Talk:St Paul's Church, Harringay

Manor House
Well done on starting this article. Looks good. Just one issue. Manor House isn't in Harringay (or even Haringey). Even if it was, I don't think it'd be right to say that it was what the area's best known for. hjuk (talk) 22:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Have removed, "is now best known for its erstwhile manor house, that gives its name to the present-day Manor House tube station, and the nearby pub of the same name, but in the recent past the area" since under WP it's not verifiable. The "erstwhile manor house" was demolished a couple of hundred years ago. It's namesake - the pub - wasn't in Harringay and at any rate it ceased to exist something like a couple of decades ago. Difficult for an area to be best known for something few people knew existed and which has given its name to something that was never in the area and no longer exists. But, great article otherwise. hjuk (talk) 10:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violations
Sorry about this, but I've removed the entire "Press Coverage" section, as it consisted entirely of blatant cut-and-paste copyright violations. It's fine to mention press coverage ("Jonathan Glancey called it 'a powerful and moving building'") but not to cut and paste entire articles verbatim; see Copyright violations and the pages linked from it, for more information on what can and can't be used. –  iride scent  20:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

"Until the coming of the railway in 1869"
What does "Until the coming of the railway in 1869" refer to? No railway station in the area opened in or near 1869; the Tottenham and Hampstead Junction Railway opened in 1868, but ran straight through from Tottenham Hale to Highgate Road (near Gospel Oak) without stopping. Tottenham Park station (now Harringay Green Lanes) opened in 1880 and Harringay station in 1885 – other than that the only nearby stations were Finsbury Park (1861) and West Green (1878), both in any case some distance away. Neither a line nor a station opened anywhere in the vicinity in 1869. –  iride  scent   22:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

fair enough
Well if you think this is more accurate - and you seem to have the facts to hand - why not amend it with references? I am sure all concerned would appreciate that.

All best Ucypanp (talk) 19:33, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Because the current wording implies causality, and there's no way to reference that; the only change I could make would be to remove the section altogether. The whole "19th century growth is due to the railways" angle is a bit dubious in any event; by far the biggest driver of growth in the former Municipal Borough of Wood Green prior to 1932 was the decision of the Artizans Company to build Noel Park (a self-contained community, not a commuter suburb, and hence not dependent on the railways, although the Palace Gates Line was heavily used to transport the building materials) It was only the 1932 Piccadilly Line Cockfosters extension that made commuting practical; prior to this point, getting to central London involved either a roundabout route on steam trains via Seven Sisters, or getting to Finsbury Park on foot or by tram, then battling through the severe congestion there. –  iridescent   19:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I'd agree with Ucypanp that the GNR (along with the general economic growth and population explosion in London) was responsible for the urbanisation of Harringay. Nonetheless, do folks think that history highlights belong in an introductory para in this article about the church? Guess it's a matter of style. But, if not, the simple solution wd be to remove the historical para. hjuk (talk) 22:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)