Talk:Kingston upon Hull

Spelling

Please use only British English (e.g. centre, colour, programme). Do not use American English (e.g. center, color, program).

This article and its name

I am really impressed with the changes to this article in recent weeks. Reads very well and does credit to the city. Well done to all involved. One question, isn't the official name of the city Kingston-upon-Hull, rather than the name we use? --(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:34, 18 January 2010 (EST)

As far as I was concerned, the city's common name is just Hull. Does anybody ever call it Kingston? Should be renamed IMO --(WT-en) inas 22:43, 18 January 2010 (EST)

Common name is Hull yes and it could easily be renamed to that. Same goes for a large number of cities where we use the formal names. Almost another a house-keeping task :) --(WT-en) Burmesedays 22:50, 18 January 2010 (EST)

I lived just across the Humber for a while, and I never even knew this town was called Kingston on Hull until I saw this article, and I'm still not really convinced :-) --(WT-en) inas 22:55, 18 January 2010 (EST)

I live across the North sea, and I'm also a question about the city's naming. I come across Kingston Upon Hull and Hull (Humberside). I think they are the same. (WT-en) Rein N. 05:12, 19 January 2010 (EST)

Yes they are. Those categories should be merged. Hull (Humberside), Kingston Upon Hull, Kingston-upon-Hull (the official name) are all the same place. It should probably all be swept into Hull, the common name for the city. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 05:19, 19 January 2010 (EST)

Hull is a disambiguation page here on WT:En, because there is more than one place called Hull all over the world. --(WT-en) Rein N. 06:39, 19 January 2010 (EST)

Ah yeah, see that now. In that case I think the title of this article should be Kingston-upon-Hull, which is the official name I believe. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 07:16, 19 January 2010 (EST)

We have numerous cities called the same thing, and yet that doesn't cause us to redirect to a non-common name. If we believe the city should be called Hull, the existence of a disamb page is no obstacle to doing so. I have no problem with using official names that are common, but this one seems obscure to me. A quick google search shows the Hull City Council, Google Maps which has Hull. OSM uses Hull - unless I'm missing something.. --(WT-en) inas 17:38, 24 January 2010 (EST)

Thanks for your positive comments. The name that appears in the charter of 1st April 1299 (of which I have a facsimile) calls the town 'Kyngeston upon Hull' (viz King's Town, after Edward 1). This became Kingston upon Hull without hyphens. Officail documents don't have the hyphen though many bits put out by the City Council just use 'Hull'. However, Bulmer's Gazetteer of 1892 refers to the town as 'Kingston on Hull' which is not correct. It may be of interest that the official name of Sutton, to the east of Hull, is Sutton upon Hull. There are other Hulls in the world e.g. in Canada (to which I have been) but the correct title of the town in Britain is Kingston upon Hull though within the UK the town is commonly called 'Hull'. European mail and other international mail sometimes uses the full title of Kingston upon Hull. This, I suspect, is because of automatic post code recognition. Anyway, thanks for noting the additions/improvements. (WT-en) Gnomy96)

Interesting history. Still, the usage of the name in your comments, (i.e you call it Hull when speaking informally), I think means that we should also call this Hull. Even if we stick with official names, it would seem like the 'U' should be lower case. --(WT-en) inas 19:41, 4 February 2010 (EST)

Perhaps the title could say 'Hull, properly called Kingston upon Hull, is a major city in the north east of England'. That might 'fix' the name problem. The 'Upon' should have a lower case 'u' ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

Good stories Gnomy:). "Properly" though is it hyphenated or not? I thought so. I.e. Kingston-upon-Hull.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 08:50, 5 February 2010 (EST)

No hypens as far as I can assertain. However, a more important point is that on the web page 'upon' has a capital 'U' which certainly is not correct. Also I'm not sure how a search could be engineered to lead a person to this page if you just Googled 'Hull' as that brings up a miriad of things not connected to the page in question. Anyway thanks Burmesedays for your interest in these matters ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

OK, let's immediately change that clear mistake then. Interestingly, the local council calls it Kingston-upon-Hull (with hyphens) but no-one else seems to! --(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:15, 5 February 2010 (EST)

Re hyphens. Yes Burmesedays I had noticed that the council site, and one or two others, have hyphens but I can't find a non electronic version with them. The one on the web will be 'down to' the 'web master'. Like many such things this current 'hyphenated' discussion has started to concern me and I will go to 'official sources' to unravel what to me is now a 'discomfort'! ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

Google returns this article as the #1 ranking for 'Hull' (on wikivoyage), and the disamb next. Clever search engine, that one. --(WT-en) inas 23:38, 10 February 2010 (EST)

I have requested a city centre map on the shared site. I wrote a lot of the original content back in 2006-07 of which fragments remain and am delighted with the sterling work that has gone into it from all contributors since. Well done everybody. Now let's get up to star status! (WT-en) Radiator4612 21:48, 10 August 2010 (EDT)

This article

It is very good. It is therefore a little crazy to see it at usable status and not up at guide. The reason for that is purely the sleep listings. If someone could put in the contact details and little bit of blurb about the hotels, then this article would go straight up to guide status. --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:04, 7 February 2010 (EST)

Will give that some thought ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

Does anyone know why there is a delay (if thats what it is) between editing and the appearance of the changes on the web. When reopening the page next day changes which seem to have been made say on the late 9th Feb don't seem to have been uploaded. However, when going back into login/edit sequence they still appear on the editing board dispite the page having been saved. ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

That's an issue with the IB cache servers and an irritating one. You can nearly alwys get the current version up by going to edit and hitting the purge cache link at the bottom of the edit page.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:49, 10 February 2010 (EST)

Yes, it's probably above 'Usable'. Who decides ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

There is no decision procedure for what is and is not a guide article. If any article is promoted, it will be get knocked back to usable if it is not up to scratch. I think this article is excellent and once it has some fully completed hotel listings (website, address, price, phone, brief description), you could safely put it up to guide.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 21:02, 10 February 2010 (EST)

I agree. --(WT-en) inas 21:15, 10 February 2010 (EST)

Thanks for all encouragement. Still things to add as well as more photos. Have emailed Hull (or 'ull as it sometimes called!) City Council about hypens in their web page! Await reply! ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

I've actually emailed them about 'hyphens'!((WT-en) Gnomy96)

I await the outcome :). A couple of other things about this aticle,. It is remarkably lacking in website urls. None for any of the attractions and very few for hotels. That ought to be put right. Also the correct format for a url is with the http:// and inside [ ]. And those great trails you have detailed under Get around, would be better as walking itineraries in the Do section I think. I will make that change.--[[User:(WT-en) Burmesedays|]Burmesedays] 09:27, 14 February 2010 (EST)

Burmesedays--Re hyphens --checked trying to find correct HCC 'hyphen' dept. Treacle running! Re web sites. I put some in but not active as I don't know how it is done. Be my guest with walking. Re web pages can you explain how its done or point me to the correct place or is it just as you said above ie all inside [ ] or can you do that for me with the ones already in? Some editing things are not easy to find --viz just spent some time working out how to enlarge 'Charterhouse'. Also was concerned about the positioning of See, was it enclosed in two lines or had two lines above it? What's your time difference to GMT. ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

I am GMT +8, when I am at home. On hotel listings here are two examples of WT "acceptable" formats for a guide article. The templated version is preferred (just select the relevant template from the bottom of the edit screen, in this case Hotels) but not compulsory. Please do ask if anything is unclear.

Non-templated

• Villa Hanis Boutique Hotel [1], Tel: +62 274 867 567. An elegant original Javanese wooden house, fully restored into a modern standard Boutique Villa. It is located in Jalan Palagan, 600m north of the Hyatt hotel and about 5 kilometers from the center of Yogyakarta.Villa Hanis has a 200 m2 private garden with private pool and view on the majestic Mount Merapi.

Templated

• <sleep name="Palmer's Lodge Hostel" alt="" address="40 College Cres NW3 5LB" directions="tube: Swiss Cottage" phone="+44 20 7483 8470" url="http://www.palmerslodge.co.uk/" checkin="" checkout="" price="Dorm beds from £21, double private rooms £77" lat="" long="" email="reception@palmerslodge.co.uk" fax="">A high quality, multi award-winning hostel in a converted Victorian mansion. Has private rooms as well as a number of dorm options. Offers free WiFi, breakfast included in the price and nice touches such as serving free trade coffee only.</sleep> --(WT-en) Burmesedays 10:15, 16 February 2010 (EST)

Too many images

This article is getting to where it has 3-4 times as many images as it should. Suggestions on what to axe? (WT-en) Texugo 09:53, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Agreed. User:(WT-en) Gnomy96 has done fantastic work on this article, but there are way too many images. I think we should leave it to him to cut them back.--(WT-en) Burmesedays 09:56, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Oh dear, 3-4 times -- those comments are a bit disappointing!!! Pity. I thought the photos helped to break up the text and act as pointers to what can be seen and where you physically are in the place. In my various travels round cities and writing diaries etc. photos, drawings etc have always been an aid to getting to grips with a place. See the Michelin Guides. Mind you I wouldn't mind some of them being smaller (I have tried) to make them less intrusive but have yet to get to grips with that aspect but that may be the answer. Similarly the connection to web pages of hotels. ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

No real worries, but you do need to lose half of them I reckon. Cheer yourself up by changing the article status to guide. Great work. Any news on the hyphens? :) --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:04, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Sorry to disappoint, but we have an established policy on this. Please see this policy. It states:

"Image use in articles should be kept at the minimum necessary to get across a point or impression. Travellers may be using Wikivoyage from networks with very low bandwidth. In some countries, an Internet café with 10 computers connected to a single 56k modem is fairly common, even travelers in developed countries can often be limited to 10k mobile GPRS access. This doesn't mean no images, just no more images than are necessary"

(WT-en) Texugo 11:05, 25 February 2010 (EST)

If deleting it is too painful Gnomy, let us I know and I will do a cull for you. -(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:13, 25 February 2010 (EST)

When I just looked at the page all the images where under each other on the right (anyone moved them?) which is not where they where. I have just replaced them in the position where I left them which looks better. As I said I think the thing to do is to first reduce some in size which is what I intended at first so don't cull yet! You computer literate folk may know how do you alter the size? Please tell. If size is the real prob they can be reduced in byte size. ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

Noticed that the photos rearranged (left and right) have just gone back to all right which looks terrible. Is this a glitch or is it being changed. Please tell. ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

I have moved them. It is standard practice around here that all images go on the right. (WT-en) Texugo 11:34, 25 February 2010 (EST)

That 'rule' or practice seems a little unfortunate. Is it a Wikivoyage rule or practice? ((WT-en) Gnomy96)

It is an established practice which holds true even for all our best articles. It doesn't appear to be enshrined in policy except for an unfinished style page here and the encouragement here to always use a thumb, which defaults on the right. I am not aware of any cases in which the community has agreed to make an exception. If it looks terrible, it's just because there are far too many images. (WT-en) Texugo 11:56, 25 February 2010 (EST)

There is a good reason for this rule (and practice and rules are basically the same here—both represent a consensus, one implicit and the other explicit—and to change a near-universal, accepted practice, one must start a policy discussion to build a new consensus, which is the same process required to change a policy). The reason is that left aligned images make it hard (for me at least) to quickly skim an article—you cannot simply run down the left side of the page for headers and names. Left aligned images can also break up text in unpredictable ways given the different display resolutions and screen sizes used by different Wikivoyageers.

As of right now, there might be just a few too many (really nice, high quality) photos, but it will look much better if you space them out more evenly. That will also make it clearer whether there are too many, or if it just looks that way because they are so tightly clustered. --(WT-en) Peter ^Talk 12:08, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Personally, I'd like to see no more than one great photo of each attraction (some of them have 3 or 4 pictures), and make them a little bigger. (WT-en) Texugo 12:13, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Argh - I see this has been written by people who love Hull just a little bit too much. The restaurant section really needs revising. There is no way that all of those restaurants are 'fantastic' or '#insert superlative here'. I am from Hull, so please don't shoot me down. The travel guide should actually help people to make informed choices.

Hull round II

We never really came to a firm conclusion on the name of this article (see above). However, there seems to be strong consensus that Hull is very much the commonly used name, and I would therefore like to propose we change the name. Kingston upon Hull (and common variant mis-spellings with hyphens etc) would become redirects.--(WT-en) burmesedays 05:42, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

Keep it at "Kingston upon Hull" while its full name is rarely spoken of it is used in sources like maps and encyclopedias and it is also used on signs and some travel guides furthermore as noted "Hull" is a DAB anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)