Talk:Wentbridge

The connection between Wentbridge and Robin Hood

I have just blocked User:Siggasonswein for a period of three hours because of what appeared to be a developing edit war over his introduction of material on this subtopic, which was most recently reverted here. I have invited Siggasonswein to discuss his desired changes here before reintroducing them. I don't know much about either Wentbridge or about Robin Hood, but I note that a google search for "The Origins and Development of the Legend of Robin Hood" discovers no wide acclamation for a paper with that title. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Wikipedia's Wentbridge page

Hi All,

First of all, Thank you for directing my commentary to the Wentbridge Talk Page, I now understand its intended purpose.

In addition, I would like to thank for your advice, I am taking it on board as best as I can. As things stand, I have completed the final edit of the Wentbridge Wikipedia page. You will note that whilst I have used my local expertise to enhance the page, I have cited both primary and published secondary sources in order to ensure that the information contained on the page is properly referenced using the MHRA style. It is important to note that I have NOT referenced my own original research in any way, as I formerly had, or made any reference to my original research during the main body of the text, thus preventing me from breaking Wikipedia's 'No Original Research' policy, which was the original issue raised by many. A BIG Thank You to both Acroterion and Acabashi for kindly taking the time to explain my errors here, I know that I was slow on the uptake ! Please accept my deepest apologies. In addition, I have endeavored to write the material in a neutral tone, thus avoiding essay-type discussion.

In particular, I have expanded the information on the geography of Wentbridge and added relevant 'topographical' details. You will note that my references to Robin Hood in this section of the Wikipedia page are minimal, and I feel, relevant to Wentbridge and its environs. I have also expanded the history article on the Wikipedia page, but only minimally. Finally, I have provided two paragraphs detailing the local history of Anglo-Saxon Wentbridge and its connections to Robin Hood, providing references to original medieval manuscripts and published secondary source material as verification of these details.

By using my local knowledge to enhance the information listed in the 'Geography and Topography' section, and adding slightly to the 'History' section, I have increased the overall length of the page. By doing so, the specific local history knowledge that I have written pertaining to Robin Hood no longer overwhelms the content of the page, which I know was a complaint of Acroterion.

N.B.

BB23, please note, as I formerly stated, I have removed the link to Wikipedia'a Robin Hood page and replaced it with a citation to a published academic text. I can only assume that you were looking at an old edit, the alteration has been made. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

I hope that these actions meet to your high standards, but if there are any further suggestions as to how I can improve my submission, please advise accordingly.

Scott — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siggasonswein (talk • contribs) 15:29, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Massive reverts

I don't know what versions were before, but the last revert was of a well-referenced version. If you have specific objections casting doubt on the added text, please write them here.

As far as I understand, the newcomer refers now to independent sources, i.e., the objection about reference to an unrecognized publication was no longer valid. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I am a 100% independent editor, never edited anything about Robin Hood. By attention was attracted by WT:BOLD. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The objection is no longer that he is citing his own material directly, but simply that the material does not belong on this page. It is egregiously WP:UNDUE. The user has been told this by more than one person, but they see it as a campaign to censor him and his "expert knowledge" (obsession) of Robin Hood.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I see. Still, some parts of his contribution seem usable. By the way, there is nothing wrong with obsession, as long as it does not interfere with commos sense. After all we ourselves are obsessed (guess with what :-) Staszek Lem (talk) 23:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I have a terrible sweet tooth. Worse, I like expensive sweets. Does that count?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it counts: you probably spend too much time on wikipedia and therefore earn too little to indulge yourselves in expensive sweets. So you become frustrated and start biting other wikipedians who jump in here only occasionally, and spend all their time eating your fav sweets instead.. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Siggasonswein: : Please read WP:UNDUE and WP:COATRACK guidelines and think for yourself that the amount of detail about Robin Hood is disproportional compared to a contested occasional reference to an old ballad. Some pieces of your text are usable. There is a common andvise it such cases. If met with objections, please add you text in small pieces. A small piece is easier to incorporate, to make them match wikipedia guidelines, and easier to present specific objections. In addition to the mentioned objections of WP:UNDUE, I noticed repetitions and excessive verbosity. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Please evaluate which parts of the addition are acceptable (in my uneducated opinion, there are some). Staszek Lem (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Most of the first paragraph of "Geography and Topography". Perhaps the last paragraph. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd suggest leaving the geography alone, since in most articles on locales it's a straightforward discussion of the location without a lot of commentary on side issues. There could easily be a four-sentence paragraph on Robin Hood related material on its own, as I've suggested several times. Please resist the urge to turn the article on Wentbridge into an article on Robin Hood. Acroterion (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

re: "on locales it's a straightforward discussion": that's what I had in mind when I spoke of excessive verbosity. Still, some of the addition here has a direct relation to the locality. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

re: "four-sentence paragraph on Robin Hood". This is a problem with many subjects. I agree that a considerable part belongs to the topic "Robin Hood" and something may only be summarized here. I am pretty sure there are TONS of scholarly research about Robin Hood, and for a newcomer it is difficult to find a good place where and how to incorporate a new addition, and what is also important, how to summarize it. I would strongly suggest @Siggasonswein: to discuss this in talk:Robin Hood. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The guideline on summary style contains good guidance for these situations. Acroterion (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

And obviously Acroterion's advice was ignored. Tagged until the entire history of the place isn't about Hood. Where's the Sheriff when you need him? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Photos

Hi, I have tried to introduce photos to the Wentbridge page, but they are not showing properly, can somebody please help to display them. Thanks

• Hi Siggasonswein, is it the image you uploaded earlier? i.e to the side here

  

Hi, yes

@Siggasonswein: I've fixed one image here. One of the best ways to learn Wiki markup is to find an article which contains similar content, hit edit, and look for the markup so you can adapt it. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Yes, I think, if I understand you correctly, that you are suggesting that I've overdone it with the pictures and given undue weight to the article. To be honest, I had thought that myself and therefore will edit it appropriately. Also, I forgot to supply the reference to the work of Brian Lewis, a local historian, and so I will add that too.

ScottSiggasonswein (talk) 11:07, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Dobson

The present ref no.9 rendered as 'Dobson, Dobson and Taylor, p.22.' doesn't work for the reader who will not no where to go to verify the text. Is the 'Dobson' the same as the present ref no.4, in which case it needs to be doubled to that ref. I have removed white spaces and encyclopedic language per WP:WORDS. Also the edit summary from the next add and revert edit states: "tacitly accepted by professional historians" - this admitted weak attribution is not good enough for "official". Acabashi (talk) 12:06, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Acabashi, yes, that is an error at what was formerly footnote 9, and Dobson is repeated, I shall amend. I have already referenced Dobson and Taylor, and so the average reader should, hopefully, be able to follow the thread of the footnotes. Will that suffice.

Thanks for doing the necessary editing to increase the quality of what I have written.

Scott

N.B.

blue plaque

noun

noun: blue plaque; plural noun: blue plaques

(in the UK) a round blue sign attached to the facade of a building to commemorate its historical significance, typically giving the name of a famous or eminent person who once lived in or near the building. Siggasonswein (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Also, I have double checked the term tacit in the dictionary, and I believe that I have misused it. The online Cambridge dictionary says that the term tacit means that something is 'understood without being expressed directly'. Therefore, I am wrong to use this term, because the notion of Robin Hood's Barnsdale heritiage, and in particular, his connections to Wentbridge, ARE directly spoken of in all of the texts that I have cited. Sorry, I was mistaken to use that term.Siggasonswein (talk) 13:41, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Robin overload and reference issue

Why is "Robin Hood" as a phrase stated 36 times in this article about a location? This is getting slightly rediuclous. Also reference/citation #1 (currently) needs massive editing. It appears to be a collection of many different sources.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 13:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Loriendrew,

You are of course correct, to use the phrase "Robin Hood" thirty-six times would indicate that the article has been very poorly written. However, I have counted the time that the phrase "Robin Hood" appears in the text of the main article, and it amounts to twelve, with the phrase used in one sub-heading. Alas, the the overwhelming majority of occasions when the phrase "Robin Hood" occurs is in reference to recognized names, i.e. the ballads entitled, 'A Gest of Robin Hood" and "Robin Hood and the Monk" or place-name locations such as "Robin Hood's Well" and "Robin Hood's Stone". I am not sure how to edit the article in order to avoid using the given "Robin Hood" names, but I am open to suggestion. There are however a couple of instances where the phrase "Robin Hood" is used generally and could be altered to, for example, "the outlaw".

You are correct about the list of citations in the opening footnote, it is very excessive. However, Acabashi directly requested a list of multiple sources that prove that Wentbridge is universally recognized by academics as being the 'official' home of Robin Hood, and as such I have provided that extensive list.

Hi Neil,

As per our group discussion the other night, I have added the information pertaining to Robin Hood that you object to. I must say that I am perplexed, as you yourself appeared to suggest that that section was fine. Either way, I have communicated with Yngvadottir, who intervened in this matter, and he has directly stated that a couple of brief paragraphs on Robin Hood's connection to Wentbridge is acceptable. I have endeavored to comply with this. But if you have any suggestions on how this section of the page can be reduced, whilst at the same time putting the point across, please share them. To that end, I have supplied page numbers to citations in order to enable experienced editors to reduce the word count.Siggasonswein (talk) 14:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I was referring to paragraphs in the "Geography and Topography" section. In my opinion, matters relating to Robin Hood should take up no more than four or five sentences in total. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:38, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Dear All,

Might I suggest that anybody who is still struggling to grasp the important part that the fifteenth century Robin Hood sources play in the history of medieval Wentbridge watch the opening few minutes of this Channel 4 documentary:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/fact-or-fiction/4od#2932721

As it ought to help to clarify the issue to the uninitiated.

Siggasonswein (talk) 15:27, 22 July 2014 (UTC)==N.B. Neil==

Neil, please note that your thread reads,

Oh, I see. Group consensus was that the information pertaining to Robin Hood was too long, and so I have halved it. To that end, both Staszek Lem and Yngvadottir have acknowledged that it is difficult to condense the subject of Robin Hood to four or five sentences. Obviously, there is a slit consensus of opinion here, and so I ask that you please either let the article stand, or use your experience to edit it.

By the way, have you had a chance to watch the video that I posted yet?

I have let the content stand. I merely added tags to it. I'm waiting to see if editors more sympathetic to your position chime in because if I edit the article, you probably won't like the results. As for the show (it's blocked here), as it focuses on Robin Hood, of course it's going to emphasize that part of history. Just as a show on the Battle of Winwaed could produce paragraphs of content on that skirmish. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

• I've done a conservative copyedit. It would be nice to have ISBNs for all those books, but I note that most specific points now have page numbers. At this point the to-and-fro of editing appears to have considerably condensed the Robin Hood material, which is what I was hoping would happen, and I've made some further cuts to the exposition. There remains the big issue that the lead paragraph still states that Wentbridge is "one of a number of locations that might have connections to the legend of Robin Hood", but the body of the article now presents it as a settled issue that Wentbridge was the home of Robin Hood. What does the scholarship actually say? Are there medievalists who still reject this localisation? I suspect so, and I note that the blue plaque by no means says it's the official home of Robin Hood. The claim needs to be presented as a theory held by many scholars, or if as Siggasonswein says above, it's "universally recognized", there needs to be an excellent citation of someone pronouncing the issue settled. ... Less importantly, the significance of the Saylis needs to be explained in the text. It's not at all clear unless one reads the inscription on the plaque. I'm sure there are other issues (if the article clearly explains the Great North Road vs. the modern road designation(s), I missed it) but that big one and that small one are the urgent tasks, in my view. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi All, and thanks for the input that you have made to date

In response to the latest commentary, I would begin by apologizing for not having the ISBN details of the cited texts. I have copy-pasted the bibliographic citations from the Master of Art thesis that I wrote into the article to ensure that it is both fully and accurately referenced, and I have provided page numbers where I have them. Alas, it was not necessary to provide ISBN numbers to books for the purposes of my academic research and so I do not have these details to hand. But I am endeavoring to enhance the Robin Hood Wikipedia page and so I will, over time, attain those ISBN numbers and insert them into the necessary pages.

I agree that the to-and-fro of editing has condensed the Robin Hood related material greatly (predominantly through educating me in the process of writing for Wikipedia), and I would thank all contributors for their efforts. I'm glad to see that by working constructively with editors I have been able to use my knowledge to enhance the page. Nevertheless, Yngvadottir has correctly indicated that there is still room for improvement and I will work to make the suggested alterations happen (I'm currently on long-term sick leave having recently suffered a stroke and so I have plenty of time on my hands).

On the matter of providing evidence regarding the locale of the outlaw's home address, I would point to the earliest medieval manuscripts, which themselves actually state that Barnsdale is Robin Hood's official home. In one fifteenth century ballad entitled, 'Robin Hood and Guy of Gisbourne', the outlaw tells his nemesis that 'My name is Robin Hood of Barnsdale - A fellow you have long sought'. Six centuries ago the fact that Robin Hood originated from the Wentbridge region in Barnsdale would not have raised an eyebrow. In the Middle Ages the phrase 'Robin Hood in Barnsdale stood' was a legal saying used to indicate that something was a well established fact. The ballads are very specific about the area, making direct reference to the Saylis, which is a very precise topographical location found only at Wentbridge. The writer of the ballads knew the locality, and sets the earliest Robin Hood stories in the region. It might surprise some people to learn that the Robin Hood stories originate from Wentbridge in Barnsdale and not from Sherwood, but Robin Hood's connection to Sherwood Forest in Nottinghamshire has been both romanticized and exaggerated by Hollywood movie directors. In contrast, historians have known of Robin Hood's Wentbridge heritage for a good few years. Consequently, English Heritage have placed a Blue Plaque, which in England is traditionally placed on a building to recognize that a famous person once lived in or near to the location. Therefore, the Wentbridge plaque does not in itself need to directly say that the village is 'the official home of Robin Hood', because the very act of placing the plaque at that location in itself signifies that the locality is recognized as being the home of Robin Hood. That said, I am sure that I will be able to find a direct reference written by a leading academic to reinforce the point that Wentbridge in Barnsdale is Robin Hood's home, and when I do I will insert it onto the page. After all, when I sat my viva for the award of Master of Arts by research degree, the external examiner, Professor David Crouch directly told me that no professional historian would be surprised at Robin Hood's Wentbridge / Barnsdale heritage since Sir J.C. Holt published the original edition of Robin Hood.

I agree that the significance of the Saylis is not adequately identified on the page, and will amend this as necessary. Alas, I do not feel that I am the right person to give specific details pertaining to the differences between the Great North Road vs. the modern road designation(s), as my expertise directly relates to Robin Hood and I do not wish to start editing issues of which I have no knowledge.

Yours,

Scott

Siggasonswein (talk) 14:37, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

==Requested citation for Robin Hood's Wentbridge origin'

I have searched through just a handful of the many academic works published on the subject of Robin Hood and to date the best quotation to Robin Hood's home that I have found reads,

'Robin Hood lived on the edge of Barnsdale Forest where Saylis and Wentbridge are feasible locations for his robberies'. Thereafter the work gives a citation to published academic works, which universally acknowledge that Robin Hood lived in the Wentbridge region of the medieval forest of Barnsdale.

I shall keep searching if a better quotation is needed, otherwise, in light of the fact that English Heritage have placed a Blue Plaque on the bridge that crosses the River Went to acknowledge that the village was Robin Hood's home, and the fact that I have provided a citation listed in a published academic work, I would indicate that it is necessary to revert the page so that it once again reads 'Robin Hood's official home'.

References

Doh, I can be pretty stupid!

It has just dawned on me that, of course, no historian has as yet proved that Robin Hood ever lived, and so I guess that one can't say that he 'lived' at Wentbridge. Only that if ever he did exist, he would have lived at Wentbridge.Siggasonswein (talk) 21:01, 23 July 2014 (UTC)