This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shropshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Shropshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShropshireWikipedia:WikiProject ShropshireTemplate:WikiProject ShropshireShropshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in England may be able to help!
Copyright examination was requested regarding subject described below. Sadly copyright examinations is not the right place for the request. The most common reason is that the content has already been added/uploaded to Wikipedia. Such cases (violations or not) are taken care of at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
The request has been moved to List of rejected requests. Please move the request to a better location so it can be taken care of. When the request is moved and/or backed up, please remove this template and the entry from copyright examinations page.
I'm not sure if this would qualify as a copyright violation but if you look here, you'll see that Google's cached version of [1] is the exact same text. This may explain the difficulty in simply deciphering what's the point of this (and definitely explains the lack of structure in this). The material seemed to have been copyrighted in 2002 (on the bottom of the page), but is from excerpts from records in the late 1800s. I'm not sure what to think about this? Any ideas? -Ricky81682 06:15, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)
I've done a little bit, such as dividing the history into major sections, on what appears to be quite a big job, considering the size of the article. I have a feeling that a good percentage of the information, while theoretically valuable as history, is actually only indirectly related to the history of the manor itself, and therefore could be removed without injury. Fortunately, there are other places (such as the internet site mentioned above) where the full article could be found, and therefore it seems reasonable to cut this article down, to also thereby make it more like an encyclopedia article. Have at it, ladies and gents, and I will, too! --Cromwellt | Talk22:45, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned above, I've chopped several large chunks that seemed unnecessary out of the article, and reworked and reworded much of what is left. I think the article looks a whole lot better now, and is much more focused on its topic. It could still use more work, but it might be good enough now to remove the cleanup tag. I will leave that judgment in the hands of my fellow wikipedians. --Cromwellt | Talk00:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
By recommendation of a fellow Wikipedian, I will go ahead and remove the cleanup tag, even though there is still more (such as more chopping) that could be done to this page to make it better. --Cromwellt | Talk21:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
.png){kind=small}
