Talk:Amersham
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Amersham article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
[edit]if schools are going to be mentioned, perhaps a comprehensive list could be added? i.e. including primary schools
Two private preparatory schools added. --Milton25 21:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
External link to local community web site described as spam and removed
[edit]Stanley Hill is in Amersham and www.stanleyhill.org is a local community web site dealing with Stanley Hill in general and speeding traffic on Stanley Hill in particular. To describe it as spam is an insult to the residents of Stanley Hill. To remove it without any discussion is an even bigger insult.
Consider the link to a bed and breakfast web site. Is that spam? Apparently not.
Wetfriday 19:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the argument that I am insulting the residents of Stanley Hill in some way doesn't hold water, seeing as you also added the same link to the Speed limit and Road safety camera articles. There it is most definitely spam as it adds little reference or extra information to the context of those articles, but merely aims to publicise a local cause. Worthy though the cause is, Wikipedia is not the place to rally followers to it. -- Roleplayer 14:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Let's concentrate on the Amersham page first. You made no mention of the TWO links to bed and breakfast establishments. Surely they are more spam-like than stanleyhill.org and yet they are they still there? Those two sites generate income from their business but there is no income from our site. I'm asking as a newcomer and you're obviously an old hand at this.
Wetfriday 18:56, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Amersham. 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/20131227091656/http://www.amershamswimmingclub.co.uk/amersham/about-us/pool-locations/ to http://www.amershamswimmingclub.co.uk/amersham/about-us/pool-locations/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/satellite/9476/locationsindex.htm
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 15:46, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Geoffrey de Mandeville - whom?
[edit]"In 1200, his descendent Geoffrey de Mandeville (who became the Earl of Essex in 1213) obtained a charter for Amersham allowing him to hold a Friday market and a fair on 7 and 8 September."
It seems obvious to me that this is Geoffrey FitzGeoffrey de Mandeville, 2nd Earl of Essex, except that the sentence means he would have been about nine when he obtained the charter. Is that feasible, or is the date of 1200 wrong? Harfarhs (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)