Talk:Harringay

message: MSRC, thanks for contributing your experience to my novice efforts on the 
Harringay page. I would like to continue contributing to this entry. 
A couple of issues:
1. Stylistically, is starting with etymology the standard?
2. Would you feel comfortable if we present the Etmology para like 
this?:
The district derives its name from the old name for the area which was 
recorded as Haringe in 1086.[2]. Both the names for Harringay and 
Hornsey developed from this root. Although the Harringay form was falling 
into disuse by the 18th Century, it was revived with the building of 
Harringay House in 1792.[1] A version with a somewhat different spelling, 
Haringey, was used for the new London Borough of Haringey, created in 
1965. 
There are further refs I can provide re the Etymoloogy. Do you think 
that's useful? Note, the normal 19th + 20th c spelling was Harringay. THe borough has one 'r'.
Are you thinking about any further edits? Would you consider working on
the page together? hjuk 12:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I copied this text from your email sent to me today. I hope you don't mind it being reproduced here. I started editing this article and then realised what a big job it was, so I took some time out to rest my eyes from the screen. I wrote the text for the etymology being careful not to make any original claims based on the references, so any further change would need new refernces. I plan to edit the article into more coherent section such as "History" and "Transport", then copyedit for tone and then reference. Unless someone else has a stab first. MRSC • Talk 12:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The spelling is correct now, thanks. My eyes were getting tired looking at a page of various forms of the name. MRSC • Talk 15:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Is that a the citation from 1936? Etymology is not static, Mills (2001) claims to be more authoritative than early sources, so it may be worth checking for any differences. However, broadly they both seem to be telling the same story. MRSC • Talk 18:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Be careful when editing text attributed to a citation as the change in meaning can sometimes paraphrase them incorrectly. I had to made some changes to correct some false attribution. MRSC • Talk 18:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm concerned taking a source from 1936 over one in 2001, especially as the later one claims to have new research. However, I think the best approach would be for you to rewrite as you plan but remove the citations from Mills. I will then attribute anything that I can to the newer text and/or point out any contradiction. The basic difference of opinion seems to revolve around Harringay falling out of common use between some time in history and the building of the house. Is that so? MRSC • Talk 18:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: On most occasions I would agree that newer texts may well have the upper hand. On this occasion, I think Madge is the authority. If Mills claims to have new research on the Harringay name specifically, I would be genuinely very interested to learn of that. The difference of opinion does seem to be about it falling out of use, yes. Alan Aris, a stalwart of the Hornsey Historical Scoiety who has published many papers on the buildings of the area states that a Tudor House stood on the site before Edward Grey built his late 18th Cent house. So it's not even as if a house suddenly arrived in 1792. This is quite apart from the other primary sources which continued to refer to Harringay Manor.hjuk 19:07, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This is basically what Mills is saying, there isn't any new meaning added here. As for the borough, I've seen seperately an article about how all the names were selected for all the London boroughs and it agrees with this. I will try to dig it out. MRSC • Talk 06:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There seems to be (slightly) conflicting accounts. I am therefore minded to think we should present the facts/opinions rather than try to give an authorative account. MRSC • Talk 11:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology and Page Revision 

message: Added back in the centred on Green Lanes bit - Given how indistinct London areas are, this approach can often be more helpful than the boundary one.
hjuk 17:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Locale

message: Was going to have a go at this from 2001 census data - but I hesitate to put too much work in on it (or anything!) without agreement from the London Group. The issue is that the wards do not coincide with the area that is generally recognised as Harringay. Would is be wikipermissable to make a declared calculation based on Harringay ward + 25% St Ann's ward? Not a perfect solution, I know, but not sure how to get any closer. Any comments / advice anyone? hjuk 08:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My instinct would be to talk about the broad makeup of the area and then use the wards output data as a citation, instead of saying "The population of Harringay is 25% this and 12% that. As we know we cannot say that authoritatively. However, the census outputs can be used to back up something like "There is a small but significant xyz population..." + citation. MRSC • Talk 11:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Demographics

message: What am I allowed to include in the history section/s and what's verboten? hjuk 08:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're allowed to put anything you like, but if you want it to stay there (!), from my meagre experience, any addition should be a) notable, b) referenced - and preferably tell some cogent story about the area. What marks this area out from the surrounding areas - and why. The article should be a précis, not large blocks of quotation, and link to other articles in wiki. Look at some of the better written areas for exemplars (humbly, I present Hoxton as an example). HTH Kbthompson 14:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I can't think of anything offhand, although if you're in the neighbourhood of Bruce Castle, I think they have local information sheets and a small library of local history resources. Historically, I'd concentrate this article on this locale and not spread it too widely. There will be a need for other local history articles for the neighbouring areas, and then some kind of summary/larger scale history article for the borough page (London Borough of Haringey). Generally, it's best not to go into too much detail, but deal with notable events - often they will have their own article (if they're national events). The overall aim is to provide a flavour of the character of an area, with links to external resources that people can follow up. HTH Kbthompson 15:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: Thanks for the needed fixes on the transport section Steve. The links for the 141 & 341 don't seem to be working. Is that me or is something amiss?hjuk 16:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not you.. It's because they're not yet written... I added the links because I hope to write the articles soon, but there are so many to do... If you'd prefer I can delete the links again... Generally such links give me the encouragement to start writing... By the way, the 29 isn't even half finished. I only added the first day of operation.  The 141 and 341 are not so complicated and shouldn't take that long. --IsarSteve 21:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Transport

message: "'s" naming convention taken from sub-article of the Featured Article Isaac Newton  - Isaac Newton's early life and achievements. Is that the wrong model? Or is there a subtly different rule for that one? PS: Please provide a link for the specific naming convention.
hjuk 17:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Harringay's History vs History of Harringay

message: I know. I know; I can't leave it alone can I. I think its about right now. Boundaries in London are soft. There are many views. One man's Wood Green is another's Hornsey (See Turnpike Lane!). I wanted to make sure that all views could be encompassed in any definition. I think this one does it whilst sticking to the majority understanding. I've also separated it out. Defining Harringay is more of an issue than for some other areas. It's worth getting it right. But I think it was rather interrupting the flow as it was. Having its own section means a reader can quickly see what they're getting and if not interested skip on.
hjuk 07:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How you now describe Harringay's boundary is exactly how I would liked to have defined it.. well done!  Sounds just perfect. The boundary between Tottenham and Harringay along Hermitage Road is quite difficult to define, but does lie, as you mentioned, somewhere near to the bend in the road.  --IsarSteve 08:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Harringay's Boundaries

message: Thanks for the info on the war - any more you've got (or any old photos?) would be great. I was trying to think where the bombed out bit in the Gardens would have been. Was it up on Warwick Gardens? Also do you know anything about the Ever-Ready factory I heard was on Warwick Gds till it was bombed out in the war? (PS I have some photos of Green Lanes in 1949. May be too much before your time. I can't post them on the site for obvious reasons, but if you want to see them let me know. hjuk 20:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Ever-Ready factory remained in business at least into the early seventies, perhaps late seventies early eighties?? It was also hit by a V1 and the houses on the west side of Warwick Gardens are testament to that attack, as their frontages had to be rebuilt after the war, making them different to the rest of the street. The Ever-Ready factory was originally part of the NMET North Met Electric Power Company owned by the Middlesex County Council, part of the same company that ran electric trams in Middlesex until 1933 and the formation of the LPTB.  The other two bomb sites on Warwick Gardens are from an earlier raid when Ritches, Brampton and Woodlands Park Rd were also hit. An Air-raid warden friend of the family, on duty in Harringay at the time, told me in 1968 that bombs hit the sides of the houses and the rooves still intact settled down on the debris making it difficult to rescue anyone.
Just to let you know that I DO put my money where my mouth is - I've taken an awful lot of trouble to research the history of East Harringay. It's not in the main nicely wrapped up like the western side. So it takes a bit of work. I've included everything I can find on the East on where I've got up to so far and I've yet to put it in, but the next parts on the 1750 - 1880 page will be about the east - the tile kilns, potteries, Hermiatge road houses - but there wasn't a lot there till a bit later. I've also contacted the Gardens residents assoc to find their local history bod and just spent this PM at Bruce Castle trying to gather more. I'm also going down to Hackney archives next week to try and find some new stuff. I've also recently got a little involved in local stuff and was disappointed to see how separate the Gardens and Ladder feel. To encourage both greater participation in local democracy and to build a sense of community across both parts, I'm trying to do something - just started a Harringay Community website - see external link on Harringay page. If you join, you'll be asked to name your road and there you'll see I've included all the roads in the area that I think you and I agree is Harringay. So I do hope you can see where my heart is in this. hjuk 20:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'll reply some more to these comments later, but I think the idea of separating out the Municipal Borough of Tottenham  and Tottenham (itself) a good idea, but this should be really on the Tottenham page.--IsarSteve 22:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ever-Ready factory

message: I know that the coord template is generated by the UK infobox, but Google EArth doesn't seem to scrape it successfully. So I'm trying also adding the template. hjuk 00:03, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Coord Template

message: Love this idea, but all the evidence suggests it's not true. All the old OS maps I can find show no such tunnel. There used to be a way under the New River around that point when it was cased in a wooden aqueduct up till the early 19th Cent - but as far as I'm aware no later tunnel ever existed nor is shown on any maps. It's also unlikely because it would have had to have gone under the river. I'd love to be disabused of this scepticsm with some evidence............please!  hjuk 01:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tunnel under the Railway

message: See WP:Categories. Categories should be used:
"which serve as classifications, should be the significant (useful) topics to which the subject of the article most closely belongs to as a member". Various communities within each London area are not topics to which the article most closely belongs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.149.86 (talk) 01:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Communities Categories

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Harringay. 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/20070927200208/http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc to http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927200208/http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc to http://www.haringey.gov.uk/map_of_parks_and_open_spaces.doc
*Added  tag to http://www.gigl.org.uk/igigl/siteDetails.aspx?sID=HgBI05&sType=sinc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130616052554/http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/Pages/Category.aspx?IDCategory=e0fcf37b-fc1f-4e5d-bef5-f28877842fd9 to http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/Pages/Category.aspx?IDCategory=e0fcf37b-fc1f-4e5d-bef5-f28877842fd9
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160224235101/http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/woodberry-wetlands to http://www.wildlondon.org.uk/woodberry-wetlands
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) 13:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't know what this sentence means in the Demographics section: "60% of residents are classified as being in the A/B & C1 social groups.[25]"
I looked at the wiki link for social groups and didn't find these A, B, C groups. I couldn't understand it from the reference either. 
Can someone explain this to me? Is there a good tag for this sentence to show that it's not well explained?Lena Key (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question! I agree it's not clear. I've changed the link from social groups to NRS social grades, which is what this specifically refers to. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 07:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social groups A, B, C ? 

message: This is incorrectly spelt, it is Harringey e.g. www.haringey.gov.uk 2A00:23C7:AD0D:F701:6D2D:946E:5998:B6F9 (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harringay