps me draw together many different sources which frequently take me down too many rabbit holes.At some point, I fully intend get round to re-writing my own wiki pages (other than where it is directly quoting) and thought that considering there have been a number of questions in a local history group I maintain relating to the America Ground, it would be good to put something together drawing upon as many sources as possible...

As you say, there are quite a number of authorities out there - many of them disagreeing with each other :-). I'll have a good read of the article you linked and mull over in conjunction with my own scribblings. Once I have come up with something vaguely presentable, which is not at too low a level for Wikipedia, I'll pop back over to Wikipedia and put the article online there leaving the more detailed bits (and probably irrelevant to someone just browsing for information) in my own wiki for now.--Roypenfold (talk) 15:53, 5 December 2019 (UTC)