Talk:Leintwardine

Amenities in the village

Hi All,

I have reverted some changes made to the amenities in the village. It is unfair that the Sun Inn should be specifically mentioned whilst AH Griffiths, Griffiths Garage, the Lion, and the Fiddlers Elbow are not.

There is not a clear explanation for the changes which resulted in the removal of these businesses, they are a part of the village, and of interest to anyone seeking to learn more about the village, the local amenities that Leintwardine enjoys are far in excess to that enjoyed by other villages in the locality and this fact should be recognised and lauded, not hidden away. T

The user in question appears to have removed these references because it is presented in list form, there is no problem with lists if the list is relevant to the topic at hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory. Businesses in the village are relevant to the modern day village of Leintwardine, the vitality of local businesses in Leintwardine are of interest in themselves, as well as those seeking to learn more about our settlement.

Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.190.54 (talk) 09:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

It is not about fairness but rather about what is trivia and what is not. The Sun appears to have a claim to notability; Griffiths Garage etc do not. You obviously have a conflict of interest here, by the way. - Sitush (talk) 10:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I have a stated interest in the village which I have been open about, you are making judgements on sparse information, all local businesses have a claim to notability by offering, to length of operation, to the jobs they provide. They are relevant to the topic at hand, this was the reason you used for the initial removal, you have now changed this reason to the information being trivia, and I would appreciate you explaining how local businesses in operation in the modern village can be considered trivia.

Alex

Please read WP:GNG and WP:TRIVIA - they should help you. - Sitush (talk) 10:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

This was not a disorganised list, it was a specific listing of operational businesses in the village. Your link clearly states that not all lists are trivia. I would appreciate a proper explanation of your logic, and not a linking to a page where I can try and cobble together an explanation of your rationale for myself. If you cannot explain your edit properly it should be reverted. I have already noted that notability exists, this is a matter to be flagged up for verification and evidencing, and not outright removal.

Alex — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.190.54 (talk) 10:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Where is the claimed notability? God, if we start listing non-notable businesses in a village then we're going to have to list every one and keep track of start-ups, as well as when they change hands/go bust etc. We don't usually do it, it's as simple as that. Can you not, for example, find mention of these other businesses in some local history book? - Sitush (talk) 10:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

What you probably could do is create an entry at WikiVoyage and then link to that entry from here using {{Wikivoyage}}. I'm not 100% sure but I think that they would accept this info. I'm happy to sort it out at this end if you do at that end. - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I will draw up a proper entry for some of the businesses that have been removed, unfortunately however for some, I doubt I will be able to find sufficient information. It was in my view at the time, more informative for the overall picture of the village to include a brief description of operational businesses.

I will have a look at the Wiki Voyage solution and let you know once I have put it up, thank you. As a compromise in the meantime I have documented the additional amenities within the generic listing above, and added in an introductory sentence prior to the retained Sun Inn entry. Is this acceptable?

Alex

No, it isn't really acceptable. I was actually thinking of removing that entire paragraph, except for the bit about churches (which are sort of inherently notable). I have access to some sources here that you probably do not - British Newspaper Archive, JSTOR etc - and I'll try to take a look through those. I don't do a tremendous amount of work here on English subjects, although I occasionally run something up about Mancunian history, but I'll see what turns up. - Sitush (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm concious that creating a fully referenced and verified entry for the businesses for which I am able to do so will create an inaccurate record of the current state of the modern village. As noted, many are key sources of employment, and this is sufficient for companies to warrant inclusion in sections on the economies of other settlements. In the context of the village, these are notable organisations, and the exclusion of some of them for which documented information is difficult to obtain will surely harm the larger purpose, of creating a record of the village as it existed, and exists? 90.200.190.54 (talk) 11:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is about notability and verifiability, not truth. (There is an essay about that somewhere on the site). Arguably, that is a big failing of the project but, believe me, we in the UK have it easy compared to, say, those trying to document stuff in India. Over there, most history etc is passed down by word of mouth and so there are no reliable documents/sources that they can use - huge chunks of Indian stuff goes unsaid because of our systemic bias that disallows oral history. Perhaps we should be grateful for small mercies? - Sitush (talk) 11:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I can certainly appreciate this, I accept that in the form it was, the listing was not permissible. Apologies for the trouble and thank you for taking the time with me on this. I will sit down in the near future and write up as much as I can reference properly on the notable modern village amenities. 90.200.190.54 (talk) 11:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I am in Manchester and my brother lives near to Abergavenney. Some time soon, I'm going to be pottering down to see him. If you'd like me to do a small detour then I don't mind driving through Leintwardine for a gab. Sometimes things seem more confrontational etc than is intended when communication is done as we are doing. - Sitush (talk) 12:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

It's easy to get a little fraught, which I was certainly well on the way to being! If you get a moment, it's worth a ganders, the Sun Inn is certainly meriting a stop for a pint in the parlour which remains almost completely unchanged, though there is now a bar on the premises within the modern extension as opposed to the landlady in a side room surrounded by barrels it has been done very well. The earthworks from the Roman Period are vaguely visible at certain points in the village, most portable items of interest have found their way to Ludlow museum, but the nearby Fort is preserved much better, pulling up just South of the village you can climb up for yourself and stand in the middle of the place, now pasture. As I kept yammering on about, it's also noteworthy the level of services the village enjoys, if you do get a chance on your travels to see relatively speaking, the smaller scale and variety of services neighbouring and outreaching settlements possess. 90.200.190.54 (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Leintwardine. 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/20060927091454/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/brandon_camp.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/brandon_camp.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121108162143/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/jay_lane.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/jay_lane.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121204055219/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/buckton.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/buckton.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071224123502/http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bravonium.htm to http://www.roman-britain.org/places/bravonium.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) 15:52, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leintwardine. 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/20140716044209/http://domesdaymap.co.uk/place/SO4074/leintwardine/ to http://domesdaymap.co.uk/place/SO4074/leintwardine/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.leintwardine.info/Leintwardine

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) 10:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)