Talk:Shelvock Manor

Untitled
I'm not sure if this would qualify as a copyright violation but if you look here, you'll see that Google's cached version of is the exact same text. This may explain the difficulty in simply deciphering what's the point of this (and definitely explains the lack of structure in this). The material seemed to have been copyrighted in 2002 (on the bottom of the page), but is from excerpts from records in the late 1800s. I'm not sure what to think about this? Any ideas? -Ricky81682 06:15, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)


 * The original text was submitted by, who claims to be the same Mark Grace as the author of the original website. (See Talk:Reverend Robert James Bateman.) I don't think there's any copyright problem here. --David Wahler (talk)  13:21, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup
I've done a little bit, such as dividing the history into major sections, on what appears to be quite a big job, considering the size of the article. I have a feeling that a good percentage of the information, while theoretically valuable as history, is actually only indirectly related to the history of the manor itself, and therefore could be removed without injury. Fortunately, there are other places (such as the internet site mentioned above) where the full article could be found, and therefore it seems reasonable to cut this article down, to also thereby make it more like an encyclopedia article. Have at it, ladies and gents, and I will, too! --Cromwellt | Talk 22:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


 * As mentioned above, I've chopped several large chunks that seemed unnecessary out of the article, and reworked and reworded much of what is left. I think the article looks a whole lot better now, and is much more focused on its topic.  It could still use more work, but it might be good enough now to remove the cleanup tag.  I will leave that judgment in the hands of my fellow wikipedians.  --Cromwellt | Talk 00:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)


 * By recommendation of a fellow Wikipedian, I will go ahead and remove the cleanup tag, even though there is still more (such as more chopping) that could be done to this page to make it better. --Cromwellt | Talk 21:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)