Talk:Whitby

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Whitby article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

Whitby has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 12, 2011	Peer review	Reviewed
October 28, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

UK geography Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Yorkshire High‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Whitby is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Fisheries and Fishing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing 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.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Findnote

Semi-protection

I have semi-protected the article due to ongoing vandalism. Semi-protection prevents edits from unregistered users (IP addresses), as well as edits from any account that is not autoconfirmed (is at least four days old and has ten or more edits to Wikipedia) or confirmed. IP and new users can request edits to a semi-protected page by proposing them on its talk page, using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template if necessary to gain attention. New users may also request the confirmed user right by visiting Requests for permissions. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:24, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can this article be un-semi-protected? Article has been semi-protected for quite awhile from what I can tell (2011). I would like to make an addition to the Literature section to include the novella titled "Whitby".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.46.113.120 (talk• contribs) 08:04, 27 March 2013‎

Did you by any chance see the section above about semi protection? Creating an account and becoming autoconfirmed will let you edit. If for some reason you don't want to create an account you could post it to the talk page and ask another editor to add it to the article. While this isn't exactly what you were asking for I hope this helps. Thanks Fraggle81 (talk) 17:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like articles being protected from editing, however, thist article - perhaps because of Whitby's association with Dracula - attracts a fair bit of harmful edits. Protection had been previously placed, then lifted, and had to be placed again. It is unfortunate, but some articles are best left protected. In addition, this is a Good Article, and is in decent shape. As Fraggle says, people can register an account, or make an edit suggestion on this page. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 07:15, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request 24 October 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The lead is over-long, resulting in the TOC being too-far downstream. Suggest a new simple heading ==Overview== be inserted after the second sentence, ending in "... of the North Riding of Yorkshire".

This would align the lengthy TOC with the similar-proportioned infobox, reducing the wsp. I have read the Talk section relating to protection since 2011. Thanks.--86.29.222.228 (talk) 14:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a post-script to the above message, I was/am driving by with an interest only in the two railway stations which I found buried under the 'Transport' heading with substantial paragraph(s) containing many sentences but with the necessary internal links; sub-headings for ===Road=== and ===Rail=== would not be a detriment, excepting the addition to the TOC-length.

SilkTork may wish to reconsider if seven-year/ongoing protection assumes too much BF.--86.29.222.228 (talk) 13:22, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into unprotecting after Halloween. SilkTork (talk) 14:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is a bit untidy and needs tightening, but it is not too long. See WP:Lead for some information on the purpose of the lead, and a guidance as to length (MOS:LEADLENGTH). The lead serves as as a shorter version of the full article, highlighting the main points. Most readers only read the lead because all they want is a quick overview of the topic. Cutting the lead after the second sentence would reduce the lead to something very unhelpful and would frustrate 90% of those visiting the page.

The Transport section is not long enough to justify having sub-sections. That would inhibit flow and readability for the majority of readers. See MOS:BODY.

Thanks for raising these issues in this edit request, but on examination the requests do not follow Wikipedia guidelines, so are not being implemented. SilkTork (talk) 15:07, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]