Talk:Noel Park

Noel Park is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 10, 2017.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 24, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 24, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in 1971, half the houses in Noel Park, London, were still lacking basic facilities such as baths, internal toilets and hot water?

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Social Housing in the United Kingdom (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Housing in the United Kingdom, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Social Housing in the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Social Housing in the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Social Housing in the United KingdomSocial Housing in the United Kingdom articles

Urban studies and planning Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning 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.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plagiarism?[edit]

The content of this article appears to be copied unchanged from http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/community_and_leisure/neighbourhoods/noelparkneighbourhood/historyofnoelpark.htm and so may be in breach of copyright. -Arb. (talk) 15:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh crap, I didn't see this before editing the article. It appears you are right. In any case, it is less of a copyvio now, but may need to be rewritten from scratch when I can get my hands on some source material. At least the structure makes sense now... Brilliantine (talk) 00:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Belatedly) rewritten… – iridescent 22:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all who have made this a brilliant article. I grew up in Wood Green 50-odd years ago and never knew half this stuff... this is what a great encyclopaedia should be like. seglea (talk) 23:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think this kind of article is what wikipedia is great at, and what drew me to the project in the first place. It's very easy to find quality information on "important" topics like evolution, for instance, but not nearly so easy to find out about the history of the place you were born in, or live in. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:49, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

From the lead: "It was one of the earliest garden suburbs in the world". It's as well to provide citations for extraordinary claims like that, even in the lead, where I don't normally like to see citations. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I can cite it easily enough – it's a claim that pops up fairly often – if you really think it's necessary. I was hoping to avoid it as I really dislike citations in leads. My thinking was that it wasn't necessary – the traditional start of garden-city construction comes with the publication of Looking Backward in 1888, or Ebenezer Howard's Garden Cities of To-morrow in 1899, depending on who you listen to, both of which post-date the construction of Noel Park. The first garden suburb is generally held to be Bedford Park, built in 1877; Noel Park was built six years later. – iridescent 23:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's not important, and I share your view about citations in the lead. I guess I may be still in shock after being asked for a citation to prove that the von Neumann computer architecture was widely attributed to von Neumann.[1] Not that I'm bitter or anything you understand. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum 00:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"It was planned from the outset as a self-contained community built near enough to the rail network to allow inhabitants to commute to work, with all properties having both front and rear gardens." How does the easy commuting tie in with the front and back gardens? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:26, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. This is what comes of treating the lead section the way I do, as a stewpot into which scraps of the body text are thrown as they're written. – iridescent 23:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was about to say that the lead is supposed to be an overview of the article, better written after the article is oherwise finished, but then I realised that you know that anyway. I said it anyway though, for the benefit of others less experienced than you. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I generally do it the other way (at least, for something like this that's not being done in mainspace where it has to look readable) – I throw scraps into it as the body text takes shape, then cull what's in there down to a reasonable size. I was sorely tempted to have "Noel Park was founded by a former scarecrow and Charles Darwin" as the opening sentence. – iridescent 01:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned building[edit]

Anybody know what this place was originally? -Arb. (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know. It's the red brick building in this photo (click to zoom) if that helps anyone. – iridescent 14:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Useful photo. Looks like a cross on top of the "tower". Hadn't noticed that before. Old Salvation Army building perhaps? -Arb. (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Gardner Court, old mission building" according to this map on Haringey Council's website. Appears from this that it's now a block of flats. – iridescent 19:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a sign on Russell Avenue ^[1] pointing to the building as the Walsham-How mission hall. It's flats now, but you can see its former use clearly in the bell-tower, etc. ^[2]. I don't know anything more about this building, but I'd like to. I know that the Shropshire Hall on Lymington was a mission hall as well, but this one I'm not so familiar with.ohsimone (talk) 17:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, despite directly contradicting Welch who says the existing Shropshire Hall is a renaming of the original 1913 Walsham-How Hall. The buildings are architecturally similar enough that it's hard to be 100% sure, but the current hall has a tower which would have had to have been demolished if they are the same building, whereas the existing building looks virtually identical to the 1913 drawing (please don't add the 1913 drawing to the article, incidentally - the quality is awful). We may be in one of those weird only-on-Wikipedia moments, where because a Reliable Source says something we have to treat it as true even when fairly sure it isn't, as there's no source to contradict it. Pevsner, although he does cover Noel Park, doesn't mention either. – iridescent 18:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a very careful rewording of the paragraph in question to make it deliberately ambiguous; every single statement is now citable and undoubtedly correct, but the paragraph is now correct whether the current Shropshire Hall is the former Walsham-How hall or not. I'm more and more convinced that the current Shropshire Hall is not the original Walsham-How hall, though – the existing hall isn't shown on the 1920 Ordnance Survey map. It does seem very strange, though; I cannot imagine the Shropshire Mission would have built two mission halls of about the same size a few yards away from each other. – iridescent 18:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If any of you live near the place, going round the building with a camera might clear this up. If it was a mission hall, there will almost certainly be foundation stones which will establish its history (unless they've been sandblasted out in a renovation). And I think a photograph is the one kind of Original Research which does not fall foul of Wikipedia rules. Sorry I can't volunteer to do this, I no longer have any family in Wood Green so never visit. seglea (talk) 22:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will try, although I suspect "hanging round a children's centre with a camera" might cause an unfortunate misunderstanding. – iridescent 23:01, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(reset indent) Took a spin by both buildings this morning. No sign of a date or foundation stone on either. Shropshire has a bank of signs at the front any of which might be hiding a stone. Walsham-How has a high wooden fence that hides the bottom of the building along most of the park side and half the front. Spoke to a resident at Walsham-How who offered that before being turned into apartments it was a dance hall which burnt down (date of fire unknown). Might be worth a look in the Bruce Castle local newspaper archive - a fire like that is sure to be mentioned and could include some background about the building. I may have cause to attend an event at Shropshire during the next week or two in which case I'll look for / enquire about any dates on the inside of the building. -Arb. (talk) 13:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

1920 OS map[edit]

iridescent wrote (above): "the existing hall isn't shown on the 1920 Ordnance Survey map". That is interesting. What scale is that? Any chance of you uploading a scan to Commons? -Arb. (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure of the scale – it's the one reproduced on p42 of Welch. (Bruce Castle or the little shop next to the church on Tottenham Lane will certainly be happy to sell you a copy, if you don't have it.) Looking at the footnote more closely, although it was published 1920, the survey itself was carried out 1910-1913, so the hall may not have been built yet – although it does show houses on the corner of Darwin Avenue, and it seems odd that they'd have demolished housing to build a hall so soon after building, with so much empty space along Westbury Avenue to play with. – iridescent 15:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Districts of London vs. Category:London Borough of Haringey[edit]

Category:London Borough of Haringey is itself a category within Category:Districts of London. — Robert Greer (talk) 17:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it shouldn't be as far as I'm concerned. This particular district happens to fall within one borough, but borough boundaries have nothing to do with district boundaries, which can easily straddle multiple boroughs (as with Finsbury Park, London, covered by Hackney, Haringey and Islington, for example) – iridescent 12:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Noel 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090503174243/http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/community_and_leisure/neighbourhoods/noelparkneighbourhood.htm to http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/community_and_leisure/neighbourhoods/noelparkneighbourhood.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:00, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Noel 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.flickr.com/photos/oh_simone/2497902472/

[2] ttp://www.flickr.com/photos/oh_simone/2573633564/

[1]

[2]