Talk:Dale Farm

message: Does anyone know the professional affiliations/qualifications of this journalist?  
He is not a journalist by training or occupation, and his trade is unknown.  He is the Secretary of the Dale Farm Housing Association, and a media source and is responsible for a fair number of the stories reaching the press over the past few years.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.238.12 (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who Is Grattan Puxon ?

message: Have any of the Dale Farm residents been prosecuted for endangering life and breaching Health & Safety Regulations over the'Calor Gas Cylinder Barricades'?  The advice is available online at <http://www.devonline.gov.uk/text/index/information_and_services/environmental_health/eh-healthandsafety-intro/eh-hs-guidance/eh-hs-lpg.htm>, and includes:<P>
1. empty cylinders areconsidered in exactly the same way as full cylinders, and that they must be stored in a weld mesh 12 gauge 50 x 50mm cage if the yard is wholly or partially accessible to members of the public. Those at Dale Farm were not.  
2. The stack must be at least 1 metre from the boundary, 2 metres from a cellar opening, drain, gully, door or window and 3 metres from any combustibles unless they are behind a 30-minute fire resisting structure. Those at Dale Farm are not.
3. Appropriate fire fighting equipment must be available (there is none at Dale Farm).
.....etc etc.
The duties of the gas user (rather than the supplier) are detailed on p.11 of <http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/internalops/fod/inspect/lpg.pdf>.
According to <http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/local_news/basildon/4195431.Gas_bottle_bombshell/>,over 40 were crammed against the neighbouring property and wired together in March 2011.  Have these been removed, or are they still in place?  Have the initial enforcement and improvent notices been breached, if so, have the Council set about bringing any prosecutions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.234.147 (talk) 19:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality of Calor Gas Barricades ? 

message: Is this true?  It says at <http://www.advocacynet.org/page/dalefarmtimeline> that in  November 2007 - "The Travellers start talking to the British Red Cross about mitigating the impact of any possible evictions. Among the suggestions - a refugee "tent city" for families that are forced out. The NGO Shelter Box, which has provided up to 35,000 tents for Tsunami victims, is also approached to provide emergency housing."
Reference is sourced to the Dale Farm Housing Association.
:It's the first I've heard of it, but what's the problem?  Helping refugees is supposed to be what the Red Cross is there for.  193.146.58.181 (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Did they really ask the Red Cross to give them free food and tents?

message: Were there actually any 'Roma' living there before the press arrived?  The letter sent to the UN in March 2011, states that the site contains 'Roma and Irish Travellers'. The Sheridans the Obriens and the Quilligans all have properties in Rathkeale Co Limerick where they are known as the travelling millionaires (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2035826/Dale-Farm-eviction-Travellers-secretly-Irish-houses.html). The Irish times In March of this year interviewed Rosemary Quilligan at Dale Farm, when asked where the men were she said they were working in France and Germany,but would be back for the eviction, however Ellen Sheridan disagreed and said most pitches were occupied by single mothers. Very strange. Dale Farm spokesman Richard Sheridan had twice been jailed for his part in the smuggling of fake cigarettes from Belgium. Sheridan, real name Richard O’Brien, was locked up for a year for smuggling 640,000 cigarettes. His Father, John O’Brien, 62, was jailed for a year along with Sheridan for smuggling 1.2million cigarettes in June 2003.
Does anyone know if an English council have any duty under UK law to rehouse a person who owns another home in Ireland?  79.70.229.67 (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any [[Roma]] residents before the eviction notice was served?

message: Legal case law established 'Gypsies' as a recognised ethnic group in England in 1989 (Commission for Racial Equality v Dutton) and Irish Travellers, already protected by race relations law in Northern Ireland, were recognised as a distinct ethnic group in England and Wales in 2000 (O'Leary v Allied Domecq). In October 2008 K MacLennan v Gypsy Traveller Education and Information Project (CaseCheck Case Reports 2008) led to a landmark ruling that Scottish Gypsy/Travellers are a distinct ethnic group bringing them within the protection of the Race Relations Act (Amnesty International UK Blogs 2009).  In Wales the Welsh Assembly Government has a general duty to ensure equality of opportunity for all people without reference to membership of specific groups. However, Irish Travellers are recognised in British law as an ethnic group.[36] Ireland, however, does not recognise them as an ethnic group; rather, their legal status is that of a "social group" (Wiki 'irish travellers' pagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Traveller ).
I have edited the article by capitalising the term Traveller throughout. This reflects the minority ethnic status.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LinnWork (talk • contribs) 09:34, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal definitions of '[[ethnic group]]s'

message: A Guardian article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/04/dale-farm-travellers-jewish-backing) states that the community have the full support of the Jewish community - of which country or countries, it doesn't say. Only one Rabbi - Rabbi Janet Burden - is quoted . She said: "People may not be aware that the Travellers, along with the Gypsies and a limited number of other groups with similar lifestyle patterns, are officially recognised as ethnic minorities, just like our own Jewish community. As such, they deserve protection under European human rights law." and goes on further: 
I believe that the obligation to protect this ethnic minority's way of life is a human rights issue that, in this particular and unusual case, may need to trump the planning law designed to protect the green belt."
Have any other Jewish groups supported her stance in the media? 
79.70.229.80 (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I take it you're not counting the author, who's also Jewish?  Well I don't know that many Jews, maybe a dozen or so, but they all support them 193.146.58.181 (talk) 18:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Jewish support?

message: The article is weighted very heavily in favour of the defence of the camp, even down to mentioning the support of the local vicar etc etc. Evidence is required to explain _why_ the travellers are to be evicted, and the pros and cons thereof. DWaterson 11:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Balance tag added

message: I am not going to get into an edit war, but the article as it stands is very highly POV, against the residents.
For example:
"Because of the size of the site, and the threats of violence from some of the travellers, the potential cost of direct action to clear the green belt portion of Dale Farm could be as high as 15 million pounds"
No source is given, and eviction by force is obviously itself violent.
And we should not refer to the residents as "travellers" every single time they are mentioned. You can call me politically correct, but it is racist to refer to someone's ethnicity every time you mention them, when the events that have been newsworthy are that people may be evicted from the homes they've built on their own land because they have built those homes without getting planning permission to do so. Can the article at some times simply refer to them as "residents"?
RE: referring to the occupiers as 'travellers' - it is their preferred identity - it was this identity that the UN acted upon - and it was this identity that spurred the CRE into action - they choose to use this identity in all court appeals - why should they (or this page) change that simply because you want them to?  79.75.219.72 (talk) 18:20, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now edited the first paragraph, but that's all the editing I'll be doing. The point regarding "refute" should be clarified. To say the Council have "refuted" the allegation against them is undeniably POV. It means that they have successfully rebutted it. Sure, they have denied it, and they have stated their grounds for doing so, but whether they have denied it successfully or unsuccessfully is a matter of opinion and therefore a non-encyclopedic issue. The Commission for Racial Equality have called the Council racist. Report that. Report the stated reasons. The Council have responded, denying the charge. Report that. Report the stated reasons. Leave it at that. Take no view on whether the Council is racist or not.Cuppyola (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is highly POV (anti-residents) in current form  

message: The following is an animation of an aerial view of the site switching between 1999 - 2011
  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Essex chris (talk • contribs) 14:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, it's copyrighted, so we couldn't use it I'm afraid. The Cavalry (Message me) 00:00, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerial view of Dale Farm 

message: It seems to me that there is confusion in the article about this. I don't claim to understand the UK planning laws, but surely the whole area around Dale Farm is Green belt land. See this site: . The council can and has allowed some residential development on some of its green belt. (See this site ). This huge area includes the "legal" part of the Green Farm site as well. The media talk about other residents, near the site, who are complaining of the travellers - all of them, not just those on the unautherised site. These residents also seem to be living in the green belt, but, presumably, had planning permission to build there. So, just stating that the disputed site is on green belt land, implying that it must therefore be illegal, is too simple. I am altering the new edits about this. Myrvin (talk) 06:44, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This story is interesting too: Myrvin (talk) 12:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

text: If you look at Google street view of the area around say 8, Oak lane, you will see several very nice bungalows that must have been built fairly recently. They must have had planning permission. Myrvin (talk) 14:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have slightly repharased the wording to reflect how it is normally expressed. Tmol42 (talk) 16:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Green belt 

message: Under UK law, if a private landlord is forced to evict a tenant and wins the case, the landlord can technically recover the cost of the eviction from the tenant under UK law and/or bailiffs can seize goods.  Under UK legislation therefore, would Basildon Council be able to charge the owners of Dale Farm for the costs of evicting them, and/or seize land of equivalent market value from the owners (either the Dale Farm site and/or any other spare land/houses they may own? 212.139.97.246 (talk) 02:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This Talk Page is for discussing improvements to the article not for seeking advice or legal interpretations. Tmol42 (talk) 02:09, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Can Basildon Council Seize Land To Pay For The Eviction?

message: I have added a NPV tag to this article as it seems to be overly supporting the travellers and there is very little mention saying the site is illegal and none in the opening summery. C. 22468 (talk) 16:15, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPV 

message: Don't understand how this event is relevant or remotely similar to the Dale Farm site clearance: can you expand on any parallels/similarities?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.99.225 (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Irrelevant Link to the Battle of the Beanfield

message: There is a "This article may be affected by a current event" tag on this page, but at the moment there is no mention of any relevant current events (presumably this refers to the eviction) on the linked page.
Digitig (talk) 17:06, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Events 

message: Just a note that the removal of people from the Dale Farm site can not be termed an eviction in the legal term of the word, as it was not a clearance of tenants on behalf of the property owner. It would be better described as 'Clearance and leveling'.  87.194.211.158 (talk) 20:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Without a reliable source to that effect as per WP:RS such a change of description amounts to opinion.  The term eviction is the correct legal term and may be followed by restoration of the property to a previous state. Tmol42 (talk) 20:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The objective of the operation is the clearance of the buildings and pitches, which do not have planning permission, from the site - not the 'eviction' of the owners and their guests.  The land will continue to be owned by its current owners.  The people have been temporarily removed so that the bailiffs can safely clear the buildings. FactController (talk) 22:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Happy to stand corrected on this point once cleared it can continue to be used by the Travellers (the owners) forany purpose in keeping with the Green Belt and any other planning etc policies that might apply to it.Tmol42 (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clearance rather than Eviction 

message: There seems to be confusion in the article over the site name(s). Parts of the article assert that the whole area, comprising the legal pitches and the illegal pitches, is called Dale Farm, whilst elsewhere in the article the area containing the legal pitches is asserted to be called Oak Lane and only the area containing the illegal pitches is said to be called Dale Farm. Which is correct, and can we get this consistent throughout the article? FactController (talk) 15:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that Oak Lane was the lane. The council called the first site "the Oak Lane site". However, surely the land on which both sites are, is Dale Farm. No doubt an old name for the area. All the media (and everyone I've heard talking and writing about the sites) call them "Dale Farm". Referring to one or both as the "Oak Lane" sites would be simply confusing for the general reader. The 2007 Prescot decision said "the school attended by children from Dale Farm", not Oak Lane. The CERD say "an unauthorised encampment on the Dale Farm site in Basildon ". Myrvin (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I based what I wrote in the lead on what was already in the body, and apparently based on this source from Basilson council.  I would expect them to know the details. FactController (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This  calls the 6 acre site "Dale Farm". It doesn't mention "Oak Lane" at all. I think the Council are not being consistent either. Myrvin (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Sorry - that doesn't work. Myrvin (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What doesn't work? FactController (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

text: My attempt to explain the confusion. I'm still confused. Myrvin (talk) 10:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Site naming inconsistencies 

message: Part of Dale Farm is legal and still remains where it was before the eviction, this was mentioned in several reports and should be mentioned here for the sake of impartiality. EquestrianAlex (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says Next to the Dale Farm site there is an authorised travellers' site known as Oak Lane. This has Council planning permission, and provides 34 legal pitches. [3]
Does it neeed more? Myrvin (talk) 18:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partly Existing and Legal 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dale Farm. 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/20120607061637/http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3976&faqdetailid=4003&inplace=true to http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3976&faqdetailid=4003&inplace=true
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023005243/http://www.basildon.gov.uk:80/index.aspx?articleid=3976&faqdetailid=4007&inplace=true to http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3976&faqdetailid=4007&inplace=true
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110925042122/http://www.basildon.gov.uk:80/index.aspx?articleid=4022 to http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4022
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425080503/http://www2.basildon.gov.uk/Website2/newsroom.nsf/PRDALE/97FCDC9CBF1A8EBC8025790C0057756E?OpenDocument to http://www2.basildon.gov.uk/Website2/newsroom.nsf/PRDALE/97FCDC9CBF1A8EBC8025790C0057756E?OpenDocument
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120425080519/http://www2.basildon.gov.uk/Website2/newsroom.nsf/PRDALE/D65CE5D4800920B280257911002B498A?OpenDocument to http://www2.basildon.gov.uk/Website2/newsroom.nsf/PRDALE/D65CE5D4800920B280257911002B498A?OpenDocument
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110408151101/http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/OurJob/cre_annual_report__and_accounts_2006-7__2_.pdf to http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/OurJob/cre_annual_report__and_accounts_2006-7__2_.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dale Farm. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3976&faqdetailid=4007&inplace=true
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.basildon.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4022
*Added archive https://archive.is/20111024200651/http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/county_news/9312646.Dale_Farm_eviction__Live_updates/ to http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/county_news/9312646.Dale_Farm_eviction__Live_updates/
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) 12:02, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Your addition to :Dale Farm has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia.  For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.  — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm hoping that another editor will adjust/attribute the new material I introduced; the source was "Dale-Farm-travellers-camp-concrete-strewn-wasteland.html".  True, the Daily Mail often borders on fake news, and that was my mistake. Not enough time at the moment to sort this. GerixAu  (talk) 19:28, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  December 2018 

message: Added this to Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism. Whilst this might not seem intuitive that Dale Farm would be of interest to anarchists I remember at the time of the eviction, the crisis was big in the anarchist circles, with anarchists actively going to defend the site and working otherwise in solidarity through action, media work, etc. etc. This is only from my experience being involved in that space at the time admittedly. I can try to provide sources if needed but even a quick search of 'Dale Farm. Anarchists' has stories on just DDG front page about anarchists 'infiltrating' dale farm ahead of it's eviction, with indymedia having an inerview with anarchists on site ahead of the eviction. SP00KYtalk 01:54, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do any independent, reliable, secondary sources cover its connection to anarchism? czar 07:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikiproject Anarchism