Naming, Content, and Parents of HM Coast Guard Stations

Question

There have been several G2G questions in the last few weeks concerning categories for HM Coastguard Stations. When I took a look at the category list after the latest post, I noted the following points:
1. There could be duplicates. For example, is HMCG No 13 Hole Haven a duplicate, or possibly a subcategory, of HMCG Hole Haven?
2. There is some ambiguity. For example, there is HMCG Newtown IoW and HMCG Newtown.
3. The names often give no indication of the location. For example, where is the last mentioned HMCG Newtown?
4. There are no parent location categories (at least, not on those I checked).
5. There are no CIBs  (at least, not on those I checked).

Therefore, I'd like to make an outline proposal for changes as follows:
1. Add structure CIBs to all the categories. These would have the fields "parent=HM Coastguard Stations" and "location=place, county". The coordinate and date fields could also be filled in.
2. Add the county to the name, so that, for example. the aforesaid HMCG Newtown category would become HMCG Newtown, Hampshire.

Comments and further suggestions would be much appreciated.

Answer 1

I would agree with this, as there needs to be some consistency.

Comments

Well Natalie, I was considering asking someone to check all 129 entries looking for and correcting typos.  I know that there will be sime.  If the PTB do decide on making changes to the advice given when the categories were first set up, then by all means have the relevant progect farm out the work amongst its volunteers.

As it is, the advice on ''How to'' should hopefully remove any confusion about which and where the Staion is.

---

This post did not specify that the duplication details. What I agree with is that the location should be added if there is duplication of a name. (which is the way it's done across WikiTree in categories...if names are too similar and can be easily confused, they should be distinguished by a location. This is why Cemeteries have locations in the name. Do you know how many St. Mary's Cemeteries there are? )

---

Fairy Nuff, but.  

The original instructions put up by someone called Durbin 702 stated: Station categories should follow this naming scheme: [[Category:Station Name]]. No location is needed UNLESS the name is repeated . 

Someone answering a question suggested that to ensure that the stations were listed in alphabetic order the text with in the category description should be treated thus: <nowiki>[[Category:HM Coastguard Stations|###]]</nowiki>  where ### is kept short, unless it is the same as another station name, inwhich case additioinal characters should be included to ensure that they list alhabetivally.

Now if the original advice is to be changed, OK, but the proposal of using structure CIBs went over my head, I have no idea what they are, so someone else will have to pick that up.

However, opening the HMCG Category does tell one where the station stood, and opening the referenced map shows one exactly where, so is the proposed change to 129 current categorys worth the candle?

---

Nick, I'm Durbin-702, and I lead Military and War. The Coastguards don't necessarily fall under that project, but I'm unsure about the UK coastguards. At some point it seems they were affilitated with the Royal Navy. (In the US our Coast Guard is under Dept of Transportation, but during a wartime situation, they may fall under Department of Defense.)  Anyway, it's unfortunately true that many WikiTree users don't look at the category page; they simply choose the category from the picking tool, even if they are unsure if they are picking the correct category.

---

I know who you are  and you are allowed to change your mind.

There is a good Wikki on the UK coastguards that has been copied onto our Wikki,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Majesty%27s_CoastguardThat states that the coastguards were formed in 1822, In 1821 a committee of inquiry recommended that responsibility for the Preventive Water Guard should be transferred from HM Treasury to the Board of Customs. The Board of Custom and the Board of Excise each had their own long-established preventive forces: shore-based Riding Officers and sea-going Revenue Cruisers. The committee recommended the consolidation of these various related services. The Treasury agreed, and in a Minute dated 15 January 1822 directed that they be placed under the authority of the Board of Customs and named the Coast Guard. 

The Preventative water guard (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterguard#History) were armed  paramiliutaries run by a government department, as were all of the related organisations.  After the RN handed the Coastguars over, they continued to be a paramiltary force.  So there is a strong argument for M&W to keep them.

Regards

Nick

---

I removed the HM Coastguard from the "Royal Navy" parent category, after discussion with colleagues responsible for categorisation in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, as it seemed to us that the coastguard service has been civilian for most of its existence: either under the UK Treasury or the Department for Transport. So it is currently located as an agency of the United Kingdom. However, there is no "United Kingdom" Project, so if the category is going to fall within the purview of a Project, that would need to be "Military and War". If that Project doesn't want it, it would need to be managed by the ad hoc liaison group of the categorisation coordinators of the England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales Projects.

---

Fair enough, what will be will be.

It must have been a thin line between Military or not when one considers that they were always in unirorm, with officers, and were armed by the UK government.

---

Nataly commented : "Anyway, it's unfortunately true that many WikiTree users don't look at the category page; they simply choose the category from the picking tool, even if they are unsure if they are picking the correct category."

The problem with adding more info to the Category name, as is done with Cemetries, is that HMCG Stations were often at the back of beyond, miles from any town such as Census or GRO districts towns, so adding town and County will not help much.  The best we could do is N E W S coast, County, to narrow the search area if following the cemetry logic, or perhaps N,E,W,S, County, then name might make using the categorisation tool less fraught.  e.g. [HMCG, E Sussex, Birling Gap] but that would play havoc with the alphabetic listing on the category page.

Answer 2

You may find it useful to consult Genuki's list of coastguard stations in England, Wales, Scotland and Isle of Man https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/Coastguards/Table

Comments

Thanks Andrew. There is also this interesting map

---

That Genuki document is a usefull source, but as it is collated from census data at 10 year intervals, it may not be complete.  Use the place of any childrens birth as well when identifying whaich staion is relevant.

---

That MCA map is a modern list (the MCA dates from 1990), of little relevance to 19th Century profiles.  I would not rely on it unless for later 20th C profiles.

Answer 3

No 13 Hole Haven was a Watch Vessel She was sold in 1870 for breaking up, it was replced by a shore based CG Station as explaned in the category notes. The date of the Boatmans service decides which station they were posted to.

Newtlown? Its notes state: This category groups profiles of persons associated with HMCG Newtown, a coastguard station at the mouth of the Hamble River, Hampshire. 

The notes on the upper level catgory state "Station categories should follow this naming scheme: [[Category:Station Name]]. No location is needed UNLESS the name is repeated ". so that is what has been done.