Talk:Burgess Park

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I really cannot believe that the park is "one of the largest public parks in South London" - Greenwich, Brockwell, Battersea, Dulwich, and Clapham Common are all as big, if not bigger! Peter Shearan 17:43, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also am unsure how Abercrombie came into it? The London Plan was 1944, and this park didnt arrive until 1973 after the canal closed surely? Also the text of the article was almost entirely lifted from the Southwark sheet, and didn't make entirely clear the connection between the canal and the park. A map would be helpful, I think. Peter Shearan 18:45, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a map in to help illustrate, thanks to the data from OpenStreetMap. dankarran (talk) 09:41, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The origins of the park definitly lie in the Abercrombie plan, and it is a great shame to omit this from the history. There is a book, commissioned by Groundwork Southwark, called "The Story Of Burgess Park" by Tim Charlesworth. This states "The Aberchrombie plan proposed a large park south of Albany Road and centred around the site of the canal. This was designated as North Camberwell Open Space...."[p42]. It is also one of the largest public parks in South London.... --Derek.hill 11:08, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's 113 acres. Dulwich park is 72 acres, Brockwell is 128, Battersea is 200. Clapham Common is 200 acres, but isn't a park (hence the name); Greenwich Park is 183 acres but is a Royal Park, not a public one. Given that it's the third largest public park in South London (and there are many much smaller ones) I think "one of the largest" is reasonable. Marthiemoo (talk) 16:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Burgess Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]