Talk:West Pier

message: This article manages simultaneously to be slanted toward (relatively) recent events and not up to date! - Jmabel | Talk 22:18, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitely needs work 

message: At the moment the pier's listed status is mentioned in the lead but not the body of the article. It was first listed in 1969 and here's the source but I've not added it myself because I'm not quite sure how it would best fit in the narrative. Nev1 (talk) 01:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for listing

message: 5 August 1872 was the opening date for Hastings Pier. Brighton's West Pier opened on 6 October 1866.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.156.95 (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening date 

message: Just a quick note on the lead, the opening paragraph should give a brief overview of the important parts of the topic (in this case location, opening, closing, dereliction and Grade I listing). See MOS:BEGIN for more. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:37, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead section is supposed to give the quick overview of the important parts of the topic.  The first paragraph should say what the article is about but does not act as a lead section for the lead section.  Duplicating material and ordering the lead illogically is not supported by any style guidelines.  186.9.130.128 (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point that the previous version put too much in the opening. I simplified the lead down to the basics as supports by the infobox. Having a longer paragraph that talks about the 19 century history rather misses the elephant in the room that the infobox picture shows its near total destruction, doesn't it? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 05:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not making any sense.  Its dereliction is clearly discussed in the lead section, which is an overview of the whole article.  You seem to be under the impression that the first paragraph should be a lead section for the lead section; it should not.  186.9.133.5 (talk) 18:00, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That does not seem to be my interpretation of MOS:BEGIN; however, in any case the GA reviewer can make a final decision on what is the preferred version. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: When the pier burned down, everyone immediately jumped to conclusions and thought "got to be arson". But was anyone charged with it and what was the evidence? I would prefer to stick to straight, uncontroversial facts. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:31, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There's this, from The Argus: "A huge blaze which engulfed the historic West Pier in Brighton today [28 March 2003] was probably the work of arsonists, say firefighters. ... Station Officer Phil Thompson, of Preston Circus fire station in Brighton, said this afternoon: "The fire is definitely of doubtful origin. There is no way it could have started on its own." Seems legit...? Nortonius (talk) 09:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's great. I've reverted to put the arson claim back in with that source to bolster it. The BBC source says officials could not conclude arson (which is probably what I was thinking when I started the thread), but "thought to" or "believed to" is not "was" so I think we've covered it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arson 

message: "The pier was the first to be Grade I listed in Britain ..." As Britain includes Scotland and Scotland has a different listing system (viz: Grade A, Grade B or Grade C), should this more correctly say: "The pier was the first in Britain to be listed at Grade I ..."?
Haynesta (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 13:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That's longer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on West Pier. 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/20040717024324/http://www.westpier.co.uk/ to http://www.westpier.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) 00:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Recently I created a page on the West Pier Trust. Since then when one tries to enter the page it redirects you to the West Pier Page. Any ideas? Best Wishes. Frankie-is-amazing Frankie-is-amazing (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The redirect was created by  after there was a general consensus that a standalone article was not appropriate. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:36, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of The West Pier Trust Page 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion