User talk:Nev1/Archives/July–August 2013

Gruffudd ap Rhys
I've left a message for you here. Thanks. PS I'll be in the Chester Meetup (see above thread). Llywelyn2000 (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
It's a great photo! I have put a cropped version into the article List of musicians at English cathedrals. And I wrote to the photographer on German Wiki and let him know.

I might take a look at the Exeter Cathedral page soon. I have recently done Wells Cathedral and just finished St Paul's Cathedral which was a real challenge. Also did Chester Cathedral fairly recently. Cheers! Amandajm (talk) 03:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It was a really good photo, so I replaced the one you did on a couple of Wikipedias in other languages. Nice find, and I'll have to check out the revamped page on Chester Cathedral. Nev1 (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/R.V.C. Bodley
Hi there! I've done a restoration of this image, and would appreciate if you'd have a look. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Newport Castle
Regarding your notification, my pleasure!-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 19:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It's always good to see someone putting in good work on castle article, and with Hchc2009 helping out I'm sure the article's in good hands. Nev1 (talk) 19:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks, there have been several great editors who have helped "polish" the article.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 20:33, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Grade I listed buildings in Greater Manchester
Hi, Nev. I've been watching the progress of this list (I guess the template is sill under development, as they've just switched columns, making some of the entries inappropriate, but that's not why I'm contacting you). I note that the references are still to Images of England. I expect you know that IoE is obsolete, and has been superseded by the National Heritage List for England. IoE is stuck in time (2000 or earlier) and is not updated, revised or corrected, while NHLE is under constant, daily review, and should be up to date. The LEN column links to NHLE, which may, or may not, contain the same text as IoE, leading to potential confusion. I would be prepared to convert the IoE references to those of the NHLE, but do not want to interfere unless you are happy with this. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * What I'm doing at the moment is just changing format between lists, replacing wikitables with templates for Wiki Loves Monuments in September. The templates are a work in progress and I'm still getting to grips with them. I spent a few days puzzling over why the |ref= field didn't work only to learn it has to be |reference= !
 * As you say IoE is now obsolete. Updating the references needs to be done, and the NHLE site will be ideal for that, I've seen you using it in your articles for a long time now. At the moment I'm concentrating on the format and leaving references till later. There are lots of lists in England and Wales which need to be got into shape so I'm focusing my efforts on that. If you're prepared to update the references for the GM list that would be one less thing I have to do. Nev1 (talk) 15:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I took the liberty of updating the Trafford section, let me know if I've formatted it in line with what you guys need and if so, I'll do some more. I found a minor error that I've identified with a citation needed tag. Parrot of Doom 16:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Those references are spot on. I don't have the book on Dunham Massey to hand (and consulting the article on the place it's under sourced, bother), so I've gone with 1732–1740 for now as that's when most of the building was remodeled. PoD, can I persuade you to take to the streets with a camera in September? Or even before, as long as you upload them in September. Nev1 (talk) 16:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I can take some pics no problem, this is perfect weather for it. I'll do a bit more on the citation front. Parrot of Doom 16:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry about the columns. I updated the row template without updating the header template. All fixed now. -- Katie Chan (WMUK) (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:41, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Tower of London
Nasa-verve (talk) 22:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

White Tower (Tower of London)
I had to laugh at "The archaeology of the standing building suggests there was a pause in construction between 1080 and 1090–1093, although it is unknown why." ... do the writers never actually look at the historical context? From 1080-1087 William the Conqueror was hard pressed on the continent, and from 1087-1093ish Wiliam Rufus was fighting back his brothers... Nice work though, it'd be great to see the White Tower article at Featured status also! Ealdgyth - Talk 17:53, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Isn't that original research? ;-) Eric   Corbett  17:57, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * To paraphrase an American TV commerical "I studied that in university" ... yeah, it's OR, but it's quite obvious OR, which is why I'm laughing at the writers who obviously didn't read the most elementary works on the historical period before writing up their official history of the white tower. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:48, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I think where we both fall down Ealdgyth, you more than me, is that knowing stuff pretty much automatically disqualifies you from contributing here in the eyes of many editors. Knowing stuff is the dreaded "expertise". But just look at a typical ODNB or EB article, written by a single so-called expert, and see how many errors you can find in it. It ain't none. Eric   Corbett  18:54, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Just in case, I'll go back to the source and check I've not got the wrong end of the stick, but I think I would have represented the source accurately. It's one of those situations where the reason is so obvious, but not necessarily easy to source without tripping over OR. However, there is a more recent work about just the White Tower, from about 2009, and it may have been updated since. The White Tower article is an unusual one as it is the most famous part of the Tower, so there's an awful lot of overlap but hopefully enough for it to be distinct. I'll have to track down the newer book at some point. Nev1 (talk) 16:54, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

MacLellan's Castle
I visited this the other day and took a tonne of photographs, inside and out. If you're interested in a castle article to edit but are lost for inspiration, well, I thought it was worth mentioning. Parrot of Doom 22:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Now that looks like a lovely place. I've not done much worth north of the border, and that building would be an excellent place to start. Nev1 (talk) 09:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * It's a very nice little town, they had an arts and craft fair on while we were there, t'was a good day. I've uploaded a few pics here. Parrot of Doom 12:16, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade I Listed Buildings in Derbyshire
Good work on the revamp of Grade I listed buildings in Derbyshire. I should probably have put something on the talk page before, but I had already started working on an expanded version of the same article at User:Dave.Dunford/DerbyshireGradeI. I'll try to (gradually) amalgamate the two articles, but feel free to join in. Photos are the obvious starting point. Dave.Dunford (talk) 11:56, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I hope you don't mind, I've been going through and updating the lists which were plain text as part of the preparation for the UK's participation in Wiki Loves Monuments. There'll be more to follow for Grade II* buildings. I hadn't realised the Derbyshire list was being developed. What I've been doing is when the lists are in place as with the Derbyshire one it could do with someone going through and adding photos and links to the buildings where applicable. It's a lot to ask since you started in a sandbox already, but could I be cheeky and ask you to do the Derbyshire? It would mean one less list I have to worry about, but if not I completely understand and I will make an effort to amalgamated the two. Nev1 (talk) 12:02, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem. I'll do what I can (though it was quite a big job). Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade II* listed buildings in Lincolnshire
Hello,, and thank you for your contributions!

Some text in an article that you worked on Grade II* listed buildings in Lincolnshire, appears to be directly copied from another Wikipedia article, Grade I listed buildings in Lincolnshire. Please take a minute to double-check that you've properly attributed the source text in your edit summary.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on Grade II* listed buildings in Lincolnshire at any time. MadmanBot (talk) 15:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade I listed buildings in Lincolnshire
In this new style listing can you add back the wikilink to each building's article, if it existed, please ? This was this very useful in the previous listing style to find which buildings have an article, and which need them (via red links) - also to check the quality of those already written. It would also be useful to have nav links to click back to the main Lincolnshire listed buildings page and click forward to the other districts, this from each of the district list pages - the other district pages won't always be obvious for someone chancing on just one district page first.

For me, I find it more troublesome scrolling down the new deep table than I did in the old listing with its close one-line format, and where I could at least click a district section in the contents box without having to move back to a main page. I find the deepness of this table was made worse after I added some requested pics. My view is that this new deep scroll format and district page splits make for less convenient access. The longer page load would make it less convenient for those with slower connections too. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 17:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Just a note that I've consolidated and summarised some of the suggestions regarding the template at Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom/Organizers' help desk. Dave.Dunford (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Acabashi, sorry I missed your message. I've started adding back the links that were in the original list, and have done so for Lincoln, Boston, Grade I listed buildings in East Lindsey, and North East Lincolnshire. More to come! Nev1 (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Lists of listed buildings
Please be more careful in creating these lists. Your "Grade I listed buildings in City of Canterbury" list, for example, apparently consisted of grade II*, not grade I, buildings, so I've moved it to Grade II* listed buildings in City of Canterbury. Also, entries in many, if not all, of the lists contain the impossible coordinates 138°16′08″N, 14°49′51″E, which results in an error message that someone else has to deal with. Deor (talk) 20:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * You are absolutely right, Deor. Its a case of more haste and less speed on my part. I'll go through the lists and check I haven't made similar mistakes. As for the coordinates, I will deal with those, but the English Heritage website was being so slow that I thought I would leave it for another day. I'll make that a top priority. Nev1 (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade I listed buildings in South Yorkshire
Thanks for the message. So long as no information is lost, I'm all for standardising the format. Have you also seen the series of articles on listed buildings in Sheffield (listed buildings in Sheffield City Centre, etc)? These may need a bit more work to fit a standard format. Warofdreams talk 15:02, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Listed building dates
On pages in the series which includes Grade II* listed buildings in West Midlands, you have used dts (a shortcut for Start date) for date_listed. As explained in that date template's documentation, it should not be used for dates such as date-of-listing, but (subject to the caveats in that documentation) for completed. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 9 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm fine with using templates, but a novice at building them. Do you have any suggestions for an alternative which wouldn't mean tens of thousands of transclusion? Or User:KTC do you have any ideas? If we don't change it, what are the implications, as from a reader's point of view it seems to work to me. Nev1 (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how your response relates to my concern that you are using templates where you should not. By doing so, you are asserting, for instance, that Aston Hall was built in April 1952. Given the vast number of similar edits which you have made recently, you should have made test edits and asked for feedback, Did you do so?  Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see Dts is not a shortcut for Start date and is used to get the date to sort correctly in a table which is perfectly valid. Keith D (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You're right: I do apologise. Please disregard this section. The issue with links, mentioned below, still pertains. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Removal of links
I'm concerned that in and many like it, you have removed a number of existing links (no doubt in many cases loosing disambiguation in the process}; for example to Aston Hall, Church of St Laurence, Northfield and Church of St Edburgha, Yardley  It is not acceptable to do so.  Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This is now being discussed at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Sundials
There are a large number of references to sundials in your uploaded data. Many of these actually seem to be churches. How can I tell the difference between buildings that are genuinely listed because of their sundials and those that aren't? Deb (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The weird thing about listed buildings is that they don't always need to be buildings as such. So sundials can be listed in their own right. I think the most unexpected listed building I've come across is a bollard. The church can be separately listed from its sundial, or a tomb in its graveyard, or its lychgate. Nev1 (talk)


 * I recognise that, but it's coming up so many times that I'm not convinced they are really sundials. Have a look at some of the lists. Deb (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * As I've worked on Grade I listed buildings in Derbyshire I came across (and corrected) several churches that were listed as sundials, towers, walls and various other structures. I'm not sure how you've generated this data but it does seem a little error-prone... Dave.Dunford (talk) 20:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There are also a lot of spelling errors, mis-capitalisations, etc, and it would be useful if the person uploading the data could actually check it before just leaving it to be corrected by other people. Having said that, an example of what Dave mentioned appears in Grade_I_listed_buildings_in_the_London_Borough_of_Southwark, where Southwark Cathedral is listed as a "Gate Pier".  Surely the cathedral is notable as a church, not as a gate pier?  The trouble is, if you don't correct them at the time of upload, how are non-experts supposed to be sure whether the descriptions are right or wrong?Deb (talk) 09:18, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Please note further discussion at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board; I;ve copied your post there. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXIX, August 2013
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Listed in W Sussex
Hi Nev. Sorry, I forgot to reply to your original message on 9th Aug! I think a notes column would be good, both here and more generally on these lists; I've always found them useful to provide some nice quick context. I'll start tweaking, adding pix etc., and you can move to mainspace whenever you like. Hopefully I'll have a bit of time in the next week or so to devote to this. Were there any other Sussex-area lists that were created at the same time? – I can help wth those as well. Cheers, Hassocks  5489 (Floreat Hova!)  11:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Right then, I've gone ahead and moved the page. Aside from that list, there's Grade II* listed buildings in West Sussex, Grade I listed buildings in East Sussex, and for Grade II* listed buildings East Sussex is split into its districts as was done at Somerset: Grade II* listed buildings in East Sussex. Any and all help is gratefully received! Nev1 (talk) 13:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Didn't see your earlier correspondence, but add my support for a Notes column. Per my comments at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board, I'd prefer fewer columns, with some of the columns amalgamated into one Notes column as I attempted at User:Dave.Dunford/DerbyshireGradeI. Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * A notes column can be added without too much trouble. We could then add the references in there and remove that column. Nev1 (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Grade I listed buildings in Somerset
Nev, Yes Grade I listed buildings in South Somerset is the only list not yet using templates our of the Grade I lists for Somerset - I am currently working on it in a sandbox & hoe to have it finished by the end of the weekend. Several of the Grade II* Somerset lists still need links & pics adding. Also Grade II* listed buildings in Bristol needs converting - but User:Jezhotwells is working on that one in a sandbox.&mdash; Rod talk 13:31, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes got up to the E's so far, User:Jezhotwells/sandbox. I am a little worried that the page is going to be rather large - there are 212 Grade II*s in the City of Bristol.  I am taking out the South Gloucestershire ones and will work on a page for that later, if there is not already one. Any ideas on maximum page size? Jezhotwells (talk) 16:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * In a technical sense, the templates stop working once there are around 340 or more buildings on one page. From a navigational point of view, smaller may be preferable but then you run into the problem of how would you split up that list of 212 buildings. It may be simpler to keep all 212 in a single list. Nev1 (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Why couldn't you just split it alphabetically, as in Grade II* listing buildings in Bristol, A–M for instance? Eric   Corbett  17:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The large lists can be a problem that's why we split Grade I listed buildings in Somerset and Grade II* listed buildings in Somerset (1073 entries) into districts & Unitary Authorities and Grade II* listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset (which has 212 entries) has been split further into those in the city of Bath and those in the rest of North East Somerset. You could try this approach for Bristol, using the Subdivisions of Bristol but some people might not know what ward, neighbourhood etc they are in.&mdash; Rod talk 17:30, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The problem with splitting it alphabetically, is that it splits up places in the same town. So for Cornwall, for example, I wanted to find places in Helston, but there are a couple on each of the two lists. The more lists, the worse the split. I think splitting geographically is definitely a superior method, even if it is somewhat arbitrary where the split is.  Harrias  talk 19:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * But you can split alphabetically by area such as Helston. Doesn't need to be by the name of the structure. Eric   Corbett  19:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have converted stage one of Grade II* listed buildings in Bristol to the new template.  Still about 100 from the official list to be added, I won't get these done by Sunday but will work on them over next few months. I will keep all in one list for convenience of the reader. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jezhotwells. If it helps, feel free to pass 30 my way and I'll get working on them in a sandbox. Nev1 (talk) 12:55, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have emailed you 30. Hope the formatting survives, if not.  i can send as an attchment. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Try as an attachment? I've replied so you have my address. Nev1 (talk) 14:26, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I could take on doing some of these over the weekend.&mdash; Rod talk 13:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * And I have emiled you another 30, Rod. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Got em & working.&mdash; Rod talk 14:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There might be a few dupes, sent a excel sheet to your work address. Have a good weekend. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Lists and pictures
I see you've done a lot of work on lists for WLM. I could help out, such as finding existing images for the lists. Do you have any suggestions for the best way to do this other than just searching Commons, or following the WP page link? I'm puzzled why there is a commonscat field that doesn't show on the output. This seems to me a useful thing to know when uploading an image for the contest, but who would see it. Is there software to automatically categorise an image once a HB number is entered? Will there be a field for that number on the upload form? -- Colin°Talk 16:47, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I find it easier to search Geograph (by grid ref square) than commons as the pictures sometimes have names you might not expect.&mdash; Rod talk 17:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks Colin, the more hands adding pictures the better. What I've been doing is searching Commons or seeing what pics are used in Wikipedia pages. I've not tried Rodw's approach, that could be useful.
 * What the "commonscat=" field does is when a user uploads a file by clicking through from one of the lists is it tells the upload wizard what category to put it in. If there's no category specifically for that building, it goes into whatever category the list page is a part of. So taking Grade I listed buildings in Bedfordshire as an example, someone uploading a photo of Church of All Saints would find their image in Category:All Hallows Church, Upper Dean, Bedfordshire. If they uploaded a photo of Hillersdon Mansion on the other hand it would end up in Category:Grade I listed buildings in Bedfordshire. The idea is by making things a bit more organised on Commons it will be easier for editors or anyone using Commons generally to find what they're looking for. So where categories exist, it's useful to add the commonscat field. The HB numbers will be automatically taken from the tables and added to the upload data. So with File:Clapham church - geograph.org.uk - 81631.jpg it includes a template below the picture telling the reader that "This is a photo of a listed building number 1114251". Nev1 (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I've clicked on one of the blank [?] pictures and it would appear to do as you say. But what do folk do if they want to upload an image where the list already has one? There's no "upload another like it" link. How will they get their details filled in automatically? Colin°Talk 19:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * On 1 September (or possibly late on 31 August) the template will be tweaked so that a link is available in case there's already an image there. For example Major National Historical and Cultural Sites (Beijing) (albeit not an example from the UK) has icons below the image which you can click on to upload a new photo. Nev1 (talk) 19:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Good. Is there a bot running to fill in the pictures people upload? That would be a great way of rewarding folk.  Do folk have to use the link or can you upload otherwise and just add the template to the image?  Colin°Talk 20:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, there is a bot which does that job: ErfgoedBot. The instructions given on the Wiki Loves Monuments website tell people to go through the list pages. I suppose you could do it through the normal upload wizard and add the relevant details by hand. Nev1 (talk) 20:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've just noticed that a the German wiki page for Renfrewshire's listed buildings contained most of the images I found -- wish I'd looked there first. The German equivalents (for Scotland at least) look very complete. I wonder if there is any way to automatically extract the image links from theirs to ours, where we have none? Colin°Talk 21:10, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know of any tools that would perform that task, and the wherewithal to write one is beyond me. Jarry1250 was a great help in writing a script which pulled the information from the existing Scotland lists and turning them into templates (the Scottish lists were by far the most consistent and well sourced, due it seems to the Herculean efforts of Jonathan Oldenbuck in about 2011; England has some good lists, but many were collections of names and nothing more). Jarry, are you able to help? Nev1 (talk) 21:18, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd second the advice to check for relevant photos on Geograph. Early Geograph pictures were imported en masse into Commons, but the project was abandoned and most later photos (most photos with a Geograph photo ID greater than c. 1,800,000) haven't been uploaded, but can be uploaded manually if they're useful. A handful of tips I've used: Dave.Dunford (talk) 08:20, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Geograph is linked from the Geohack page, so a quick route from a Listed buildings page to the relevant Geograph grid square is to click the grid ref or lat/long in the listing page, then scroll down on the Geohack page to "Geograph Britain and Ireland" and click "Photos".
 * The following page can be used to see whether a particular Geograph picture has already been uploaded to Commons: http://toolserver.org/~rhaworth/cat_geo.php
 * Geograph has a tool that allows quick uploading of new images to WikiCommons: click the link "Find out how to reuse this image" below the photo on Geograph and scroll down to "Wikipedia Template for image page." Download the file and copy the supplied template into the clipboard, then do a Basic Upload, selecting the file you downloaded, pasting the template and adding relevant categories.
 * Images of England is a useful resource, but its search facilities are inefficient and it uses an older, obsolete numbering system for referencing listed buildings. I wrote a script that takes the NHLE number as a querystring parameter, scrapes the old "legacy system" number from the NHLE page for that property, and then redirects to the relevant IoE page. Although the resulting IoE images are copyrighted, so not available for use on Wikipedia, it's still useful to double-check that a picture you've found is of the correct building; simply replace the number at the end of the following URL with the NHLE number of the site you're interested in. http://www.birdguides.com/dev/listed.asp?nhle=1052912
 * Thanks for all that. I think I shall first work to make use of the existing German images for lists, by hand if necessary. That seems to be the quickest route to populating the lists with the low-hanging fruit. I'm interested that you say the Geograph import stopped. I don't know the history there. I must admit I'm usually very disappointed with the Geograph images on Commons - very much a last-resort in terms of quality. Are newer Geograph pictures any better? Hopefully the WLM contest will fill the lists out with high-quality images. So for the images that are not already on Commons, I wonder if it best to see if WLM populates things than to spent a lot of time up-front searching for Geograph "thumbnails". Colin°Talk 09:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Geograph is what it is (a geographical record aimed at complete coverage of the UK, rather than a photographic site or a specifically architectural/historical resource): there are some great pictures and some not-so-great ones (and it can be frustrating when the building you want is in the picture, but not the main subject). I'd say that newer photos are on average better quality than early ones, as digital cameras have improved and the project has matured, but the photos are still only as good as the contributing photographers. But IMO a slightly unfocused or badly exposed photo is better than no photo at all. For information on the Geograph bulk upload (and why it stopped) see here and here. Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

One thing that could usefully be done is applying Start date to entries in the "date built" column (see to the Grade 1 in the West Midlands list, for example). This probably needs manual intervention, because of date ranges, Julian dates, dates with text caveats, etc., but a bot could do the job for unambiguous Gregorian dates. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Would that work when a sort key is used? Nev1 (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Crewood Hall
EH have confirmed that Crewood Hall is listed at Grade II*, and have amended the page accordingly. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 20:41, 30 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Nicely done, I've added Crewood to the Grade II* list. Nev1 (talk) 23:15, 31 August 2013 (UTC)