Talk:Wood Green
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Notable people associated with Wood Green
[edit]I can't find references for any of these. I suspect they are largely, if not entirely spurious. I propose deleting the whole section, as it is in any case not very informative, even in the unlikely event that it is accurate. I'll do this in a few days unless there are objections.. Wood green (talk) 18:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- This list is just growing again - these lists will always grow if there's just a notable people section - best way to have properly referenced additions is to have ONLY a category which means Wood Green info needs to be added to the person's article. It's worked well on Crouch End article. So am going to do the same here. ||||
One of London's most important shopping hubs
[edit]Do me a favour, its a crap hole and half the shops are pound shops. How can it be thought of on of the most important, what are the others, which is more important, which less?212.35.97.195 10:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
The area is great for shopping, unfortunatley not inspirational planning from Haringey Council, and not a fantastic piece of sustainable planning. What the council need to realise is that if they plonk a shopping mall on a residential street, there is going to be increased traffic and they need to deal with the consequences. Also they should never have been allowed to tear down the beautiful Edwardian theatre and archictecture to build it. Having said that, there is a lot of renovation and regeneration going on in Wood Green, led by residents & business rather than the council, which is having a positive impact! The council need to get on board and help rather than hinder these efforts
- Isn't the issue that Wood Green has been identified as one of the major district centres in the London Plan? If you want to understand why its regarded as important and understand the planners' thinking, try that.Eyedubya (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
First ATM
[edit]What is the source for the "world's first ATM was in Wood Green" claim (that I just removed)? I don't think it's true, because this very afternoon I walked past a plaque in Enfield Town saying *that* was where the first ATM was. - Khendon
- I also heard that the first ATM was in Enfield. jt_spratt
Removed quote
[edit]Removed the quote below: can't find any reference for it and find it hard to believe (I've been to that butcher's - they're not bad, but finest steak in London it ain't). Certainly the place is not "famous in the culinary world".
"It is also famous in the culinary world; indeed Gordon Ramsay prides himself on sourcing the finest steak in London from the Food Court located to the rear of the formentioned Shopping City."
no, that was true (I guess POV, or something) when Ramsay was living in Crouch End i the early nineties. The reference comes from a minor article in the G2 about twelve years ago. The quote should be re-instated with that proviso.
Ricin plot
[edit]Could the Ricin Plot become a subsection of the History as i personally no longer would count it as current affairs. Jt spratt 12:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Public open space in Wood Green
[edit]This article needs a section on public open space in Wood Green, such as Woodside Park (currently threatened with redevelopment into a backdrop for a new Civic Centre for Haringey) and all the other places that don't even have names on Google Maps, but are well-used and much loved. Eyedubya (talk) 09:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- @Eyedubya: Now done. I've also added an article on Woodside Park (including adding a disambig page) and added names to unnamed spaces on Google Maps - though the way things work these days they may ever show up as labels but will show up in search.HughJLF (talk) 17:02, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Today section
[edit]This section seems just to be a miscellaneous section with some promotional text. Perhaps it could be modified to fit into the geography section or an Economy section as per WP:UKTOWNS. Also the Notable appearances section looks like a Trivia section. Grim23★ 23:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I moved the today section to this page in case some the info can be re-added when the article has grown abit more:
thumb|Wood Green shopping mall
thumb|Wood Green Showcase cinema at night
The area has also established a reputation for being vibrant and multicultural, and it has been estimated that nearly two hundred languages are spoken in the area.(ref - Haringey's English Language Page).
The Wood Green International Short Film Festival, a film festival showing short British and international films, was founded in 2002. As well as screening films, it hosts discussion groups and workshops for both established and up-and-coming filmakers. The next festival is in Mar 2009.(ref -[1] Wood Green International Short Film Festival)
R.E.M.'S album Fables of the Reconstruction and The Smiths single "Panic", were both recorded at Livingston Recording Studios in Wood Green. (ref -Livingston Recording Studios London) Bjork's 'Debut' was also recorded in Wood Green. Buena Vista Social Club, was recorded in Cuba but mixed in Wood Green. Artists who have recorded in Wood Green include the Libertines, Shakira, Ry Cooder, John Martyn, Jamie Cullum, Youssou N'Dour, Ash, Ronan Keating amongst others.
Grim23★ 00:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Wood Green. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141220031101/http://data.london.gov.uk/2011-census-ward-pop to http://data.london.gov.uk/2011-census-ward-pop
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Boundaries
[edit]A lot of reliance is being placed on Google Maps in an attempt to define, if not invent, boundaries, even though both the parish map and postcodes greatly differ with Google - for instance, whatever Muswell hill nimbies believe, most of Ally Pally park and the building itself and the area north are actually in Wood Green, which certainly doesn't stop at the main railway line. We surely need to find better and more reliable sources than Google. Straw Cat (talk) 15:06, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Straw Cat:London neighbourhood boundaries are a minefield. I haven't placed any reliance on Google, but there is no source I would rely on other than what local people think. I should point out that I don't pretend to have the definitive answer, but I'm happy to help in finding the best answer we can. Postcodes tell us little more than where postcodes are. Parish boundaries are more informative, but as far as I'm aware they predate the development of Wood Green as residential area by a good few centuries, so ultimately aren't really that useful. So that brings us back to local people - and as I'm sure you'll agree we're unlikely to ever get consensus. I wonder if the thing to do is just acknowledge that, define something that's unarguably Wood Green and then point up bits that might or might not be Wood Green depending on who you're talking to. What do you think? HughJLF (talk) 16:57, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Problem is, what local people think could be what they would like to think. I live on the borders of Hornsey but could be tempted to say I'm in Crouch End - but that would be a fib. Estate agents like to talk about Highgate borders when they mean somewhere less exalted.
- Didn't we have the same problem with the Hornsey article? I fear that your attempt to try to define new "perceived" borders at exact street level is doomed and in any case isn't for WP - it's WP:OR. We have to go on what we've got, which is still usually parish boundaries. Hence my challenge that Wood Green stops at the railway line ... if we narrow the borders from what they were we then mispresent the history of the area, which was then wider. We can explicitly state and admit it's controversial, as we've done on the Hornsey article. And also refer to the historical shift in boundaries and administrative areas. Straw Cat (talk) 18:33, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't get an email about these comments and have just edited without having read them. Nonetheless, I think what I've done fits what you suggest in your 2nd para. How's it looking for you?HughJLF (talk) 12:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Straw Cat: How do you feel about getting rid of that 'dubious' tag after the most recent (May) changes made? HughJLF (talk) 00:17, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I may be missing something but all I can see new is a link to a single source - a version of Google maps which does not show up on the normal Google map of the area. Even if that were a sufficient independent published WP:RS, that does not address the issue that Wood Green for most of its history included Tottenham Wood, which includes Alexandra Park and Palace, and the article is supposed to cover this history. Straw Cat (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I wouldn't disagree with what you say about the history of Tottenham Wood. But I don't think there are many who'd argue that in the present day Wood Green goes any further west than the railway line. Would an reword that acknowledged the historical inclusion of Tottenham Wood satisfy you? HughJLF (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- As I've mentioned below and elsewhere, with all due respect, what is at issue is not what an editor, however eminent, thinks "many would argue" is the border, but what has been published somewhere in authoritative WP:RS's - that's how the encyclopedia works. I have the same misgivings about your line-drawing in Hornsey/Crouch End. It's too subjective. Straw Cat (talk) 23:52, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I wouldn't disagree with what you say about the history of Tottenham Wood. But I don't think there are many who'd argue that in the present day Wood Green goes any further west than the railway line. Would an reword that acknowledged the historical inclusion of Tottenham Wood satisfy you? HughJLF (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I may be missing something but all I can see new is a link to a single source - a version of Google maps which does not show up on the normal Google map of the area. Even if that were a sufficient independent published WP:RS, that does not address the issue that Wood Green for most of its history included Tottenham Wood, which includes Alexandra Park and Palace, and the article is supposed to cover this history. Straw Cat (talk) 18:06, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Straw Cat: How do you feel about getting rid of that 'dubious' tag after the most recent (May) changes made? HughJLF (talk) 00:17, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't get an email about these comments and have just edited without having read them. Nonetheless, I think what I've done fits what you suggest in your 2nd para. How's it looking for you?HughJLF (talk) 12:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Citations
[edit]@Straw Cat: Which statements do you think need citations? In my opinion having that banner at the top throws the credibility of the whole article into question. If it's just a few bits can we just flag those and deal with those? I've been trying to start on upgrading the quality of the article. I think you're local. So I assume you have an interest in getting the article up to scratch. Which bits do you think need some citation love? (Or is it beyond redemption as it stands?) HughJLF (talk) 17:30, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Apart from the boundaries issue, the section on Locale is problematical: reads like an essay, not an encyclopedia.
- I do appreciate all the work you've done to improve this and other local articles, and yes, I'm only trying to correct some bits that detract from that; so please read these comments in that context. Straw Cat (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Mmm, thought that locale bit might be problematic. I just wanted a section that gives a flavour, but I recognise it's ended up sounding like quite a personal view. Got any ideas for putting it right? In the meantime, how about flagging up that section and removing the overall citations banner? PS: Glad to have you working on the article. No nose out of joint here! :o) HughJLF (talk) 19:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Personal views are a red rag to WP editors as you may have found elsewhere ... someone would eventually have tagged it. The no original research (WP:OR) or editorializing (by editors) in WP is frustrating, but unavoidable. The latest edition of Pevsner may have something on Wood Green that could be quoted, or there may be an ES Homes and Property article. There must be lots of published stuff out there. No objection to removing the general template as long as the unsourced bits are tagged. I wouldn't worry since the sourced additions and pictures you added are great and speak for themselves. Straw Cat (talk) 12:01, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I should know better than to wave red rags on Wikipedia! :o) Good suggestions in your last. I found an article in the ES H&P which kinda says something pretty similar to what I was trying to. It calls the shopping area 'gaudy' and contrasts it with the residential. I've tried to depersonalise the section a bit and added the ref + link. Is is workable now? HughJLF (talk) 12:15, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- That sorts the Locale problem, but you're still guessing about the boundaries. THe entertainment section is good; when I have time I must add something about Wood Green's famous Sweetie industry (I first saw the name on a packet of licorice allsorts). Straw Cat (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- Did you see the changes i made to the boundary section? What else would you suggest? (I came across an old newspaper article about Barratts the other day from 1899 (I think). Apparently all but a couple of small wings were completely destroyed by fire in that year). HughJLF (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- In the absence of any response to my last, I'll delete the dubious tag then. HughJLF (talk) 13:35, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Did you see the changes i made to the boundary section? What else would you suggest? (I came across an old newspaper article about Barratts the other day from 1899 (I think). Apparently all but a couple of small wings were completely destroyed by fire in that year). HughJLF (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- That sorts the Locale problem, but you're still guessing about the boundaries. THe entertainment section is good; when I have time I must add something about Wood Green's famous Sweetie industry (I first saw the name on a packet of licorice allsorts). Straw Cat (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I should know better than to wave red rags on Wikipedia! :o) Good suggestions in your last. I found an article in the ES H&P which kinda says something pretty similar to what I was trying to. It calls the shopping area 'gaudy' and contrasts it with the residential. I've tried to depersonalise the section a bit and added the ref + link. Is is workable now? HughJLF (talk) 12:15, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- Personal views are a red rag to WP editors as you may have found elsewhere ... someone would eventually have tagged it. The no original research (WP:OR) or editorializing (by editors) in WP is frustrating, but unavoidable. The latest edition of Pevsner may have something on Wood Green that could be quoted, or there may be an ES Homes and Property article. There must be lots of published stuff out there. No objection to removing the general template as long as the unsourced bits are tagged. I wouldn't worry since the sourced additions and pictures you added are great and speak for themselves. Straw Cat (talk) 12:01, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- Mmm, thought that locale bit might be problematic. I just wanted a section that gives a flavour, but I recognise it's ended up sounding like quite a personal view. Got any ideas for putting it right? In the meantime, how about flagging up that section and removing the overall citations banner? PS: Glad to have you working on the article. No nose out of joint here! :o) HughJLF (talk) 19:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)