Talk:Deal, Kent

message: Anyone else agree that a section on the town's century or so of coal mining would be relevant? or should there alternatively be a Kent mining industry article which references Deal (if there isn't one already). I can have an attempt if people think it's worth doing. Ormondroyd 09:58, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It would definitely be a worthwhile addition, but I know almost nothing about the topic! Stewart Adcock 19:44, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a Kent Coal Field page already, with a link to this one Wavy (talk) 10:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mining industry  

message: I removed the link to the "official town website" because although it exists, it is virtually empty. There is certainly no useful information that would qualify it for inclusion under WP:EL rules. Trying to find anything at all on that website just ends in frustration.--Shantavira|feed me 18:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official website 

message: I've never heard of either of these, and there's no citation.  Where has it come from?   Ormondroyd (talk) 10:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed it pending a reliable reference, it was added an IP user in January. MilborneOne (talk) 11:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "...(or Deale or Deal Sands)" 

message: someone seems to have broken the references section on the main article, the items 4 & 5 are effected. not sure how to fix.  2.216.226.50 (talk) 01:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  References section broken 

message: Someone might want to deal with this.... Nick Cooper (talk) 23:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That link is to a trivial news story from two years ago. The town council "dealt with it" a few weeks later.--Shantavira|feed me 13:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegality of crest 

message: as a child I lived in Deal from1947-1956 and there were 3 cinemas then, not two as claimed in the entry - The Odeon, The Royal and The Regent 125.209.161.2 (talk) 06:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deal Cinemas 

message: User:Martinevans123 User:PaleCloudedWhite I do not think that a settlement should have a weather box referenced to a weather station outside the area concerned, rather weather boxes should only be used if the weather station is inside the area covered by the article. Hence countries and regions could justifiably have one, but not villages nor many towns. The one in the article should be removed, perhaps leaving a  link to a page which justifiably includes one. SovalValtos (talk) 12:09, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully agree. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weather box 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Deal, Kent. 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/20150925091206/http://dealcommunityradio.com/ to http://dealcommunityradio.com/
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) 12:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A disagreement arises between myself (ArbieP) and SovalValtos about whether to show four photographs alongside the Notable People section for Deal, Kent. These are the photos in question:
File:John Whitaker Hulke.jpg|John Whitaker Hulke, 1870
File:James Arbuthnot.jpg|James Arbuthnot, 2007
File:Norman Wisdom (1965).jpg|Norman Wisdom, 1965
File:ElizabethCarter.jpg|Elizabeth Carter, c.1740
The case in favour is that they add a little colour and life to the words of the article and the mixture of photos makes for an attractive contrast. This is particularly so, for example, between James Arbuthnot and Norman Wisdom.
The case against is that the photographs are better on their linked pages. Using images gives the individuals undue weight, as none of them had a major impact on Deal. They do more to illustrate the individuals than they do for Deal. 
Contributors with an interest in Deal, Kent are invited to have their say here
ArbieP (talk) 17:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure the images add anything to what is an article on Deal, some of the "notable people" have little to do with Deal so adding a picture doesnt really represent an image of Deal that adds to the article. I would vote for not including them. MilborneOne (talk) 20:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

text: I feel sorry for Deal if it's so boring it needs a 1965 black and white photo of Norman Wisdom (taken in Schiphol) to add a little colour and life. But I agree with MilborneOne. It's obvious that Deal is spoilt for choice with famous people, and I don't see how one could fairly choose between them. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat relevant but I had an issue with Arbie adding these sorts of images on a lot of town articles back in what August or so, Ofcourse I wasn't gonna go on a one man crusade and start reverting however I did have an issue, Arbie seeing as myself and indeed others have an issue it might be better for you to get consensus for your additions instead of simply adding them and getting into a thousand and one disputes with people. –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 21:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The case in favour given above is aesthetic, which does not comply with the guidance given in MOS:PERTINENCE, which says images should not be primarily decorative. Incidentally even with adding images for just four of the over 20 Notable People listed, they extend outside the section in desktop view. No objection to the images themselves they are just proposed for the wrong article.SovalValtos (talk) 17:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Photos in the Notable people section 

message: Deal and Walmer are adjoining but separate towns, Civil Parishes or Communities. The current consensus is that there are separate articles on Deal and Walmer rather than mingling material into one article. User:Lloydmayer wishes to add material relevant to the Walmer article to this one on Deal  with the justification that 'Walmer is part of Deal'. Should content in the future be mingled into one article or continue to be kept in two separate articles?SovalValtos (talk) 10:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: For the avoidance of doubt, the Royal Marines rifle ranges at Walmer were part of the former RM barracks at Deal. Lloydmayer (talk) 11:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Lloydmayer please could you give a source for a rifle range at Walmer.  I can only find references to a range along the coast near Oldstairs bay south of Kingsdown,. not one in Walmer The barracks themselves seem to have been in Walmer not Deal..SovalValtos (talk) 11:36, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: From Moonraker: “They scrambled down a steep cliff-path to the beach and turned to the right beside the deserted small-arms range of the Royal Marine Garrison at Deal.” During my time, the RM barracks were always known as RM Deal; RM Depot, Deal; or RMSoM, Deal - though they may have historically been referred to as RM Walmer. Now all converted into flats, apartments, and new-build homes. :-( Lloydmayer (talk) 12:42, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We now have enough with the Moonraker quote to edit the mention of the Fleming novel without giving undue detail or mentioning off topic settlements such as Kingsdown or Walmer.SovalValtos (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off topic Walmer content