Talk:Fort Halstead

message: "Vital?". Can't see how a fortification that was constructed to meet an obsolete threat of invasion by Napolean could be "vital".
It was built for ammunition storage between 1895 and 1897 and disposed of by Government auction in 1921: that's how important it was.
It was reacquired by the War Office in 1937 for armament research, but again, it is hard to quantify how important it was to winning or preventing any conflicts.
A local newspaper states that the land the establishment is on has now been sold and might be developed in to housing, which suggests it isn't needed now, either. 
--81.174.151.35 19:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully the changes I made last night have gone some way to improving the neutrality and accuracy of the article.  I agree that references to "vitality" etc. were neither of the above.  The link you provide appears to be speculation, given that the last paragraph explicitly states that Dstl have no plans to scale down operations at the Fort.  DJR (T) 13:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Reference to the Act in the context it was makes no sense, since all civil servents are required to sign in. Even I had to do that when I worked for the Department of Transport! Nick Cooper 22:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that now you've told us all - does that get you locked up in the Tower? :)  Lynbarn 23:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bah! I forgot about that! Nick Cooper 23:38, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official Secrets Act 

message: A nuclear bomb was indeed developed there, not just "believed" to have been so. In addition, it led to the in-joke that it was the only nuclear weapon ever to have been dropped on British soil - as it is speculated to have rolled off a shelf. I'm not sure Im allowed to say much more, however, many of the "beliefs" posted on this page are indeed true 81.130.45.60 (talk) 19:49, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Believed? 

message: "On 17 June 2011 Dstl announced that its facilities at Fort Halstead are to close following a review of operations at the site."
As this 'news' is more than two years old, do we need to keep this article? Has FH closed? if not, then surely an update is well overdue?
RASAM (talk) 20:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Closure

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Fort Halstead. 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/20081120153325/http://www.tendra.org/faq/ to http://www.tendra.org/faq
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 23:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Fort Halstead. 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/20110928062749/http://www.dstl.gov.uk/downloads/Dstl_Fort_Halstead.pdf to http://www.dstl.gov.uk/downloads/Dstl_Fort_Halstead.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121020122441/http://www.freewebs.com/heinkill/PAC.pdf to http://www.freewebs.com/heinkill/PAC.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928003326/http://www.iee.org/OnComms/pn/History/HistoryWk_Computing_in_Britain.pdf to http://iee.org/OnComms/pn/History/HistoryWk_Computing_in_Britain.pdf
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) 10:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified