Talk:Sudbury, London

Tone and photographs
I read with interest the point raised by Dancarney in his/her edit regarding the text - that it reads like a tourist. The detail about the sudbury shopping area was designed to provide Wiki users with the kind of now historical information based upon local knowledge which could not have been obtaind elsewhere. These could not have been found from any tourist guide I have read on the subject and I believe provide a sense of atmosphere about the place. I can accept however that currently most wiki articles tend not to go into such depth on a subject- perhaps they should and this would be an interesting new direction for the site. I therefore accept the edit. I am however, deeply disapointed by the omission of ALL of the photographs. These are actual photographs of sudbury, using a very high quality images, taken by myself. This is what large parts of sudbury actually look like i.e. well kept parkland. If it is a question of space, remove one or two, but to suddenly remove without warning all the photographs, without replacing one with images you feel are more suitable, does not in my opinion help the article's development at all. I have replaced the photographs for the time being so that you may point out which of the photographs you object to and why, I would be grateful if you would provide constructive alternatives, as I did not see any higher quality images of sudbury in wikicommons which is why I took the photographs myself (one thought that crossed my mind is that you may have confused sudbury in suffolk with sudbury in London, may I point out they are two different places with similar names and there are seperate wikipedia articles for each. Thank you for your care in future edits of this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo7000 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Your taking and supplying the pictures is appreciated but all of them put like this in the infobox is a bit overwhelming. You could probably get 2-4 in the article and 1 in the top of the infobox but not all in the infobox. There is also a link to the files on Commons where people can view the images without being overwhelmed. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 18:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your last edit CambridgeBayWeather, it has really improved the layout of the article. I'm not in anyway political but really dislike the way modern housebuilding driven by councils of all political persuasions tend to blur the individual characters of adjaecent areas. Take it from me Sudbury Town London used to have a very individual identity. The legacy of this demonstrated in its historically buildings, give a far greater flavour of the place than any discussion of cheap modern equivalents no different from the identikit developments favoured all over our country which will probably have a very transient lifespan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jo7000 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)