Talk:Castlethorpe
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Buckinghamshire may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I edited, then reverted, the opening para of this article. This is what I believe it should say: Castlethorpe is a village with a population of around 1000 in the Borough of Milton Keynes, though not in Milton Keynes itself. It was formerly in the old county of Buckinghamshire, England. The village lies about 3 miles north of Stony Stratford, 4 miles west of Newport Pagnell and 7 miles north of Milton Keynes city centre. It is separated from the county of Northamptonshire by a small stream.
In doing that, I believed that this is in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places), but as Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (places) shows, this is in dispute and I accept that it is not helpful to add fuel to the fire. So I've reverted pending agreement. --Concrete Cowboy 16:57, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
- The phrase "It was formerly in the old county of Buckinghamshire" is prescribed nowhere in the naming conventions. It can be "within the traditional borders of Buckinghamshire" as that is present tense. Past tense references to traditional counties are somewhat contradictory. Owain 11:36, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- It was formerly in the Kingdom of Mercia too. These historic borders are interesting subjects (especially for geneology and other historic study) and worthy of Wiki articles, but have no current practical application. The past tense highly appropriate. Incidentally, the phrase "old county" was another editor's. --Concrete Cowboy 20:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Notwithstanding being in the traditional county of the same name, Castleford (in standard 80.255glish, otherwise known as 'Castlethorpe' in English) is also in the ceremonial county of Buckinghamshire. Aren't we, according to the current policy, meant to use ceremonial counties in favour of UAAs? 80.255 20:23, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Technically (according to the enquiries I made earlier this month after a discussion with yourself) it is still in Bucks, just administered differently to the rest of the county. Incidentally, I don't know what place you're talking about, the rest of us are talking about Castlethorpe, not Castleford. ;-p -- Francs2000 | Talk
21:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Technically (according to the enquiries I made earlier this month after a discussion with yourself) it is still in Bucks, just administered differently to the rest of the county. Incidentally, I don't know what place you're talking about, the rest of us are talking about Castlethorpe, not Castleford. ;-p -- Francs2000 | Talk
- What are refering to here? Traditional counties or ceremonial counties? As far as lord lieutencies go, legislation usually says things like "X shall be deemed to form part of Y for the purposes of ABC". That doesn't mean that it's "in Bucks" or "not in Bucks" as if there were some single, stand-alone definition of 'Buckinghamdshire'; it means that, as I've always said, there is more than one entity called 'Buckinghamshire' co-existing simultaneously with others. Legislation then picks, chooses or defines anew whichever it wants for any particular purpose.
- None the less, I'd be interested to hear about your enquiries, and what they did, or did not, estblish, from your own standpoint. 80.255 21:14, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Well I did respond to you on the same discussion page but I don't think in all the melee of other discussions there that you saw my response. Feel free to continue it elsewhere on a discussion page of your choice if you wish (my talk page for instance). -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:18, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Well I did respond to you on the same discussion page but I don't think in all the melee of other discussions there that you saw my response. Feel free to continue it elsewhere on a discussion page of your choice if you wish (my talk page for instance). -- Francs2000 | Talk
- Though I still take issue with there is more than one entity called 'Buckinghamshire' co-existing simultaneously with others. because, ultimately, there is only one county called Buckinghamshire in the world and there always has been, and I can never agree to the point of view that it's less confusing to refer to different aspects of that as different counties. But this isn't the forum for this discussion, I just wanted to pick up on your specific wording at source. -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
- Though I still take issue with there is more than one entity called 'Buckinghamshire' co-existing simultaneously with others. because, ultimately, there is only one county called Buckinghamshire in the world and there always has been, and I can never agree to the point of view that it's less confusing to refer to different aspects of that as different counties. But this isn't the forum for this discussion, I just wanted to pick up on your specific wording at source. -- Francs2000 | Talk
- Only until the 10th century, to my recollection, at which point it either became merged with Wessex or Wessex took over. But at the time that the county boundary was first laid, Castlethorpe was in Wessex. Just thought I'd add that... -- Francs2000 | Talk 20:18, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Only until the 10th century, to my recollection, at which point it either became merged with Wessex or Wessex took over. But at the time that the county boundary was first laid, Castlethorpe was in Wessex. Just thought I'd add that... -- Francs2000 | Talk
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Castlethorpe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090608003948/http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/parishes/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=17026 to http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/parishes/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=17026
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Castlethorpe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050829020434/http://met.open.ac.uk/genuki/big/eng/BKM/Castlethorpe/Index.html to http://met.open.ac.uk/genuki/big/eng/BKM/Castlethorpe/Index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)