Talk:St John the Evangelist's Church, Corby Glen

Assesment
I am happy to make this a B on project criteria.
 * There may be more research needed on the number of of bells. http://www.corbyglen.com/stjohns.html and http://ldgcb.org.uk/towers/lincsak/ lists a ring of 5, and http://www.keltektrust.org.uk/corbyglen.html suggests the 6th has not arrived yet.

--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 06:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Perhaps the [|Corby Glen website] is a little confusing - "The imposing west tower, a local landmark, house a ring of five bells. Four of these are original and were cast between 1580 and 1628.  A fifth bell, from Bassingham church and dating from 1694, was added in 1988.  The bells were re-hung in a modern steel bell frame in 1975 when the old Grammar School bell of 1691 was also installed as a weekday service bell".  The "also installed" would seem to imply that the Grammar School bell was a sixth, added in 1975 - four original, one from Bassingham, and one Grammar School - I shall check with the vicar or churchwarden, and then update. Acabashi (talk) 20:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * careful - someone might accuse you of Original Research! (grin)--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought the old school bell is a 'clanger' - not tuned in to the change-ringing peal. An extra-numery used for the call to prayer.  I'd be very surprised if a school bell could be wheel-hung to 'go over'.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 21:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * c.f Ring of bells.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 02:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * From a couple of phone calls made, you are correct in thinking that the 1975 (1691) bell is not part of the peal. I have changed the text to fit - an excusable bit of good faith OR I think. I have changed Bassingham (a mistake on the Corby web site which I'm hoping they will fix) to Bassingthorpe. The "Bassingham" bell has been sold, which left the original four, but two new 'old' bells from St Albans have now been installed, making six - but the St Albans' info can't be added as there isn't a ref for it. Acabashi (talk) 14:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good effort. Is the Keltek trust page I linked above not a good ref. then? Or their other page? http://www.keltektrust.org.uk/stalbans.html If you write to the corby website about the spelling, you could ask them to post the full story, which you could then use as backup later.--Robert EA Harvey (talk) 20:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Appologies - absolutely right about Keltek - idiotically missed it can you believe. Be pleased if you would you like to adjust the text and add the refs - I'm off on holiday for a week early this morning so would appreciate this. I mentioned the discrepancies and updates needed on the Corby Glen web site to the church warden - and also the bell captain I spoke to at the Willoughby Memorial Library with a hope that he would inform the Corby Glen web master of changes needed. Best. Acabashi (talk) 00:20, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 07:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Name of the church
I notice that in most of the refs, the most "official" ones such as the Diocese of Lincoln and English Heritage, the name is given as Church of St John. The present name of the article (with the possessive) seems to me to reflect oral rather than formal usage. What do you think? Awien (talk) 01:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * http://www.achurchnearyou.com/corby-glen-st-john-the-evangelist/ uses the full name. http://www.lincoln.anglican.org/search_parishes.php?14022030 follows their own unique parish-church convention, but otherwise uses the full name. Omitting it would probably have woken the disambig kraken, which has gone unfed at several fenland churches. Whether or not a possessive is applied seems like advanced nit-pickery to me.  I might not have used it, but can see no reason to change it. --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 05:03, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * When naming the article I went with Wikipedia's established common naming convention for church articles. I can't find discussions on how the format came about, but I suppose the thinking was that the more formal Church of St Kevin, Bogthorpe could give the impression that the place name is formally part of the church name, or that the saint was St Kevin of Bogthorpe. Acabashi (talk) 13:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Sorry, I phrased that very badly. What I was trying to hint tactfully was that you might want to consider moving the article to the more formal and typical formulation Church of St John the Evangelist before your moment in the limelight. Apologies again for putting it so badly! Awien (talk) 13:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * And maybe I'm wrong about its being typical. Haven't really looked into it. Best, Awien (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2013 (UTC)