Talk:Harringay

Etymology and Page Revision
MSRC, thanks for contributing your experience to my novice efforts on the Harringay page. I would like to continue contributing to this entry.

A couple of issues:

1. Stylistically, is starting with etymology the standard?

2. Would you feel comfortable if we present the Etmology para like this?:

The district derives its name from the old name for the area which was recorded as Haringe in 1086.[2]. Both the names for Harringay and Hornsey developed from this root. Although the Harringay form was falling into disuse by the 18th Century, it was revived with the building of Harringay House in 1792.[1] A version with a somewhat different spelling, Haringey, was used for the new London Borough of Haringey, created in 1965.

There are further refs I can provide re the Etymoloogy. Do you think that's useful? Note, the normal 19th + 20th c spelling was Harringay. THe borough has one 'r'.

Are you thinking about any further edits? Would you consider working on the page together? hjuk 12:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I copied this text from your email sent to me today. I hope you don't mind it being reproduced here. I started editing this article and then realised what a big job it was, so I took some time out to rest my eyes from the screen. I wrote the text for the etymology being careful not to make any original claims based on the references, so any further change would need new refernces. I plan to edit the article into more coherent section such as "History" and "Transport", then copyedit for tone and then reference. Unless someone else has a stab first. MRSC • Talk 12:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Everything suggested above can be referenced to VCH and S J Madge. Also can I just check re the decision process on how the entry is written. I'm asking you questions and seeking collaboration. Is this appropriate? I'm wondering from your last message whether you have a supervisory / decision-making role?Your version contained two place name spelling errors. The -ay form was the commonly recognised one. ONly the 1864 OS map used -ey. All other maps and sources use - ay. ALso the Borough has only one r. hjuk 12:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The spelling is correct now, thanks. My eyes were getting tired looking at a page of various forms of the name. MRSC • Talk 15:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Updated with additional info - all cited to THE expert on this.hjuk 17:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Is that a the citation from 1936? Etymology is not static, Mills (2001) claims to be more authoritative than early sources, so it may be worth checking for any differences. However, broadly they both seem to be telling the same story. MRSC • Talk 18:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Be careful when editing text attributed to a citation as the change in meaning can sometimes paraphrase them incorrectly. I had to made some changes to correct some false attribution. MRSC • Talk 18:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Mills (2001) says it is an artificial revival. I think that should go back in as current text has changed the meaning from that of the citation. MRSC • Talk 18:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Mills' opinion contradicts Madge who wrote a whole book on the subject. Madge showed through reference to primary sources - all rerefenced and atill available today in the National Archives and the Guildhall - that the - ay form was in continual use from 1086 on. From 1500 onwards it became more associated with the house and park, whilst Hornsey was increasingly used for the Town. Mills is not the best authority on this. So I think we should revert to Madge. I will change ref accordingly.hjuk 18:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm concerned taking a source from 1936 over one in 2001, especially as the later one claims to have new research. However, I think the best approach would be for you to rewrite as you plan but remove the citations from Mills. I will then attribute anything that I can to the newer text and/or point out any contradiction. The basic difference of opinion seems to revolve around Harringay falling out of common use between some time in history and the building of the house. Is that so? MRSC • Talk 18:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * On most occasions I would agree that newer texts may well have the upper hand. On this occasion, I think Madge is the authority. If Mills claims to have new research on the Harringay name specifically, I would be genuinely very interested to learn of that. The difference of opinion does seem to be about it falling out of use, yes. Alan Aris, a stalwart of the Hornsey Historical Scoiety who has published many papers on the buildings of the area states that a Tudor House stood on the site before Edward Grey built his late 18th Cent house. So it's not even as if a house suddenly arrived in 1792. This is quite apart from the other primary sources which continued to refer to Harringay Manor.hjuk 19:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The issue I raise relates to your revision re the adpotion of the name by the borough. It's not the content of your change I tried to change, more the comprehensibility.

"The name was also re-used for the London Borough of Haringey created in 1965, however a version of the name more faithful "

It says "the name" - to which name is that refrring - several are used above.

It says "more faithful" - more faithful than what? And I wonder, isn't that straying into the realms of subjectivity? It assumes detailed knowledge of the thinking behind the choice - a) that the choice was made in relation to the name Harringay (re the MORE fathful issue); b) the fidelity issue underpinned their thinking. Wouldn't it be more objective to simply state the new name and not guess at the reasoning - perhaps simply pointing out its similraity to the Domesday version? hjuk 20:02, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * This is basically what Mills is saying, there isn't any new meaning added here. As for the borough, I've seen seperately an article about how all the names were selected for all the London boroughs and it agrees with this. I will try to dig it out. MRSC • Talk 06:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

It may be of interest for you to know that the Haringey / Harringay naming issue in Borough vs. people long predates 1965. From the Hornsey Journal in 1921: "The public write "Harringay" and the Town Council, in their official documents, write "Haringey". In this they stand alone, although the public may have little better authority than themselves for the form they have adopted". Although this article refers to the town, not the borough, sounds like the borough name may have come from established practice - I don't know why it was established - rather than specific sixties saxon nostalgia. In light of this, ought the entry to sound so certain on this issue? hjuk 09:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There seems to be (slightly) conflicting accounts. I am therefore minded to think we should present the facts/opinions rather than try to give an authorative account. MRSC • Talk 11:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Harringay & the Plot to kill King Henry V
"At the next feast of the Nativity of Our Lord, the Lollards, living in London and elsewhere, treacherously plotted the death of King Henry V . A great multitude of them congregated secretly in Harringay Park near London to rebel against King Henry and they were intent on weakening the authority of the Church and injuring the Faith. This treachery was made known to our King and a strong force soon entered the Park surreptitiously in the dead of night. Coming across these traitors before they were able to gather, the King took some at dawn, slew them and scattered others. Then great fear broke out amongst the Lollards and they acknowledged the King as their ruler. But in that year, he hunted down the said traitors in villages and towns, as they lay low in caves and grottos and secret houses, took many of their sect and punished them by binding them in chains." (From Strecche's Ch.2: Lollards and Sir John Oldcastle)

Harringay as London Prepares to Welcome King Edward V
"On May 3, 1483, Richard duke of Gloucester, with his twelve-year old nephew, the new King Edward V, the duke of Buckingham, and some 500 northern troops arrived at Harringhay Park on the northern outskirts of London. They were met and escorted to the City by the mayor, Edmund Shaw, the sheriffs William White and John Matthew (Spelling modernized), and the twenty-five aldermen, all attired in their scarlet robes of state, plus representatives of the Livery Companies dressed in violet - some 100 in all on horseback".

I have removed the two large quotes above. They are too long and should be paraphrased if included.

Citations Needed
I have removed citation needed in some instances. I think that's over-doing it.

I don't know about the Admirals / Disraeli thing. SOmeone else put that in. Would love to see a citation. hjuk 17:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Citations are a fundamental aspect of the project and not at all optional. Any tags should go back in. See WP:A. MRSC • Talk 18:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I added the Admirals/Disraeli bits as well as the pedestrian control systems, but I can't see how I can supply citations on the road names.. ..just check out an atlas and you'll see for yourselves


 * Endymion, Alroy, Tancred... well if they've nothing to do with Disraeli.. I'll eat my hat...


 * Frobisher, Allison, Fairfax, Beresford and Umfreville... all Admirals...  I'm going to remove the tags just for these two points....  I could refer you all to the h2g2 site, but I had something to do with that entry too! --IsarSteve 21:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Why don't you enclose the names of the streets in ref tags, and list them as a footnote? Then people can see for themselves without going to the map. HTH Kbthompson 14:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * thanks for the suggestion.. if I understand you correctly, you mean like this Beresford Road ?? and then as a footnote??--IsarSteve 13:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed it, you may wish to correct my change to what you want to see, but it demonstrates the principal - and I would hope obviates the need for actually referencing the physical environment. BTW: the co-ords currently point to somewhere random on the seven sisters road, is there not a better set? Kbthompson 15:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean about the grid ref. It was TQ 318886 which pointed to a place a little east of Green Lanes on Kimberley Gdns. I've just changed it to TQ317887 which is at the corner of St Ann's Rd + Gn Lanes - a kind of good reckonong point for the centre of Harringay. This was taken from the Ordnance Survey site which shows refs on an online map. hjuk 07:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe I was wrong, but when I went to the hybrid view, it dropped the pointer on the middle of Seven Sisters (the co-ords for the map are determined by the lat & long settings, but I don't know how to find the correct values). Must say, the article's coming along nicely. Only one stylistic point, and that is you shouldn't use refs against section headers, need to find a technique that shows the source for the section without adding the ref to the title. If in doubt, you can consult the omniscient WP:MoS for the way things should look. Cheers Kbthompson 08:53, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Have shifted the refs from the titles. Hope it's ok. As far as I know the co-ords are right. I'm not an expert though. So happy to be corrected. Is it possible to link to subarticle sections rather than to a whole subarticle. I tried and failed! hjuk 19:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok - have got something working there on the subsection links - follows something I read in one of the wiki user pages. It works; it's convenient and usable. But the big question is will it be allowed?

hjuk 20:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Locale
Added back in the centred on Green Lanes bit - Given how indistinct London areas are, this approach can often be more helpful than the boundary one.

hjuk 17:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Demographics
Was going to have a go at this from 2001 census data - but I hesitate to put too much work in on it (or anything!) without agreement from the London Group. The issue is that the wards do not coincide with the area that is generally recognised as Harringay. Would is be wikipermissable to make a declared calculation based on Harringay ward + 25% St Ann's ward? Not a perfect solution, I know, but not sure how to get any closer. Any comments / advice anyone? hjuk 08:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * My instinct would be to talk about the broad makeup of the area and then use the wards output data as a citation, instead of saying "The population of Harringay is 25% this and 12% that. As we know we cannot say that authoritatively. However, the census outputs can be used to back up something like "There is a small but significant xyz population..." + citation. MRSC • Talk 11:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks MRSC hjuk 19:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

History
What am I allowed to include in the history section/s and what's verboten? hjuk 08:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're allowed to put anything you like, but if you want it to stay there (!), from my meagre experience, any addition should be a) notable, b) referenced - and preferably tell some cogent story about the area. What marks this area out from the surrounding areas - and why. The article should be a précis, not large blocks of quotation, and link to other articles in wiki. Look at some of the better written areas for exemplars (humbly, I present Hoxton as an example). HTH Kbthompson 14:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks kbt - will follow your Heepesque recommendation. Your last one on Rainham was very good. hjuk 19:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Good to have clarity on the ground-rules. Some guidance on content would be helpful, if you don't mind my asking.....again!. My two issues are these: 1. Given Harringay's synonimity with Hornsey in the records up to the 19th century, it would be easy to write Hornsey's history as a significant part of this section. Whilst I can imagine that's not what's wanted, a certain amount of overlap is inevitable. As far as possible I can keep to the East of the area, where possible focussing on Fernfields Manor, drawing in Hornsey and Brownswood Manors to give context and a little more flesh on the bones. Does this sound reasonable? 2. The second issue relates to that part of Harringay that lies over the boundary in Tottenham. I've not developed any knowledge at all on that. Can you recommend any good sources beyond VCH that would enable me to focus on the areas situated to the south of old Hangar Lane (present-day St Ann's Rd.)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by hjuk (talk • contribs)
 * I can't think of anything offhand, although if you're in the neighbourhood of Bruce Castle, I think they have local information sheets and a small library of local history resources. Historically, I'd concentrate this article on this locale and not spread it too widely. There will be a need for other local history articles for the neighbouring areas, and then some kind of summary/larger scale history article for the borough page (London Borough of Haringey). Generally, it's best not to go into too much detail, but deal with notable events - often they will have their own article (if they're national events). The overall aim is to provide a flavour of the character of an area, with links to external resources that people can follow up. HTH Kbthompson 15:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Transport
Thanks for the needed fixes on the transport section Steve. The links for the 141 & 341 don't seem to be working. Is that me or is something amiss?hjuk 16:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not you.. It's because they're not yet written... I added the links because I hope to write the articles soon, but there are so many to do... If you'd prefer I can delete the links again... Generally such links give me the encouragement to start writing... By the way, the 29 isn't even half finished. I only added the first day of operation. The 141 and 341 are not so complicated and shouldn't take that long. --IsarSteve 21:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

In as much as it matters, I'm happy for the links to stay or not. It will be good to have the links when they're done. Good luck with gettig those them written.hjuk 13:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Harringay's History vs History of Harringay
"'s" naming convention taken from sub-article of the Featured Article Isaac Newton - Isaac Newton's early life and achievements. Is that the wrong model? Or is there a subtly different rule for that one? PS: Please provide a link for the specific naming convention. hjuk 17:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Harringay's Boundaries
I know. I know; I can't leave it alone can I. I think its about right now. Boundaries in London are soft. There are many views. One man's Wood Green is another's Hornsey (See Turnpike Lane!). I wanted to make sure that all views could be encompassed in any definition. I think this one does it whilst sticking to the majority understanding. I've also separated it out. Defining Harringay is more of an issue than for some other areas. It's worth getting it right. But I think it was rather interrupting the flow as it was. Having its own section means a reader can quickly see what they're getting and if not interested skip on. hjuk 07:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * How you now describe Harringay's boundary is exactly how I would liked to have defined it.. well done! Sounds just perfect. The boundary between Tottenham and Harringay along Hermitage Road is quite difficult to define, but does lie, as you mentioned, somewhere near to the bend in the road.  --IsarSteve 08:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Yayyy! Thanks. I had a nagging discomfort with my first effort/s ever since I wrote them. Good to have some validation for this one. It does feel more right to me too. hjuk 08:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

EA Manual ??

 * Oh dear, I've been on a bit of WikiHoliday the last couple of weeks.. and when I get back.. well!!


 * I knew it wouldn't be long before we would have our differences. .. :o)


 * You seem to have all but erased Tottenham from the Page and you seem to be "pushing up" the connections with Hornsey. Now I know you may have your reasons for doing this, but like it or not, over the last 50 -100 years Harringay was more closely connected to Tottenham than to Hornsey. The whole of the main street (Green Lanes)  lay with Tottenham's boundaries, but this doesn't even get a mention. Apart that is for a mention of the (safe) middle ages and a vague reference to the fact that the nineteenth century development was different East of the GNR and North of the THJR, due to the area being part of Tottenham. The development at the time was similar to Tottenhams. e.g. Lower Middle Class and Working Class properties.


 * If by chance the old municipal boroughs of Hornsey and Tottenham had been allocated to different boroughs in the Local Government re-orginisation of 1965, then there wouldn't be such a close connection between Harringay and Hornsey.


 * Lastly, even down to "Nearest Places" section, Stoke Newington (going up) gets a mention, but South Tottenham or Bruce Grove (both rock bottom) do not!

I hope you are not turning your exceptionally good work into an Estate Agents Manual!!

--IsarSteve 11:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It would maybe nice to mention that Harringay Arena was location of the Annual "Tottenham School Sports" from at least the 1940s until 1964. The equivalent of the Olympics for Tottenham's kids... and of course I was present on the last occasion it was held on 1 July 1964.--IsarSteve 11:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I also noticed that Tottenham has been cleared of all mention of Harringay & West Green (Why West Green?) It's as if they were never districts of Tottenham. I have a dreadful feeling this has all to with house prices?? I hope not!!--IsarSteve 11:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OH! I certainly didn't mean to "wash Tottenham off". My view is that one of the things that unique about the area is that both parts of it were on the extreme borders of their respective manors/parishes/boroughs and that did have an effect on their development. Most current written history of Harringay has been done by the Hornsey Historical Society and so focuses on the ladder. What I wanted to do was to write an account of the area as a whole bringing both East and West in. History is always a matter of perspective as well as interpretation of fact and my penny's worth is that the area was equally connected to and influenced by Hornsey and Tottenham. The changes I made to nearest places was just trying to reflect what areas are physically nearest at all points of the compass. I hope I've picked up the clearing the Tottenham page point on the other talk page - it's just about getting the logic underpinning each page the same - each page is about a present-day urban area. As for the history piece, I made a category for the manor / borough to capture all that and each Harringay page liists that category. But Tottenham is no longer a borough. It's a much more tightly focussed urban area/"town" - call it what you will.

What do you think should be included? hjuk 19:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply, So much to answer:
 * I can't fault the Harringay page at all, except as I have done about the mentioning of Tottenham or at least a mention that 3/4s of Hgay was part of the TBC. We lived in the gardens area in a Prefab on a "bombed" site and at the time (late 1950s) there were lots of stories of the bombing of the area.  A V1 also caused the gap between Fairfax and Effingham  and the arm of one the victims of this attack was found in Hornsey Goods yard.. still holding a handbag! grusel.. There are also stories on the BBC war history site about the gardens area and V1s.--IsarSteve 22:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ever-Ready factory
Thanks for the info on the war - any more you've got (or any old photos?) would be great. I was trying to think where the bombed out bit in the Gardens would have been. Was it up on Warwick Gardens? Also do you know anything about the Ever-Ready factory I heard was on Warwick Gds till it was bombed out in the war? (PS I have some photos of Green Lanes in 1949. May be too much before your time. I can't post them on the site for obvious reasons, but if you want to see them let me know. hjuk 20:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The Ever-Ready factory remained in business at least into the early seventies, perhaps late seventies early eighties?? It was also hit by a V1 and the houses on the west side of Warwick Gardens are testament to that attack, as their frontages had to be rebuilt after the war, making them different to the rest of the street. The Ever-Ready factory was originally part of the NMET North Met Electric Power Company owned by the Middlesex County Council, part of the same company that ran electric trams in Middlesex until 1933 and the formation of the LPTB. The other two bomb sites on Warwick Gardens are from an earlier raid when Ritches, Brampton and Woodlands Park Rd were also hit. An Air-raid warden friend of the family, on duty in Harringay at the time, told me in 1968 that bombs hit the sides of the houses and the rooves still intact settled down on the debris making it difficult to rescue anyone.

Just to let you know that I DO put my money where my mouth is - I've taken an awful lot of trouble to research the history of East Harringay. It's not in the main nicely wrapped up like the western side. So it takes a bit of work. I've included everything I can find on the East on where I've got up to so far and I've yet to put it in, but the next parts on the 1750 - 1880 page will be about the east - the tile kilns, potteries, Hermiatge road houses - but there wasn't a lot there till a bit later. I've also contacted the Gardens residents assoc to find their local history bod and just spent this PM at Bruce Castle trying to gather more. I'm also going down to Hackney archives next week to try and find some new stuff. I've also recently got a little involved in local stuff and was disappointed to see how separate the Gardens and Ladder feel. To encourage both greater participation in local democracy and to build a sense of community across both parts, I'm trying to do something - just started a Harringay Community website - see external link on Harringay page. If you join, you'll be asked to name your road and there you'll see I've included all the roads in the area that I think you and I agree is Harringay. So I do hope you can see where my heart is in this. hjuk 20:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll reply some more to these comments later, but I think the idea of separating out the Municipal Borough of Tottenham and Tottenham (itself) a good idea, but this should be really on the Tottenham page.--IsarSteve 22:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

For my money, I'd keep the two pages separate, but I can see a good case for doing it otherwise. I'm not planning to do anything with the Tottenham page/s. So, if you're going to upgrade them, you have my best wishes. hjuk 20:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Coord Template
I know that the coord template is generated by the UK infobox, but Google EArth doesn't seem to scrape it successfully. So I'm trying also adding the template. hjuk 00:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Tunnel under the Railway
Love this idea, but all the evidence suggests it's not true. All the old OS maps I can find show no such tunnel. There used to be a way under the New River around that point when it was cased in a wooden aqueduct up till the early 19th Cent - but as far as I'm aware no later tunnel ever existed nor is shown on any maps. It's also unlikely because it would have had to have gone under the river. I'd love to be disabused of this scepticsm with some evidence............please! hjuk 01:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Communities Categories
See WP:Categories. Categories should be used: "which serve as classifications, should be the significant (useful) topics to which the subject of the article most closely belongs to as a member". Various communities within each London area are not topics to which the article most closely belongs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.149.86 (talk) 01:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Harringay. 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/20070927200208/http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc to http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927200208/http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc to http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc
 * Added tag to http://www.gigl.org.uk/igigl/siteDetails.aspx?sID=HgBI05&sType=sinc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130616052554/http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/Pages/Category.aspx?IDCategory=e0fcf37b-fc1f-4e5d-bef5-f28877842fd9 to http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/Pages/Category.aspx?IDCategory=e0fcf37b-fc1f-4e5d-bef5-f28877842fd9
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160224235101/http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/woodberry-wetlands to http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/woodberry-wetlands

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Social groups A, B, C ?
I don't know what this sentence means in the Demographics section: "60% of residents are classified as being in the A/B & C1 social groups.[25]"

I looked at the wiki link for social groups and didn't find these A, B, C groups. I couldn't understand it from the reference either.

Can someone explain this to me? Is there a good tag for this sentence to show that it's not well explained?Lena Key (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Good question! I agree it's not clear. I've changed the link from social groups to NRS social grades, which is what this specifically refers to. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 07:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Harringay
This is incorrectly spelt, it is Harringey e.g. www.haringey.gov.uk 2A00:23C7:AD0D:F701:6D2D:946E:5998:B6F9 (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)