Talk:Northolt

message: Northolt is a villiage near ickenham  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.168.221 (talk) 12:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Location

message: I rolled back some crime stuff which was in a mess and unreferenced, but now there's nothing, which isn't good either. Sorry about that. Can anyone with local knowledge find some relevant, well-referenced stuff, please? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The section seems strange and seems written by somebody with an axe to grind about the place perhaps? Rectory Park Road, quoted, doesn't exist in Northolt (although there is a Rectory Park Avenue) and Nimrod Close is a tiny little side street which should hardly warrant a mention  - Maybe the author had some bad experiences in Northolt. Irisismykid (talk) 15:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

text: That section has now been removed by an IP editor. As it was totally unreferenced, it's difficult to shed a tear over it. I will continue to hope that if anyone wants to put something in about crime they can provide decent stuff with proper references. I do not think that the section just removed should be restored. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 20:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime 

message: Editor SovalValtos mentions there is little info with which to improve the article. I agree. So I've  started doing  a little googling for the historical side:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload%3Ft%3Darch-457-1/dissemination/pdf/vol02/vol02_13/02_13_339_342.pdf&sa=U&ei=6PaZVJXOAciqUen7gMAH&ved=0CBkQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNHewrIHEuSimqkJzGkIJeFBj6-raw
http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload%3Ft%3Darch-769-1/dissemination/pdf/vol05/5_211_299.pdf&sa=U&ei=6PaZVJXOAciqUen7gMAH&ved=0CBQQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNH6on1mOzGo4wsZsDV4NcP7Z5dqAg
<nowiki>http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/middx/vol4/pp109-113
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/london-environs/vol3/pp306-319
http://www.ealing.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/2445/northolt_village_green_area_management_plan
Haven't got time to read, digest and add the information now, as we are frantically busy, on having  received a Red  Security Alert.  Apparently, some geezer is planing to enter our  home sometime this week by  squeezing himself down the 8  inch heating flue! Might sound unlikely but around this part of North West London he is known serial offender who has perfected his technique. Be warned, he might be coming your way too.--Aspro (talk) 23:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that UKIP has policies it would like to implememnt to deal with foreign criminals coming over here and nicking work from our own. Emeraude (talk) 11:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And about time too. On previous unauthorised entries, he has emptied the sherry decanter (fortunately it was only the cheap stuff I buy the wife). Mind you, I thinks we're ready for him this time. The house now  resembles a Norwegian forest -just  to confuse him. And my daughter has genetically re-engineered our dog (or something along those lines that only teenagers know how to do) so he has sprouted a pair of plastic antlers and were his nose once was there is now this big bulbous red thing. He even frightens himself when he looks in the mirror. He sure scares the life out of me.--Aspro (talk) 17:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

text: Not sources exactly, but Britain from Above has a collection of 1920s - 1950s aerial photographs covering most of Britain. In the case of Northolt, there are numerous shots of the racecourse, e.g. Northolt Park Race Course, Northolt, 1931 and The stands and paddock at Northolt Park Racecourse, Northolt, 1934. Could supply some useful external links. Emeraude (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I was wondering about those images. What came to my mind was, since they  were shot for commercial purposes,  the 50 year UK copyright has expired on many. So a shot of the race course could be added. We might need to heed the terms and conditions of that web-site however, if we get them from there. Incidentally,  the entrance gates can be still be seen on  Google's street view:  for any local  who wondered what these gate were for. At this time of the year I'm planing what I may shoot in the summer. I think I'll take a trip down to Gunnersbury Park Museum with my light-tent and take a few images of some of the archaeological artefacts recovered  in Northolt. Although this museum is a bit iffy about photos taken for more than personal use, the realization that this is positive publicity might sway them. Also, I have a rather bad  photo of the 1452 floor brass of   Rowdell in St. Mary's church which needs re-doing with a light-tent. The last time I was in there, I couldn't take a photo of the  Gyfforde brasses either, as there  was some sort of modern keyboard instrument sitting over the top with a woman insisting on finishing her rendition of all things bright and beautiful.  Although she was probably playing all the right notes, they didn't seem to be in the right order – so I had to take my  leave to preserve my sensibilities.  If any one is passing Ealing Central Library, their Local History dept. (speak to Dr Jonathan Oats) may  may have some useful stuff too.--Aspro (talk) 12:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you'll find that Britain From Above images are unusable. Although the original photos may be out of copyright, these ars modern digitised images taken from the originals and thus subject to new copyright. The website states, "The images, information and data featured on this website are subject to Crown Copyright and other Intellectual Property Rights held by the Partners and Individual Contributors as indicated." and "No permission is given for any commercial use, distribution or reproduction". Emeraude (talk) 13:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries there: Copyright is a 'privilege' granted as of right, to those who produce creative images, which extends from the moment such a creative work is published only for  a set time. Slavish copying does not create a new copyright in that creative work (which would  allow in perpetual copyright and outside the privilege as stated in law). Otherwise, just a few organization would now be 'owning' all our  cultural heritage that our forebears created,  just by these organizations simply copying and placing a © against it. The law does not grant them that privilege - even though they might claim so. It is that site's T&C we need to consider and an image on WP would drive more traffic to them, so they may see it as a win-win.--Aspro (talk) 16:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

text: Apparently, this copy/renewed copyright myth has already cropped  upon our sister project Wikimedia Commons. National Portrait Gallery. National Portrait Gallery and Wikimedia Foundation copyright dispute. The upshot of this was, that the NPG realized that WC was making a wider audience aware that that the NPG  had a large  expository of art, in a way, that was  more efficiently than the NPG could publicize themselves.  And there was no point in the NPG lawyers  throw-all-their-toys-out-of-the-pram and demand  that the law satisfy their imaginary rights. Because the law did not grant lawyers the right to make-up-the-law to suit themselves. So these images are still on WC for all to see. That is a practical, real-world  example of the win-win  that I mentioned above. --Aspro (talk) 21:24, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for more information 

message: As User:Emeraude points out. The automatic weather station that gathers this information is situated in South Ruslip. Which is at  a lower elevation than the village of Northolt. So when a BBC outside broad-cast unit descends on the village of Northolt during a   summer heat wave, to ask the locals what they think about being in the hottest spot in Britain, they really should be asking residents of Ruslip -which is like 2 degrees hotter.  Have no objection to the Weather box (deleted by  Emeraude) to be transferred to Ruislip. This may seem like pontificating but as an encyclopedia, should we not get this right? Applaud  Emeraude for removing it from Northolt but lets go the extra mile and explain this information comes from  a robot in  Ruslip, on ground   named RAF  Northolt because that was the nearest railway station that served the airfield. Aspro (talk) 13:15, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The climate at Northolt will be virtually identical to the climate at Northolt Aerodrome, which will also be virtually identical to the climate at South Ruislip. The altitude of the aerodrome is 35-40 metres. The altitude of Northolt 'village' is 35-40 metres. It is perfectly valid to place climate data from Northolt Aerodrome within this article. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: "Virtually identical" is not good enough for an encyclopaedia. The fact is, the figures are collected by RAF personnel on the air base, which is not in Northolt. Northolt is an urban area; the airfield is essentially open country so there will be significant differences in weather readings (in temperature and wind strength especially). Given the co-ordinates for the airport's reference point (the crossing of the two runways) and the Met Office data collection point, we can deduce that the weather station is on the north side of the airfield and therefore closer to Ruislip Gardens than to South Ruislip. Weather statistics are not collected, officially at least, for Northolt village. Emeraude (talk) 12:00, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It is perfectly legitimate to state the Met Office climate statistics for Northolt within this article. If there are concerns that the weather station is not sited slap-bang in the middle of Northolt built-up area, then a short explanation of its location can be included along with the statistics. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:58, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only is it not "slap-bang in the middle of Northolt built-up area", it's not even in Northolt! That is the point. Emeraude (talk) 08:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It is about a mile and a half from Northolt 'village'; that is plenty close enough to be included as descriptive of the climate here. Please see London (Good Article, uses data from Heathrow), Yeovil (Good Article, uses data from Yeovilton) and Bristol (Featured Article, uses data from Filton), as just a few examples. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Think that when PaleCloudedWhite say's  “Good Article, uses data from Heathrow” he means  the Automatic terminal information service. You can listen in to it on 113.75 on  the two meter radio band.  Heathrow having been constructed on a low flat heath (hence  the name Heathrow) has a different climate.  It is nothing to do with distance. I use the service to double check my barometer and to decide whether I need to leave the house with an umbrella or not.  But as to temperature and visibility reported by the  LHR  ATIS (London Heathrow Airport  automatic terminal information service)   it often differs to me, eventhough I am   just a few miles away and within hearing range of their engines  as they fly almost overhead.. Have no problem at all with the 'climate chart' being included for Ruslip  because its  is an accurate  record of Ruslip's climate... but not the Village of Northolt (unless it makes clear  on the Northolt article that weather station is in Rusip and not Northolt). Accuse me of pontificating if you like, but not before  reading Microclimate.  The weather station is not in Northolt. Aspro (talk) 23:28, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not "an accurate record of Ruislip's climate" any more than it is an accurate or inaccurate record of Northolt's climate. The microclimate in my back garden is different from the microclimate in my front garden, this does not mean that a weather station sited in an open field half a mile up the road cannot be used as a description of the general climate for both front and back gardens. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 05:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's not "half a mile up the road". Northolt Station and the aerodrome control tower are 2½ miles apart. However, I believe from the met Offic website that the weather station is on the south side of the aerodrome, still 2.1 miles away. Emeraude (talk) 09:17, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're splitting hairs. From a climatological point of view, it doesn't matter if it's half a mile or 2 miles or even 5 miles, providing that basic factors - primarily altitude, aspect and distance from the sea - are similar. Which they are. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Well, that's a slightly different discussion to the one above, and is probably best decided here. According to the other editors here, these boxes couldn't possibly be used in county articles because the climate data they contain is only applicable within about a one mile radius. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: They can be used as an example for that area but as I said I would rather not use them at all. There is a simpler form of weather box showing  typical temperature and rainfall through the year.Charles (talk) 09:44, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Climate of Northolt vis Climate of South Rusilp.

message: Viscount Lascelles and Earl Harewood are the same person but the article suggests one constructed the course and the other opened it.  Wikipedia's own pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Harewood#Earls_of_Harewood_.281812.29 AsparagusTips (talk) 19:12, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pony racing 

message: Article gives no info on this. Is it "North - holt", "Nort - holt" or "North - olt" ? I guess the first, but can't be certain. Has the place been known 1000 years or more ? Boeing720 (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I used to live within a mile of Northolt, and always pronounced it as per the last of your variants, though I'm not a native of the area and could have introduced my own regional bias to the pronunciation. And of course I'm not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your honest reply! I think you're correct that "correct pronunciation" is the local one. Boeing720 (talk) 06:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I was born and brought up nearby as well. "North - holt" and "Nort - holt" are definitely wrong. I'd suggest the name is pronounced somwehwere between "North - olt" and "Nor - tholt" (with the "nor" as in north rather than "nor"). Emeraude (talk) 08:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation ? 

message: Any ideas on how to clarify the two overlapping sections  - merge them or leave the numbers and merge the text into history?Sciencefish (talk) 13:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separation of history and demographics