Talk:Cock Lane ghost

message: "He listened to the couple's plight and was sympathetic, offering them the use of lodgings in his home at what (in 1965) was 20 Cock Lane, to the north of St Sepulchre's."
Is that supposed to say "(in 1965)"? I see in the history it was changed to 1765 last night, but reverted at some point. It doesn't seem to make sense. Also, having the parentheses placed there seems wrong regardless. Should probably be "... in his home at (what was in [whatever year]) 20 Cock Lane." I'm not sure such a clarification needs to be there at all, though. Lara 15:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The property wasn't numbered in the 1700s, but by 1965 it was identified as number 20.  It no longer exists. Parrot of Doom 16:33, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, is the number really relevant? The inclusion of a modern date is confusing. Would it not be acceptable to have it simply read "his home on Cock Lane"? Lara 20:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

text: I've bumped this down to "Legacy" with some clearer context, and have dug up a source for the building's demolition in 1979. --McGeddon (talk) 10:56, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  In the Fanny section  

message: Fanny scratching?  Cock Lane?  Is this an April Fool's joke? Unknown Unknowns (talk) 15:49, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you ask?--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed it is.  Dthomsen8, this is today's feature article, and the misleading intro in its description on the main page is in rather poor taste.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.38.55 (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No - the article is true - and has passed the difficult test of becoming a featured article.  As far as we know, everything in the article is absolutely true.  The only thing that's (slightly) special is that the intro on the main page was worded so as to lead one to believe that it's a fake.  Everything on the Wikipedia front page is true...even on April 1st. SteveBaker (talk) 18:44, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't say anything about the article content.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.38.55 (talk) 18:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, sometimes we have to give a little to those with a sense of humor. It's good to have fun now and then. Lara 20:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is an article about the alleged ghost of a woman called Fanny, scratching, on a street that was probably the site of a cockpit, in poor taste? You'll have to explain that one to me. Richerman (talk) 20:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

text: Technically, well, scratch a fanny find a cockpit. Nishidani (talk) 21:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: April Fool

message: Congratulations to everyone who has worked on this article - it has been the most-viewed article of 2011 so far, with over 222,000 views on 1 April. This makes it the eighth most-viewed Today's Featured Article since we began tracking statistics in December 2007. See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Statistics for how it compares with other Today's Featured Articles, and Wikipedia:Today's featured article/Most viewed for the all-time list. Prioryman (talk) 14:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Who said sex doesn't sell? Not that there was any hint of it...was there? Bob talk 14:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Congratulations