Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sheffield/Archive1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Category:Buildings and structures in Sheffield[edit]

I think the following buildings deserve an article:

JeremyA's additions to Captain scarlets list:
I think that all Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings should have articles (except in cases like Abbeydale Industrial Hamlet where there is a group of listed buildings that are better covered by a single article). I think that Grade II listed buildings should be treated on a case-by-case basis, as there are a number of these that are things like telephone boxes or milestones. Notable listed buildings currently missing articles include:
There are quite a few of new buildings proposed or under construction that might be worthy of article at some stage:

There was a Velocity Living article which has now been deleted, sadly. I started the article as I thought the bloack was a landmark structure in Sheffield. Shame. L.J.Skinner, talk to me 13:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The New Retail Quarter (NRQ) is the biggest building project in the pipeline. It will occupy the area around John Lewis, which is moving to where the fire station is. It is also why Grosvenor Hotel is being demolished. josh (talk) 19:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the NRQ should have its own article. It would be good if someone could get some photos of the buildings that will be demolished (this area). In particular I notice that some listed buildings may be demolished (e.g. this one) and Leah's yard is to be extensively renovated. We have a category at the commons that could hold the resulting photographs. JeremyA 16:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Already started - New Retail Quarter. Unfortunately, the image I had (this one) is copyrighted and was removed. L.J.Skinner, talk to me 13:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list I drew up a little while ago of buildings which probably merit an article: Upper Chapel - Sheffield Central Library - Moorfoot Building - Persistence Works - Showroom Cinema - Victoria Hall (Sheffield) - Sheffield Central Schools - Old Bank House - St Matthew's Church, Sheffield - west.one - Glossop Road Baths - Moore Street Electricity Substation - Butcher's Wheel - Gatecrasher One - Castle House - Sheffield Head Post Office - Royal Exchange Buildings - Kelham Island - Green Lane Works - Cornish Place Works - Burngreave Cemetery - Woodside Estate - Northern General Hospital - River Don Works - Shrewsbury Hospital - Mount Pleasant (Sheffield) - Landsdowne Cinema - Sharrow Snuff Mills - Sheffield Royal Infirmary - Hillsborough Barracks

I generated by flicking through the Pevsner guide and selecting buildings with interesting details without current articles on Wikipedia. Warofdreams talk 11:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
a few more of which I am quite proud of:
The Bear Pit (botanical gardens)
Cholera Monument Grounds
Shrewsbury Road Hospital
Birley Spa
Captain scarlet 19:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've created Buildings and structures in Sheffield. Feel free to butcher it. josh (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one. I've left a note about Sheffield Cathedral though--most of it isn't as old as people think. JeremyA 00:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance of a template or category which can go at the bottom of all articles in the series? Or would there bee too many/too few of them for this? L.J.Skinner, talk to me 14:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Education in Sheffield[edit]

I recon school buildings on which we have data should be treated. I know the articles I edited (Meersbrook & Heeley) have some information on schools, that information can be moved to a school's own article. I myself am not interested in writting about education itself, but more about the school buildings. Captain scarlet 18:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Districts of Sheffield[edit]

There are a number of disticts of Sheffield that already have reasonably good articles, however for most districts there are just one or two sentences in the ward articles. A major goal would be to bring the coverage for all major districts to the same level.

  • Ward articles offer a good base to work upon, demerging information on disctricts from there into their own article. Captain scarlet 18:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree. Any chance we can have a list of districts (Crookes, Neepsend, Netherthorpe, Longley etc), a list of wards (Fulwood, Manor Castle etc), and a list of constituencies with associated templates? (this will probably need to be done across SY and not just Sheffield with the new Penistone and Stocksbridge constituency being created. There's a good template already with the template:sheffield, but how about changing with a list of disricts and a separate list of wards. Example: Crookes AND Crookes_ward AND Sheffield_Hallam_Constituency, Hillsborough AND Hillsborough_ward AND Sheffield_Hillsborough_constituency, Dore, Totley AND Dore_and_Totley_ward AND Sheffield_Hallam_constituency. Also, Hillsborough's current article describes the ward, the district and the supertram stop! It almost reads like a disambiguation page - it's a real mess! L.J.Skinner, talk to me 13:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rivers in Sheffield[edit]

I would like to open a category for all the rivers and streams in Sheffield. I have opened articles for the Blackburn and Totley Brooks. Old Hay, Needham's Dyke to come. I will start artiucles on others later in the week. Regards, Captain scarlet 22:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need Category:Rivers_in_Sheffield and Category:Waterways_in_Sheffield? Unsigned edit left by Lewisskinner, 15:06, 31 October 2006

Scope[edit]

I see four possible options for the geographical scope of this project:

  1. Limit the scope to the area covered by City of Sheffield
  2. Include some agreed upon metro area
  3. Include the whole of South Yorkshire
  4. don't define the geographical scope and decide on a case-by-case basis

As for subject areas. Should the project just be concerned with physical things in Sheffield (districts, buildings etc.), or should it include people and events that are closely linked to Sheffield?

Any thoughts? JeremyA 21:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having a scope that includes articles outside the City of Sheffield may cause complaints from those in the surrounding area. I'd imagine there would be little interest in the majority of articles in the surrounding area as well. A South Yorkshire project would be more approriate for the wider area.
The scope probably needs to be more specific than just articles related to Sheffield. What type of articles are to be included/excluded. The main articles and stuctures are clearly included but what about residents (I wouldn't include) and sports clubs (I would include). josh (talk) 23:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with josh on the scope of the project. However, I would suggest that anything related to Sheffield would be an appropriate part of this project. It seems to me that this is the ideal place to discuss notable residents of Sheffield without current articles, or with articles which could be improved, just as sports clubs, buildings or notable local bands can be included. Warofdreams talk 01:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about this, I think that it would be good to keep the scope deliberately vague--clearly we might annoy some people if we go and stick a Wikiproject Sheffield tag on the Rotherham article, however, there are a number of areas just peripheral to Sheffield (e.g. Templeborough) that I feel it would be a pity to exclude completely from any discussions/collaborations that happen here. Likewise, with respect to people, I think a mass grab of biographical articles would not be useful, but I agree with Warofdreams that this would be a good place to discuss any missing notables. Currently the scope says "Articles about subjects related to the City of Sheffield", maybe we should change that to "Articles about subjects related to Sheffield" and let each person decide what that means to them. JeremyA 14:23, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Former Draft of the project proposal[edit]

Purpose[edit]

The purpose of the proposed project would be to exand and improve wikipedia's coverage of the Sheffield area, and to provide editors doing this with a central place to discuss ideas/changes.

Some possible functions that a project could have:

  1. The main Sheffield article is already a featured article, but this shouldn't mean that we regard it as finished. One function of the project could be to discuss ways in which this article could be imporved whilst maintaining it at featured quality.
  2. The second tier of articlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JeremyA/Sheffield&action=edit

Edit this pages on the Sheffield area already includes some reasonably extensive articles. A wikiproject might be able to identify articles from this tier that could be improved to featured quality.

  1. There are also gaps in the second tier of articles. The project could work towards identifying and filling these gaps. Examples of articles that might result from this include Buildings and structures in Sheffield, Education in Sheffield, and Religion in Sheffield.
  2. There are a number of disticts of Sheffield that already have reasonably good articles, however for most districts there are just one or two sentences in the ward articles. A major goal would be to bring the coverage for all major districts to the same level.
  3. The project could provide a central 'to-do' list where editors could suggest/discuss articles that are needed (e.g. articles on notable buildings or institutions).
  4. Questions that might be raised/discussed might include: Whether it is desirable to write articles about all Sheffield schools, just secondary schools, or whether grouping all schools into an article on Education in Sheffield would be better. Whether there should be articles for supertram stops, as have been written for other cities (e.g. Nottingham Express Transit).

Goegraphy of Sheffield[edit]

I feel that this is, perhaps, one of the weakest sections in the Sheffield group, at the moment. Anyone else feel this way? (Most of the "Natural History" section doesn't seem to be Natural history, to me). Wikityke 03:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia - Natural history is an umbrella term for what are now usually viewed as several distinct scientific disciplines. Most definitions include the study of living things (e.g. biology, including botany and zoology); other definitions extend the topic to include paleontology, ecology or biochemistry, as well as parts of geology, astronomy, and physics and even meteorology.Wikityke 03:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We must agree though that Sheffield is not actually in the 'North' but is borderline and pulled in two directions of South Yorks and the East Midlands: ref Graham Turners' 'North Country' .It once advertised itself as the 'shopping centre of the North Midlands',was (is?) served by East Midlands gas. In latitude alone, unless its been pushed urther north then it is tencamped as the northernmost Midland City. Indeed Barnsley even let alone Leeds do not consider Sheffield as 'proper' Yorkshire anyway! Sorry but geographically we can't push it north other than if there is an actual physical earth plates movement.Still a top, great place though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squire4 (talk • contribs)

There's been a lot of discussion on this at Talk:Sheffield and a clear consensus that Sheffield should be described as being in the north. Warofdreams talk 02:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Potential project[edit]

Perhaps we could set about adding Template:Coor title dms to all the geographical/landmark articles. josh (talk) 19:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy and I have been ading the template, but its placing is disputed, so we've kind of paused. There are two main templates, one that simply adds the coordinates in the body of an article, and this one which adds the coords at the top right, which is excellent for articles with one scope, unfortunately, some have decided to randomly move it around. Captain scarlet 19:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Parks and woodlands in Sheffield[edit]

I have recently worked on the stations, the houses, the trams of/in Sheffield. Now I am keen on working old cinemas and parks. True to what I do I have already create a template to qstick at the bottom of the articles relating to parks and woods in Sheffield. My problem is that some of our political wards bare the same name. I have noticed some constituencies have the tag added at the end and was wondering if all political wards could have the same style of tags, thus freeing the names of the areas, disitrcts, parks, woodlands that have the precise name ?

Template:Parks and Woodlands in Sheffield

Parks and woodlands in Sheffield

Abbeyfield | Beeley Wood | Bingham Park | Botanical Gardens | Concord Park
Cholera Monument and Clay Wood | Crookes Valley Park | Ecclesall Woods | Endcliffe Park | Firth Park
Graves Park | High Hazels Park | Hillsborough Park and Garden | Longley Park | Meersbrook Park
Millhouses Park | Norfolk Park | Rother Valley | Weston Park


Category:Parks and woodlands in Sheffield

I am keen on developping all of those, as well as others I might have missed. I have voluntarily not included St Paul's Gardens or the Winter Gardens, as the first is a plaza qnd not really a park since they concreted it, the second a building and although floral, is not a park, they should be part of each or the other category.

Are they any large or smaller parks I might have ommited ? Regards, Captain scarlet 20:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that "Woodlands" is capitalised in the category name. This probably should be lowercase. I can't move it though (do you need to be a admin). josh (talk) 23:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Other parks which might merit an article include the Ponderosa and High Hazels Park - there's a longer list here. Sheffield Wildlife Trust's list of nature reserves may also have some candidates. I can see why you've included the Rother Valley Country Park, but it is entirely in the Borough of Rotherham - do you think it merits a note or perhaps even removal from the template? Warofdreams talk 02:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hesitated with Rother Valley, it's in Rotvrum, it is a Shefield, I'd be happy to remove it you guy recon geograhical location is important. Ponderosa is Crookesmoor, so it is already present. I capitalised Woodlands to follow what SCC do on their website, I live right next to the Parks & Woodlands HQ so got used to see it capitalised, woodlands' W is lower case in in the template if that's ok ? I swear Crookesmoor was Crookesmoor, as opoosed to Crookes Valley, but if Warofdreams recons it's Crookes then that's cool.
I'm more concerned at trying to get the parks name back to parks, try to get the political wards to politics if you see what I mean. I see I have forgotten some Disictrict parks, which is weird since that's the page I was working on originally LOL (see link to Parks and Woodlands at the bottom of the template's page). Cheers guys, Captain scarlet 06:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to open the Cholera monument grounds article, but why not include grounds in its title? I purposely added grounds in the link from the template and you're put a redirect: why ? I was going to have article on the statue and the garden. Captain scarlet 06:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Graves Park is an article about the electoral ward not the large council park (which is what I expected). I assume we will want an article on the Park too. Any objection to moving the ward to Graves Park (ward) to put the park on Graves Park (I think Graves Park (park) is a little odd for a name). Andreww 18:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dito Firth Park Andreww 18:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to do so myself, so I'm in full agreement. In general, all the ward article should be moved to the +wards alternative. Captain scarlet 18:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In general, that's fine with me, but only where disambiguation is needed. Incidentally, I wrote the Cholera Monument article a couple of weeks ago, which is why I put in the redirect from your template. I've got no problem with you moving the article, but I don't really understand your comment. Also, Crookes Valley Park and the Ponderosa are different parks, albeit divided only by a road. Warofdreams talk 00:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hutcliff wood is probably worth an article. I'd guess that Marriott wood (the bit southeast of Hutcliffe Wood Road) might as well be included in the same article. --VinceBowdren 00:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also Beauchief Park and Ladies Spring Wood. --VinceBowdren 00:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done for Beauchief, Hutcliffe and Ladies Spring. Marriot ought to be included in Hutcliffe Wood, with a redirect from Marriot Wood to Hutcliffe Wood. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's Hutcliffe with a definite e at the end, as it's listed on the Sheffield Council website. I can't link to it as the search page is dynamic. Once I have a screenshot to reflect the spelling I'll revert back to Hutcliffe Wood. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The spelling does seem strange; the road is definitely 'Hutcliffe Wood Road' (and the name of the crematorium agrees with that), but the maps I've checked (e.g. A to Z, the OS 1:25000) spell the name of the wood 'Hutcliff Wood'. I've assumed the OS to be definitive, which is why I spelt it that way. --VinceBowdren 11:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, and I have noticed name variations on Google, but since I'm at work and not working like I should, I haven't been able to check my library and not moved the article until I can be sure of either spellings. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed my mind about Beauchief Park. Went out for a nosy around this evening, and it does seem to be two golf courses with no public access except on the rights of way, so it doesn't really count as a public park. On the other hand, the bits of woodland in and around the beauchief abbey estate (Ladies Spring wood (SK325814), Parkbank wood (SK 336 818), Gulleys wood (SK332814) and Old park wood (SK 332 809) are worth recording, though I'm not sure there's enough information to warrant giving them separate articles. Maybe incorporate them into a single beauchief park article, or include them in the beauchief abbey article, or something? --VinceBowdren 23:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a Beauchief Park section in the Beauchief Abbey article, with info about Ladies spring wood and Parkbank wood. As yet I don't have any information about the other woods on the estate. --VinceBowdren 23:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just came across [1], which is a useful source for etymology of local wood names. --VinceBowdren 15:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's the Park opposite Crookes Valley Park called (facing the Upperthorpe Tower blocks and near Infirmary Road)? L.J.Skinner, talk to me 13:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Answered above Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter's Bar?[edit]

Does anyone have an opinion on the Hunter's Bar article? I find it strange to refer to Hunter's Bar as a suburb. Even though I attended Hunter's Bar middle school, I have always thought of the term more as the name of a landmark--just referring to the junction of Ecclesall Road, Brocco Bank, and Junction Road. Surely the district there is Sharrow Vale. JeremyA 14:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think is considered an area. Its mentioned by the Artic Monkeys in the line "He talks of San Francisco, he's from Hunter's Bar". josh (talk) 15:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd not call it a suburb - it's a roundabout! It is in the Sharrow Vale. Though people do often refer to the "Hunter's bar shops" as distint from the "Eccy road shops" L.J.Skinner, talk to me 13:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter's Bar isn't a district, an area or neighourhood, it's a toll bar. It is a place in Sheffield on the edge of Sharrow (Sharrow Vale and wrongly called Ecclesall Road), Brincliffe, Greystones and Endcliffe. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Unsupported Pollution Data ?[edit]

Geography_of_Sheffield#endnote_Pollution Geography of Sheffield

The reference [2] quoted in "Today Tinsley (48 parts per billion) still comes 9th in the UK pollution hotspots, while the city centre (43 parts per billion) remains above the government's recommended levels[2]." certainly hasn't been available since Jan 2006 and I can't find any other source for this information.

What's more the author of this part doesn't even state "48 parts per billion" of what !!!

Does anyone have any objection to removing this unsupported statement? (Or can anyone supply alternative, more explicit sources?). Wikityke 00:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

According to a cached repost of the article [2], the parts are of oxides of nitrogen and the figure comes from research by Calor. However, this repost doesn't mention Tinsley at all.
There are some interesting figures for Tinsley which could be covered instead. A 2004 survey by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapists found 41 micrograms of nitrogen dioxide per cubic metre, above the national average and above the government's end-2005 target of 40. The Sheffield Green Party note an RMT survey which found 43. Defra note that monitoring in Tinsley since 1990 has found only three occasions where pollution exceeded guidelines, but "the failure to monitor PM10 and ozone at these sites is almost certainly resulting in under-reporting of days exceeding the Standard".
A model developed by the American Heart Association suggests that mean levels of oxides of nitrogen across much of the city exceeded 55 micrograms per cubic metre from 1994 - 99 (but note that this is not directly comparable with the CSP's figures as the AHA include all oxides of nitrogen). Warofdreams talk 02:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Lord Mayor of Sheffield[edit]

Roger Davison is no longer Lord Mayor—it is now Jackie Drayton. So far we haven't written articles about all the city councillors, which seems reasonable to me (most people don't know/care who their councillor is). So, if being a councillor alone does not give enough notability for an article, does being a past Lord Mayor? Should we delete the Roger Davison article? My suggestion would be not to have articles on individual Lord Mayors (past or present) but instead to start Lord Mayor of Sheffield and cover both past and present Mayors there. Any thoughts? JeremyA 22:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What? We have councilllors? An article on each particular LM might be a bit much, but an article on the title of Lord Mayor of Sheffield could be good. Then we can write an article on the most notable LMs of the past, like those who actually did anything other than being driven in their black Jaguar (no I'm not bitter). Captain scarlet 06:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Having composed a brief article on Jackie Drayton I find it's linked from here. I would have thought a Lord Mayor is OK for an article (but not other posts). There are quite a few notables amongst the Lord Mayors, eg Hattersley's mother Enid, Ballard, Dyson. The Munn might well be Meg Munn's father. I would have thought a Lord Mayor is comparable to an MP, say, or the wearer of SUFC's number 36 shirt. -- roundhouse 23:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sheffield City Centre[edit]

An article on Sheffield City Centre has recently been created. You may be interested in expanding and/or reformatting it. Warofdreams talk 15:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Project links[edit]

Most of these links don't seem to connect to anything. Any ideas? Wikityke 00:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stations template[edit]

I've been implementing templates listing railway stations in metropolitan counties/PTE areas (e.g. {{West Midlands railway stations}}, {{West Yorkshire railway stations}}). South Yorkshire is next on my list, but it would probably supercede the {{Sheffield Stations}} template. Any objections? --RFBailey 22:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 23:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can see the value in a template covering South Yorkshire. Would you able to explain your objection? thanks, Warofdreams talk 23:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have a better idea, two in fact, which I would like to show you before we end up with something boring and similar to other navigational infoboxes. I think you'll like it. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 07:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Here goes:
  • Option 1: Advantage, Is the foundation to bring forward many more stations than with options 2. It means it is possible to have navigational infoboxes for Doncaster, Rotherham and Barnsley.

Stations in Sheffield {{User:Captain scarlet/Stations in Sheffield}}

  • Option 2 is similar; with all stations in South Yorkshire with a seperate band for stations in Sheffield, it is more in line with {{Stations in Greater Manchester}}. Larger stations may be put forward with a bit of bold.

Stations in South Yorkshire {{User:Captain scarlet/Stations in South Yorkshire}}

It's a bit like Hovis, the best of both. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good work! I'm rather keen on option 1 (it looks a little similar to something I tried before). Option 2 is also good with me; it has certain merits in that the SYPTE covers the whole of the county. Warofdreams talk 12:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, what we had discussed and disagreed a while back seems implementable now and since I had already update the Stations in Sheffield template to look like other navigational infoboxes such as the London, Liverpool and Manchester ones, adding the closed stations wasn't too much of a problem. I am also keen on the first option in the way that it serves the urban and administrative region of Sheffield.

Option two is a bit boring really, and does little to enhance our interest in the localities, Wikipedia needs exciting articles rather than endless lists. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 12:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've implemented Option #1 following discussion as there was no outright opposition. If RFBailey disagrees this can be discussed here with other members of the Project. Enjoy, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 13:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance of Combining the two? Sheffield, closed stations in Sheffield and stations in SY, perhaps bolding stations such as Sheffield Midland, Sheff Victoria, Rotherham Central, Masborough, Doncaster Frenchgate, Barnsley etc? Also, Can anyone add Stations for Deepcar, Wharncliffe Side, Sheffield College, Ski Village and Nunnery Square? Indeed, are these appropriate yet? See Don Valley Railway wiki and Don Valley Railway website for more info L.J.Skinner, talk to me 16:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The choice for South Yorkshire was to not follow the national trend as it serves us better to show them that way (in the same way it is done for the West Midlands and Liverpool). There lies four templates for each localities in south Yorkshire. Doncaster Frenchgate is not a station, but a completely indipendent bus station/bunker entity. The stations proposed by the DVR cannot be implemented as there are no certain projects about these and they, at the moment, pure speculation of a group of individuals rather than an established authority. Indeed, plans made by SYPTE, contained on a PDF once published and found in the mists of the Internet did not conclude of the reuse of this part of the Woodhead Line. Once authorities have published wishes to reopen these stations and plans for the beginning of construction have been laid out, then it will be appropriate to include them in the template (the actual template, not the backup contained within my userpage...). Once cannot include each and every private speculation or wishes in seperate articles. Suggestions, backed up with adequate sources (these are notable and respectable sources as usual) should better be contained on Transport in Sheffield or South Yorkshire Public Transport Executive. Once must remember that this is an encyclopedia and terms and content should be verifiable, which cannot be done if no authority has documented the said projects. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 13:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Education in Sheffield[edit]

I am currently working on the list List of schools in Yorkshire and the Humber to provide a summary of the baisc info for every school in the country. I am today looking at the Sheffield section (see it here). I was looking to try and link to the list from the breif education section in the main Sheffield article and mande a comment on the talk page about not finding an easy way to do that. Then someone suggested a break away article on Education in Sheffield. What do other think of this idea? If you like it, what sort of stuff could be included? (Maybe even the list of schools could be included when finished?...perhaps there could be article for Education in (each LEA in the country) eventuially) so the regional lists are not needed. Anyway, let's talk about this here and see what we come up with. I don't think all schools are worthy of their own article here, certainly not primary schools, so I'd also like to ask what should be included in the list. I'm just putting type of school, specialisms, age range and, when I get round to finding it, the number on roll and a link to their website. Anything else? Evil Eye 17:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religious affiliation, if any, is probably worth mentioning for each school. --VinceBowdren 13:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==Category:Sheffielders==[edit]

This has been up for a renaming to People from Sheffield by the consistency police. The discussion is here. josh (talk) 10:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Do any of you think this is a nice template WikiProject Sheffield Particpiants?

This user is a member of
WikiProject Sheffield

Abdullah Geelah 13:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you used the template and have included it myself. I would have miself used a landscape oriented photo rather than a portrait oriented one as it stretches the template in height. Also there are guidelines and convention with regards to how template are named. Other than these two technical points: all good! Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rivers template[edit]

Proposed something like: Template:Waterways in Sheffield

Waterways in Sheffield

River Sheaf | Blackburn Brook | River Don | River Loxley | Meers Brook | Old Hay Brook | Porter Brook | River Rivelin | Sheffield Canal | Totley Brook | Limb Brook | River Rother | Owler Brook | Carr Brook

So far I've pretty much just pulled all the rivers out of the Rivers in Sheffield category. --VinceBowdren 14:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice ! I was at some point about to write articles on all the brooks of Dore and Totley, are they notable enough to feature on the template or is every 1 m wide trickle maybe not important enough ? I would remove Concord Park though ;) Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concord Park removed (can you guess where I copied the outline from?). Not sure how big a river has to be for inclusion, it'll have to be judgement calls I think. Basically whether size and significance justify an article - e.g. the Limb Brook is pretty small, but historically interesting enough to be worth writing about. --VinceBowdren

(off course i do ;) ). I see no problem with your explanation. We must have just missed each other since i was looking for signs in Hutcliff Wood while you were in Beauchief. Any plans for today Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 08:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes[edit]

I have had long standing mild disagrements with other editors concerning the excessive use of infoboxes. My main arguments being that location infoboxes contain no information, take a lot of space and are vertical. As with any vertical infoboxes, they let not much else to be edited in an article since half the height of an article is taken by infoboxes which as far as I know do not permit images to be put onto the right hand side next to infoboxes but below it. I very much doubt that knowing the police force or the postcode of a random area is of encyclopœdic interest or relevance.

I would like to see locations infoboxes not be used on areas of larger cities which already contain an infobox detailing whatever needs to be edited in.

I have twice removed the locations infobox from the Totley article since it not a town or a district but merely a neighbourhood. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 20:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with you. That infobox is particular cumbersome because of rival groups wanting their favourite geographical reference in it. So it now has county (traditional and modern), region, England, UK. The last two being exactly the same in every infobox. The region is also repeated in the EU constituency.
Perhaps we could setup a Sheffield area infobox that only lists Ward, Constituentcy, Postal Area(?), and population. A far more useful map based on Sheffield could then be used as well. josh (talk) 23:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly what I had in mind. Unfortunately, the said member User:YorkshirePhoenix has now flagged the article as a UK geography Wikiproject article. I can sence a lot of pettiness coming out of this and ownership if it may be called that way being a topic of disputes. I don't know why the user has a particular interest in Totley but as far as I know all the articles for districts of Sheffield were written in collaboration with other members of the Sheffield Wikiproject. A district(?s) of Sheffield location/place infobox is definitely of importance since the creators of the england place box have no regards to its size and we must think that we can provide a better alternative, such as the Template:Sheffield stations template. there is a grave need remove duplicate, offtopic unencyclopedic information. I will endevour to propose a draft model for tonight (as I'm at work and errr, mmmh...) Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Totley is a clear contender for the Template:Infobox England place because it is a Derbyshire village in a South Yorkshire borough. The infobox allows this information to be clearly conveyed without any "weasal wording". Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 10:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Totley is in Sheffield, as it has been since 1934. It is also not in a borough, but a neighbourhood in Sheffield and is not a district, nor an area. There literally hundreds of such neighbourhoods in Sheffield on which Wikiproject Sheffield works and maintains, Totley being only one of many of them. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the infoboxes contain zero information - if there is no infobox, then this kind of data is often inserted haphazardly into an article e.g. there is a separate template just for the grid reference. On the other hand, I do see your point about how much space they take up, especially in small articles such as those for Sheffield neighbourhoods. There seems to be a separate infobox for London places - can we learn anything useful from what they've done there? Do any other cities have their own separate infoboxes? --VinceBowdren 10:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Sheffield is the borough I was talking about (last time I checked it was a metropolitan borough). As such Totley is in the metropolitan county of South Yorkshire but it isn't in Yorkshire (Stockton-on-Tees and Coleraine are other examples of boroughs which cross county lines and my own Metropolitan Borough of Doncaster includes Nottinghamshire villages such as Finningley). Infoboxes are simple way of conveying this information in a standard format. I agree that a Sheffield infobox with a larger scale map and more relevant information may be more appropriate: as Sheffield straddles the Yorkshire/Derbyshire border this infobox should obviously include the historic county. I look forward to working towards a mutually satisfactory resolution and will hold off reverting to the England place infobox for the timebeing. Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 10:39, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of the London neighbourhood infobox, but look at what it contains. Firstly, it's just as ridiculously big, and it contains the area's dialling code, I don't see that as being encyclopedic or worthy of featuring in an encyclopedia. The problem with area infoboxes is that, I insist, they contain nothing and using the badly edited articles as an excuse to use an infobox is not on. Since we at the Sheffield project would like to think we can work to an acceptable end, editing, rewriting articles to efficiently show properly presented data should be our goal; an infobox which includes which police force, fire station, amublance operate in the area, the postcode, the dialling code, the water supplier, the quality of the air, the pollen count, the number of shops, the type of tarmac used on its roads etc is not what Wikipedia was created for. Wikipedia is not a directory. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Check your sources (such as Sheffield. Sheffield is both a metropolitan borough and a city. Stocksbridge is in the metropolitan borough only, Totley is in both, in the city de facto. Totley was made part of Sheffield in 1934, when such things as South Yorkshire didn't exist (1974 anyone ?). The city of Sheffield does not straddle the border with Derbyshire as the borders were displaced (as borders do in time). Finningley is also now in Doncaster, therefore in Yorkshire when Doncaster englobed Finningley. Following your argument, We all live in Normandy, since the Duke William of Normandy became king of England... I think not, borders evolve and move, so have these. The line is clear, Totley, Dore, Bradway, Meersbrook, Norton, Ecclesall, Beighton, Mosborough are in Yorkshire and Sheffield. Also please try to answer at the bottom of a talk page to facilitate reading. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 10:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, let's start talking about what it should include. A map showing the location within Sheffield MB, City Council ward, Parliamentary constituency (I presume Sheffield has a few), Civil parish (if Sheffield is parished), postcode and historic county. Anything else? Oh, and inclusion in the old County Borough of Sheffield doesn't make Totley any more part of Yorkshire than being in South Yorkshire does (this is because the Local Government Act 1888 created administrative counties and subsequent local government reforms have modified them, not the counties themselves). Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 10:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that postcode is useful; postcode areas don't map to neighbourhoods very well, so you would need to occasionally include two or three postcodes for a given neighbourhood, without being able to explain where the division lies. Better to omit, rather than be misleading. --VinceBowdren 11:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good point (I did add it as an afterthought assuming they would map to neighbourhoods - I've never lived in a big city). Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 11:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As I have stated before, dialling codes, or postcodes are not appropriate. They do not qualify for what wikipedia is, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: White Pages, Directory. Though Wikipedia is a website, it still remains an encyclopedia, look beyond your PoV, and see that an encyclopedia does not contain should information . They neither are neither descriptive (see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia) or relevant (a postcode does not describe an area, it is a property). This is not the place for such information and if you disgree you would have to create a debate and come up to a concensus on Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not.
quote:WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A DUMPING GROUND FOR RANDOM INFORMATION
WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A PLACE TO PUBLISH YOUR OPINIONS'/quote Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 11:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't include the historic county. If we do that then why not name the areas that were in Hallam or whether they were in Sheffield county borough or Stocksbridge/Wortley urban district. There would also be problems with determining which traditional county areas are in. Especialy the areas stradling the boundry. The fact is that historic counties are dead. You probably can't find a single map made in the last 50-100 years that uses historic counties. Had they still been in existance then the Yorkshire boundry would have been moved further south along with Sheffield. josh (talk) 11:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they still exist: I have already explained that the LGA 1888 created administrative counties and that all sunsequent local government reform refers to them, not the pre-existing historic counties. The Yorkshire county boundary hasn't moved south with Sheffield any more than the County Durham boundary moved south across the Tees with Stockton. I completely understand why southerners from Derbyshire might want to be Yorkshiremen: but they're not! Historic county is quite enough for the infobox: the old UD's and Wapentakes can be covered in the articles themselves. Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 11:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The old counties do still exist for some purposes, but I think you're in a minority in considering them so important. IMO we don't need to include such a large infobox just to make the point that Totley was formerly in Derbyshire and is administered by a different local authority. --VinceBowdren 11:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On rereading the Totley article, I'm tending to agree with Captain Scarlet. The article already says that the neighbourhood was formerly in Derbyshire, is now in Sheffield, and has a link to the Dore and Totley ward, where you can get all the other administrative/political info. We can't include information such as population because the neighbourhood has no definite boundaries nor compiled statistics. As already agreed, such information as postcode isn't worth including either. The infobox did add the map, which was useful, but for such a small area I think a map showing Totley within Sheffield would be more useful. It also added the OS grid reference, but the article already had a co-ordinates template, so the grid reference was basically duplicating that information. --VinceBowdren 11:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One possiblity would be to give the date the area was added to the Sheffield borough and from which district it joined. Although this could still run into problems with certain areas where it is unclear when they joined the borough. The NHS has information on the population of individual areas (it also has maps but they're copyrighted). josh (talk) 12:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If an infobox is needed, which it isn't since the Totley article was well written and all information an infobox should contain is already plainly and simply laid, the it should contain no omre than what Vince proposed. a very succint yet straight to the point non-written description. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, the bulk of information should be in the article body, Wikipedia is not a directory and thus information is to be laid in structured sentences (with better spelling than mine). the infobox should have a map of the city of Sheffield, with the area coloured, the OS grid references and or the coordinates (most Sheffield related articles already have the coordinates template). Any further information should be present on the ward's artricle since areas in Sheffield have subjective boundaries (see discussion between me and JeremyA concerning Norton Lees). The city is in the infobox title, the county and so on are redundant (area is in Sheffield, Sheffield is in South Yorkshire etc).
One has to admit that most of the Sheffield related article are at least well presented (thanks to JeremyA) and so infoboxes are pretty useless even for stubs and all information is usually laid in the opening sentence. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to stay out of this now. If there was going to be a userbox it would have to include the historic county as the Yorkshire/Derbyshire boundary does run through the Sheffield MB: but, to be honest, you've convinced me that since we are never likely to be able to populate the England place infobox properly (population, postcode, etc) and the historic county is well enough covered in the article body, we should leave it as is. To be honest I was thinking of it in terms of a village (where the England place infobox works quite well) rather than a suburb and never really appreciated how small an area we were dealing with until we got into this. In my defence this is because the way villages near Doncaster, Barnsley, etc are reported in Wikipedia is basically the same as this small suburb of Sheffield is described, even though they are clearly not part of the towns like Totley is part of Sheffield. Likewise I'm not even going to add a map with a dot showing the rough location of Sheffield within Great Britain as this would not achieve a great deal. Consider that a retraction and an apology. Yorkshire Phoenix United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland God's own county 14:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I respect your decison and point of view and am happy that you understand the nature of what we're dealing here. I hope the point I have tried to make was understood. All is good and we very well may have a Sheffield locality infobox afterall, even if it is éphemère. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 16:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've created {{Infobox Sheffield place}} and setup one at Totley. josh (talk) 23:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. One thing about it; the borders of Sheffield aren't particularly well-known, so it might be worth making it clearer what the map is of. One option (I'm trying not to add too much information to the infobox here) would be to indicate Sheffield town centre on the map? --VinceBowdren 23:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can do about that. Meanwhile, I've found this page which lists the years when the various areas merged with Sheffield. Unfortenatly they might be a bit out. He seems to be going off the year of the relevent act (i.e. 1900 Sheffield Corperation Act) but the boundry changes tend to come into effect a year or two later. Cross referencing with this page which gives the correct dates could help. josh (talk) 23:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent box, might have waited for the projecters to see it before implementing it, but it's simple and small. :) Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 07:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reservoirs[edit]

There is an effort underway (discussed at Talk:Peak District) to get the reservoirs in and around the peak district national park written up. Given that most of the them are in the dark peak, that makes quite a few of them in or supplying Sheffield; so if anybody here has a bit of useful knowledge to throw in, you're welcome. --VinceBowdren 11:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New members[edit]

Hi, I'd like to help out on this project. I've been trying to sort out some rudimentry articles for the train and tram stops, and I've edited City Lofts Tower and others. Any chance I may be able to help out? Please reply on my talk pageL.J.Skinner, talk to me 16:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Project directory[edit]

Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 17:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category redundancy[edit]

I'm concerned at the recent creation of several categories which seem to cross over categories that already exist. Category:Sheffield Galleries and Museums Trust, Category:Art museums and galleries in Sheffield and Category:Museums in Sheffield and Category:Sheffield Industrial Museums Trust all concern areas treated by each other category. I already doubt these categories require an article, the subjects are such niche subjects that their existance should be recorded in Culture in Sheffield rather than in individual articles. The related categories should be deleted on the gorunds that their content will stay below a level needing categorising and should be merged into Category:Museums in Sheffield. Categories rightfully exist with hundreds of articles within and we here have some with five, six. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 15:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There are not so many museums in Sheffield that Category:Museums in Sheffield needs any sub-categories. —JeremyA 20:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hallamshire[edit]

I just finished transcribing the first chapter of Hunter's Hallamshire. Hopefully this will prove useful as a source for some of the Sheffield-related articles. —JeremyA 03:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic work! I note that someone online is currently charging £15 for a scanned copy on a CD-ROM. Are you planning to transcribe the whole work? If so, it should be of great benefit to everyone doing research on the history of Sheffield. Warofdreams talk 04:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure yet—I'm not planning on making it a project to get the whole thing transcribed, but I think that I will do some more. On the one hand I agree that it would be great to have the text of this book freely available, on the other hand I think that £15 is really reasonable price to charge for the scans (the person that scanned it has done quite a few other rare books and I think that he should be encouraged to do more). But in the end that is probably a moot point, as what will stop me doing the whole thing is the amount of work involved. I think that I will probably add chapter 2 and then see where it goes from there. —JeremyA 22:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Would you consider Hunter notable enough for an article? I can't find much information on his life, but I could probably write a reasonable stub. —JeremyA 03:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I might consider transcribing (do you mean by OCR or by hand?) the Grammar School chapter. And the 'reasonable stub' looks very reasonable. I would have thought him very notable. roundhouse 09:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The first chapter I transcribed by hand. It's a long time since I used any OCR software, but my previous experiences are that by the time I have checked for and corrected all the errors made by the OCR software I might as well have typed it myself. The stub is now at Joseph Hunter. —JeremyA 03:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time to break out Education in Sheffield?[edit]

I think that the list of schools is misplaced in the Sheffield article. Is it time to make a separate article on education? —JeremyA 15:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed (there is already a more informative list at List of schools in Yorkshire and the Humber). A separate article would be nice. -- roundhouse 15:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 16:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed Wikityke 17:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Awards[edit]

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 21:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimapia ?[edit]

What does everyone think about a greater integration with WIKIMAPIA for the Sheffield articles? (a Wiki operating together with Google world maps and satellite photo's).

I've added one or two "External links" to try it out, for example from Sheffield Winter Gardens to Wikimapia-Sheffield Winter Gardens.

You can click on a satellite photo' item and read/edit the info'screen and link to Wikipedia articles/Commons photo's etc. for that item.

Comments welcome !

Cheers Wikityke 17:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in two minds about this. On the one hand the coor templates (e.g. {{Coor title dms}}) already do a pretty good job of linking to multiple mapping services (including wikimapia). On the other, few, if any, people realise that clicking on the coordinates at the top of the article will get them to a map sources page—so maybe a more explicit link is reasonable. —JeremyA 02:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My point exactly. Plus, I think the majority of Wikipedia contributors would probably prefer to link to a WIKI mapping system. At the moment I find Wikimapia Sheffield a bit too much of a "sandbox". Relatively few "serious" users seem to be involved, so quite a few frivolous items creep in (despite the fact that the system does include an option for new items to be edited and/or reviewed for inclusion/exclusion by other users, - " This place is waiting for your review, is it properly described? ", and a for/against vote counter). There's also an option to report abusive comments etc.
The apparent lack of an automatic "my watchlist" or "newly added items" listing does, currently, make peer review a bit demanding, but as more "serious" users begin to enter hopefully this aspect will improve. Wikityke 14:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I do not believe in Wikimapia and find it to be an amateurish way of showing places on maps. Since it is little administered and even less looked than Wikipedia, the place seems to be a recollection of people's houses and doubled, tripled if not quadrupled places of no interest. I am in full agreement however to a neutral map linking such as {{Coor title dms}} which offers more professional mapping systems and styles. It is also frowned upong to do website advertising which is what putting Wikimapia forward would be. It would also be more beneficial for the project to create its own maps rather than using third party ones. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:21, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree with Captain scarlet that my preference would be to use with the links provided by the coor templates. Wikimapia doesn't seem to provide a great deal that couldn't be better included using the coor templates. Adambro 12:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given that Google Earth now maps {{Coor title dms}} tagged articles, and Wikipedia users can add User:Dschwen's\ WikiMiniAtlas, I would say that Coor title dms is the best option at the moment. —JeremyA (talk) 03:42, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone have some local knowledge of Crookes?[edit]

Whilst editing the history article I got interested in the urns that were found at Crookes at the end of the 19th century, so I thought I might add some more about them to the Crookes article. However, I've come across a couple of problems that hopefully someone who has lived in Crookes might be able to help me out with. I'm trying to work out roughly where the urns were found. The description of the find in the Sheffield and Rotherham Independent starts 'On Easter Sunday [1887] Mr. Herbert T. Watkinson, of Summer Street, was walking in Cocked Hat Lane, near the Bole Hills, at Crookes, when he noticed in the side of an excavation that had been made for the foundations of some new houses what looked like a drain pipe.' S.O. Addy later wrote an article in Notes and Queries (the article is reproduced in a chapter from a book that I have been transcribing here) in which he states that Cocked Hat Lane is Tinker Lane. However, I have compared Addy's description of the site of the find with the 1855 map of old-maps.co.uk and it looks to me that the area he is describing is on Bole Hill Lane—so, does anyone know if Tinker Lane used to come all the way to Northfield Lane? The other thing is that he says that the urns were taken to Weston Park Museum—does anyone know if they still have them, and are they on display? I have been trying to find a photo of the urns, but so far my best bet seems to be in a 1912 book that I may be able to get a photocopy from but not a scan. —JeremyA 02:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW. Congrats to Josh and the other editors of the Sheffield Wednesday article for getting it on the Main Page. It's good to see Sheffield represented up there again (even if it is the wrong team ;-)

Similar WikiProjects[edit]

I've added this WikiProject to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/List of city WikiProjects. Many of the projects on that page have transcluded the list onto their project's page under a section titled "Similar WikiProjects". BlankVerse 14:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schools[edit]

Does anyone have any authoritative references for schools in Sheffield? In particular I think Myers Grove was the first comprehensive in Sheffield, probably opening in 1960, and I would like a ref for this. (My recollection is that the 1961 form for choosing a school post-11+ included Myers as a comprehensive, together with the grammar schools at the time + Rowlinson.)

There was also the short-lived Crosspool Sec Modern (to which Westways transferred) which became KES Lower school in Sept 69. Exact dates would be nice.

(Westfield apparently opened as a comp in 1957, but was in Derbyshire until 67.) roundhouse 14:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a reference stating that Myers Grove was the 1st (in 1960) followed by Hinde House (63) and Chaucer (64) (both of which existed before in some guise). roundhouse 11:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation[edit]

The article, category and tempaltes for Sheffield city centre seem to be overly capitalised. Should they not be renamed/moved so as to obey the Manual of Style and avoid over capitalisation? Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Music[edit]

Is the section Sheffield#music getting large enough now to warrant a Music in Sheffield page? L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 16:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching this section for a while... it seems like everyone who's ever picked up an instrument in Sheffield would like to be included! I suggest that we lose the red-links and either find citations or remove uncitable material. Culture of Sheffield could also be expanded rather than creating another article for unknown bands to list themselves in. —JeremyA (talk) 03:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sheffield/Archive1&oldid=1185422973"