Talk:Notting Hill

message: I would be interested in working this article up to GA status. I place the criteria for GA here, and people can work towards each criteria and then tick them off. SilkTork *YES! 17:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Collaboration on turning this into a Good article 

message: I once saw a very old ordinance survey map where Notting Hill was called "Noding Hill"
Pauline Jackson
30 July 2011  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.195.143 (talk) 10:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notting Hill name 

message: Clarification required on this sentence. What 'dubious practises' is the author referring to? What precisely was the connection between Rachman's activities and Carribean immigrants? 195.112.55.34 (talk) 12:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Caribbean immigrants were drawn to the area in the 1950s, partly because of the dubious practices followed by the landlord Peter Rachman," 

message: This section reads like campaigning material; I question whether it's really appropriate for the page. Ref WP:SOAP and WP:BALL ----
86.1.64.115 (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  'New Crossrail Station' 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Notting Hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20041201012236/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/london/yourlondon/london_history/pottery_lane.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/yourlondon/london_history/pottery_lane.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090129212132/http://www.london.gov.uk:80/mayor/carnival/index.jsp to http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/carnival/index.jsp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Notting Hill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090620215548/http://cms.met.police.uk:80/met/boroughs/kensington_chelsea/03working_with_the_community/safer_neighbourhoods/north_kensington/notting_barns to http://cms.met.police.uk/met/boroughs/kensington_chelsea/03working_with_the_community/safer_neighbourhoods/north_kensington/notting_barns
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The figure of £93 million is based on a multiplier applied to a direct figure of £45m direct benefits. I question this. The multiplier is drawn from the British arts Festivals association who are not a disinterested source and it is only applied to benefits not to costs. All the stall holders along Portobello Road are closed down & replaced by other stalls selling - almost without exception - barbecued food, yet this is might be seen as a neutral economic effect. I would also suggest that it is unlikely that more casual traders pay the same rate of taxes (if any) that the regular stalls might pay. Householders pay upto £400 to have their properties boarded up. Obviously this creates profit for builders (plus the "multiplier") but the householder experiences this as a loss which cannot even be claimed on insurance, as a burglary would. In which case an economic argument could be made for the positive effects of burglary or theft. In 2015 Boris Johnson said that 407 arrests (which seems likely to have been exceeded in 2016) was unacceptable - but has to be seen in context of "£93m benefits." In other words it IS acceptable due to this oft quoted figure. 02:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Economic Impact