Talk:Lewisham

message: I don't feel like going all through the article edit history to try to figure out what is obvious nonsense, and what just might possibly have some legitimacy. AnonMoos 01:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why I added template

message: Can someone get a pic of the former citibank tower in the centre of the shopping centre??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.163.212 (talk) 11:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tower

message: Someone needs to get rid of that blank area at the top of the article, it looks awful!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gul e (talk • contribs) 10:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Big blank area

message: I have heard Lewisham being pronounced with a "sh"-sound in the middle (ʃ), even though the s and the h come from different morphemes. Is this the standard pronunciation? If so, I would add /l'ʊɪʃəm/ to the article. I always thought it was pronounced /l'ʊɪshəm/.
Iago212 06:24, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As a non-native spaker of English, I had also always thought it was s-h, but since it is pronounced as "sh" in the prerecorded messages in London Transport vehicles, I believe that "sh" is indeed the standard pronunciation. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Dann bin ich ja wenigstens nicht der einzige. Will add the pronunciation to the article now. Thanks, Andreas! Iago212 11:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Thank you very much for the insight and the info about Fowler's book. I have to look into that. I am baffled that I have never heard of him.Iago212 11:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: This section seems un-encyclopedic to me. There are neither references nor sources, just bald assertion from beginning to end. It may also be en-ecyclopedic in the way that (even if it is the unvarnished truth) it over-emphasizes the activities of a tiny number of unrepresentative people within a very restricted age band. If this is an important item then I suggest it should find its own space elsewhere rather than lopside a general overview of a London Borough Dezwijger (talk) 10:51, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't belong in the History section and should probably be trashed entirely for reasons given by Dezwijger Modal Jig (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewisham Gangs 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lewisham. 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/20100602000714/http://www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan/docs/londonplan08.pdf to http://www.london.gov.uk/thelondonplan/docs/londonplan08.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) 23:00, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm of the impression that the current title image, of the Renaissance housing development tower is not a recognisable, representative enough icon of Lewisham to make it suitable for this use. As a resident of Lewisham for my whole life, I suggest using an image of the clock tower in the town centre, perhaps one of Lewisham's only landmarks other than the train station, shopping centre and citibank tower, though the latter options are characteristics which exist in many similar towns; the Lewisham clock tower only exists in Lewisham. Let me know what you think.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edisg1 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title image for the article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Lewisham. 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/20060818222026/http://www.lewishamlawcentre.org.uk/ to http://www.lewishamlawcentre.org.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316223953/http://m25cctvinstallers.co.uk/cctv-installers/east-london/cctv-installers-lewisham to http://m25cctvinstallers.co.uk/cctv-installers/east-london/cctv-installers-lewisham
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060427064012/http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/lewisham/main/index.html to http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/lewisham/main/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015182534/http://www.lewisham.myzen.co.uk/gallery/ to http://www.lewisham.myzen.co.uk/gallery
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060815161900/http://www2.lewisham.gov.uk/lbl/LewishamVoices/ to http://www2.lewisham.gov.uk/lbl/LewishamVoices/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100806185708/http://www.lewishamforum.co.uk/ to http://www.lewishamforum.co.uk/
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) 20:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lewisham. 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/20160817211217/http://www.gold.ac.uk/facilities/curzon-goldsmiths/ to http://www.gold.ac.uk/facilities/curzon-goldsmiths/
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) 07:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It seems there aren't really any good sources for the population of Lewisham proper - or for that matter, how the town of Lewisham is defined. Of course there's the London Borough of Lewisham. That's easy. There is the electoral ward of Lewisham Central. That's also easy from ONS data. However, I have not found any definition for a geographic place or "town" called Lewisham. Someone seemed to have arbitrarily defined "Lewisham" being made up of the wards of Lewisham Central, Lee Green, Ladywell and Blackheath. Are there any reliable sources for this? I have not found this definition in any publications from the local authority. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 22:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population / Geographic boundaries 

message: The paragraph that lists the pubs in Lewisham ("As of 2019, there are seven pubs in Lewisham") is confusing - it lists the pubs that are in the town centre of Lewisham, but there are way more pubs in Lewisham borough. There's about 15 in New Cross alone.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.112.201 (talk) 22:48, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is about the town of Lewisham, not the borough. New Cross is part of Deptford I believe. Both are part of London Borough of Lewisham but not the town of Lewisham. The article is incoherent, though. In the lede, it draws on Lewisham Central, Ladywell and Blackheath - for some bizarre reason which no one has explained to my question above this. I don't see the point of this pub list. It's unsourced and a bit WP:OR in my opinion. Will remove. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 07:09, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, I've made a comment on the next section above regarding Lewisham's boundaries. I just want to see if other editors agree before making an edit. Including Blackheath seems a bit odd, as it is a place with it's own distinct identity. 86.145.253.109 (talk) 18:23, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Pubs 

message: The lead needs to follow and summarise the main text. The main text is clear that Lewisham became part of the county of London in 1889, so placed that in the lead. Per WP:UKCOUNTIES we use past tense when referring to the historical county.  Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Here  is one of the many discussions about HCs. It mentions Lewisham. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You are aware of the guidelines as we have discussed on Talk:Romford, so what is your reason for reverting in an edit that is not compliant with the guidelines which I have again quoted here? It is all very well to say "WP:BRD" in your summary, but you have provided no reason why Lewisham is an exception to the guidelines. Moreover the lead must summarise the main, and the main tells us that Lewisham was in Kent until 1889 when it became part of the County of London. My edit summarised that and your reversion says something in Wikivoice that we should not be saying because in Wikivoice we use past tense when talking about historical counties. Again, Wikipedia guidelines, as they exist now, say:  Perhaps you would like to propose a guideline compliant counter edit. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

text: Guidelines also state HC can be mentioned in the lead. The guidelines are stale, of no effective use and need a complete re-write. Please consider that if a rule isn't followed by a large number of people it is the rule at fault, not the people. I would happily take part in a meaningful debate on how that should be done but this is not the place to do it. You are in my unwritten list of quality editors, if that makes any difference, so I have no doubt you know how to start such a debate, and where to do that. If you haven't already looked, there is a library of archived discussion at ukgeography-how  to write about counties and many places elsewhere. I don't think it appropriate that I start a debate because I have already done that before, more than once. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:59, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As you have been told in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London and elsewhere, if you don't like the guidelines and believe a change is due, you must raise an RFC on the guidelines pages. You know you are editing against the guidelines. You also know that you are editing against consensus. The correct route is not to defend edits that do not conform to guidelines and consensus, the correct path for you now is to open that RFC. If the guidelines change, the pages will change to match them. Until then, we do not say that historic counties still exist in wikivoice as per the guideline I have quoted. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:07, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

text: I have commented on the talk Project London page - there is one discussion going on at three or four articles. BTW, I am not editing contrary to guidelines - I am sticking to talk pages. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:33, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You reverted my edit on this page from a guideline compliant version to a non compliant one, with the edsum WP:BRD even though I had already opened in talk here and established elsewhere that my edit had consensus. Discussion you were aware of and contributed to. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:41, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So is there any reason not to put the information back on this page as per the guidelines? Or is there an alternative guideline compliant presentation we could make? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Put back if you want to, I won't edit war. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 00:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  County