Talk:Little Coxwell

England Low‑importance

	England portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Church

I'm not local and I don't know when exactly the church was founded but KIng John gave the manor of Little Coxwell to the Cistercians in a charter dated 1203, and the monastery founded at Faringdon that included these lands was moved to Beaulieu in 1204 - so if they did found the church it would have been in the thirteenth century. Davedeslave (talk) 17:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

County

The village is still located in Berkshire, not Oxfordshire as many try to insist. The Local Government Act 1972 redefined only ADMINISTRATIVE boundaries, not the actual county boundaries. The legislation states clearly that it was moving only these administrative boundaries which had been set by earlier legislation, and a government statement published in The Times on 1st April 1974 confirmed as much. Unfortunately, a large portion of the population has been bullied into believing that villages and towns were "moved" into new counties by this act, when in fact nothing of the sort happened. The local authorities are complicit in this charade, since they are interested primarily in promoting only what they regard as "their" territory.

Unfortunately, those who refuse to accept this fact appear to be the ones who have established "Wikipedia policy guidelines" and are so intent on perpetuating the incorrect information that they also completely ignore other Wikipedia rules when it suits their agenda, by removing valid information about the true county when it is supported by legislation and refusing to cite the legislation they believe actually moved the real county boundaries (they cannot cite it because it doesn't exist).

For more information, see the website of the Association of British counties: http://www.abcounties.co.uk 87.112.142.201 (talk) 16:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you are referred to WP:UKCOUNTIES and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about counties. Dave.Dunford (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions for counties are often discussed, and the outcome has always been the same: use current counties. I suggest you open a discussion at the talk page of the UK-wide geography project, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography. Mr Stephen (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Berkshire IS the current county, as it has been for centuries. It is the ridiculous assertion in "policy" that the ADMINISTRATIVE areas created/altered in 1974 are current ACTUAL counties which is wrong. But it seems that despite citations of legislation and even government confirmation of the fact, editors who stand by the incorrect policy are more interested in perpetuating the misinformation than with accuracy. They keep claiming that they are right, yet will not cite anything to back up those claims - Except for their own policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.142.201 (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to UKGEO. Mr Stephen (talk) 18:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Little Coxwell. 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:

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: 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) 20:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]