Talk:Ambrosden

Ambrosden has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 13, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

What Should Be Done To Improve Ambrosden?[edit]

I just stumbled across this article looking through the "A"s in the copyedit backlog, and as I worked as a computer programmer on the Army base near there for two years, lived in and around Ambrosden during that time, and as my wife spent the first 18 years of her life living in Ambrosden, I couldn't resist taking a peek.

The first thing I'd suggest is re-organising the article slightly to fit the current WP:UKCITIES guidelines for writing about UK settlements. Anyone object if I have a go at that? --Malleus Fatuarum 13:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Front and back of the village[edit]

I have edited out the text which referred to these: without a map that shows where the front part is it does not convey the meaning properly.----Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 19:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toponym[edit]

Thankyou to everyone who has helped to raise this article to GA status.

I am not sure that the debate of the toponym's etymology has been settled in favour of the popular ascription to Ambrosius Aurelianus. The antiquarian John Dunkin thought so in 1823. The historian Mary Lobel thought not in the Victoria County History in 1957. The classicist Martin Henig, who co-wrote Roman Oxfordshire with Paul Booth in 2000, agrees with Dunkin. However, I have not seen the sources on which Dr. Henig bases his view. Motacilla (talk) 00:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ambrosden. 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/20090619172253/http://www.northoxfordshirecamra.org.uk/pubs/turnerarms.htm to http://www.northoxfordshirecamra.org.uk/pubs/turnerarms.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: 18 January 2022).

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) 19:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]