lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Biggin Hill

message: Biggin Hill is trying to be part of the big league and it wants to grow to be a bigger airport. 
It is a competitive with London City Airport... some rivalry there. See ASA advertising issue.
Although Biggin Hill is within M25 and closer to London than Gatwick.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.25.35 (talk) 23:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think most residents would disagree with you! Biggin Hill has to win the award for least "London" out of any part of any London borough except for North Ockendon maybe! Justgravy (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy / Background / POV 

message: I will add a few photographs of Biggin Hill when i am authorized to do so and when i am back from holiday, any suggestions as to what to capture? --Muz (talk) 20:24, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty though the current Polesteeple Hill picture is, surely a better image would one of Main Road, as that is the main thoroughfare of the town? Jaruzel (talk) 08:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 
Talk:Blackheath, London

message: >> part of the Village around Blackheath Halls lie on the north and eastern side respectively, in Greenwich.
I'm pretty sure that Blackheath Halls is in Lewisham.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.148.103 (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lewisham/Greenwich

message: I moved this cited but inaccurate assertion here:
"Some vestiges of the Danish camps may be traced in the names of Eastcombe and Westcombe, on the borders of Blackheath, where 'coomb' refers to the Saxon for 'camp'." 'Greenwich', The Environs of London: volume 4: Counties of Herts, Essex & Kent (1796), pp. 426-93 accessed: 26 May 2007
Combe actually has no link to Saxon nor Danish.--Wetman (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The historian of 1796 as is typical for The Environs of London posits instead a corruption of "camp"; very unlikely, I agree. Swanscombe in the area, if anything confirms your theory of no corruption, as does the near-standalone raised land of both.- Adam37 Talk 17:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: About ''[[cwm]]''

message: I was told when I lived in the area that a number of pits on Blackheath had been filled in with rubble from world war 2 bomb sites and that's part of the reason why so much of the site is flat. Can anyone confirm?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidvaughanwells (talk • contribs) 18:07, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I read similar on one of the related web pages about Blackheath or Greenwich. Will try and find it again! DavidAnstiss (talk) 09:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

text: http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/lewisham/assets/histories/blackheath - found it! DavidAnstiss (talk) 10:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A valuable fill-in of what happened to the many voids so long exploited for gravel.- Adam37 Talk 17:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: world war 2

message: There are two links: List of people from Greenwich & List of people from Lewisham. Well, how about those who are listed to be born in Blackheath, as actress Sarita Choudhury? She's is not in those lists, and there isn't a list in this article... 85.217.14.140 (talk) 23:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also 

message: Should links to particular vendors be included when others are excluded?
> Multiple fitness boot camps, including Be Military Fit, run classes on the heath. This usage increased during the COVID-19 lockdowns with Gyms in London closed. Yuri Schimke (talk) 18:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional links
Talk:Brondesbury

message: What is a "place"? A neighborhood, district, region, sub-township? Is it legally separate, or just colloquially considered separate? "Place" could mean a street corner or a pub. Isn't there a better term for what Brondesbury is? -- ESP 06:28 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
:Related to why that was put by an earlier editor, the reason is TfL define station names. These in turn towards Inner London (Inner London is strictly speaking east of the station and also of the Edgware Road) are invaribly in modern usage what people consider the area they live in (partially or wholly) to be.  Jokingly they put Kilburn tube station north of and so closer to Brondesbury manor than 200 metres away Brondesbury station which is closer to the linear settlement heart of Kilburn.  This is pathetic so yes, if you are pompously addicted to manor terms you will say wherever you live in Kilburn north of its centre that you live in Brondesbury even though Kilburn's station is closer to you; on the other hand if you are fixated by modern trends and the nearest tube station you will say you are in Kilburn like most photographs do of the area (none of the streets say Brondesbury I note in the Wikimedia Commons) and only if you live right within the 100-metre radius catchment of Brondesbury might you say you are in Brondesbury but the road there is mainly Kilburn High Road so again you might as well just say Kilburn.  It is a joke, the stations should simply be reversed in name.  If Brondesbury is a place the tube operators are doing their best to deny its existence.- Adam37 Talk 10:58, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Place
Talk:Canonbury

message: The article currently has: "Originally a fresh water supply in Tudor times (c.1613)."
Shouldn't this be "Stuart", not "Tudor"? The Wikipedia article on the Tudors suggests that the Tudor period ended 1603.
But my edit (Tudor--->Stuart) was reversed, making me suspect that the situation is more complex than I thought...
80.176.158.37 20:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I based the revert on this article. If that is incorrect, feel free to change it to Stuart. IrishGuy 21:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've edited the section to remove Tudor and/or Stuart and instead to have a link to the Wikipedia article on the New River as this discusses the history of the creation of the New River in more detail. In summary, Colhurst first proposed the aqueduct in 1602 (Tudor period) but the water did not start to flow until 1613 (Stuart period) - so I don't think the phrase "fresh water supply in Tudor times" is the best description of what happened.80.176.158.37 08:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tudor or Stuart? 

message: Canonbury and East Canonbury appear to cover much of the same area, without the later being well defined. Since neither contain much substantive content, and don't have too many links, I'd suggest they be merged into one. Kbthompson 18:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with the merge, but a massive clean up will be needed. --Regan123 19:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done deal, work completed, some refs added - could do with a lot more! Kbthompson 10:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Chalk Farm

message: The local school was pronounced "lame" by Ofsted? Any reference for that, or is this just juvenile vandalism?
"Cold cottages" sounds fake to me.  Attestation/sourcing, anyone?  --Dupes (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

message: Banbury shot Sir Charles Williams there during the Regency. There was a notorious murder there much later. Either of these could be behind the Cockney rhyming slang ‘Chalk Farm=arm’. Some research here could improve the article. 77.69.34.203 (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Death

message: The article as it stands says "The area is not formally defined" and then goes on to say "an area that extends to Ainger Road and takes in part of the Primrose Hill open space". That's the problem because the area to the west of the railway is all Primrose Hill and has been considered a long time. However my understanding is that Chalk Farm (as in the lower Chalcot/Caldecote farm) was on Regent's Park Road in the middle of the main Primrose Hill shops. So historically this description might be reasonable but not really now. It is probably more accurate to see the area as equivalent to the new (as of 2022) Haverstock Ward which includes St Saviour's Church (that describes itself as in Chalk Farm) and the station, but paradoxically Chalk Farm Road forms part of the border so it does not include The Roandhouse. Also does not include "Chalk Farm Morrisons" as was and is - the old larger version where the buses once pulled into has been knocked down and is being converted into flats. Not sure either how far east of Haverstock Hill (originally Hampstead Road) the Chalcot estate originally went - but I don't think the modern idea of "Chalk Farm" bears much resemblance to the original boundaries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.181.108 (talk) 11:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Where is Chalk Farm?
Talk:Charing Cross

message: The article says: "The site of the cross has been occupied since 1675 by an equestrian statue of King Charles I", and later "1865, a replacement cross was commissioned from E. M. Barry by the South Eastern Railway as the centrepiece of the station forecourt; about 160 feet (49 m) east of the original site".
This implies that the monument outside the station is 49 m away from the statue of Charles I, but there is no way that can be true. It's more like a few hundred metres. I'm not sure which is wrong, the distance, or the assertion that the statue is on the original site. 86.151.118.165 (talk) 21:37, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: shows a plaque by the statue that reads "On the site now occupied by the statue of King Charles I was erected the original Queen Eleanor's cross a replica of which stands in front of Charing Cross station." One would think this plaque is correct, so maybe it's the distance that is wrong. OTOH, I've just noticed that 217.155.193.120 above says "the original Eleanor Cross site is now a good way 'down' Whitehall", which would make it even further away from the present one. Dunno. 86.176.211.219 (talk) 14:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distances don't add up
Talk:Chislehurst

message: The photo is poor and is of the cave attraction rather than something that signifies Chislehurst itself. However it's better than nothing, I hope. Secretlondon 13:03, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: Where does the spellins of chiselherste come from? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alec - U.K. (talk • contribs) .
: I don't know where your spellins (sic) comes from, but the traditional spelling is a modern version of what you will find in the second sentence of the article. Kevin McE 16:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: Following some pretty nasty comments in the edit summary, and to be clear I am considering requests at ANI/DELREV/RPP, I have restructured to achieve broad WP:UKTOWNS compliance, which is usually the best way to go in the event of disputes..  The result is not perfect but is the right way forward and the article can gradually be reworked towards that structure.  It is likely Culture and community and Landmarks sections will eventually take some of the content currently in the Geography and history sections in time.  The Toponymy header may be dropped in time depending on how the history section evolves.  Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructure 1 June 2021
Talk:Chiswick

message: Hi,
as a bus buff I missed a note about London Transport's famous Chiswick Works opened in 1921 where buses were repaired, overhauled, repainted and in the beginning even constructed. Moreover buses underwent tilt tests and drivers where instructed on skid pans.
Could anyone add a few lines, please. I would be very grateful as I think that it's a part of London's absorbing transport history.
Thank you very much 
Michael (Munich, Germany) Frank Michael 68 (talk) 07:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chiswick Works
Talk:Clapham

message: I have changed "£488. 14" to "£488 14s" in the Early history. The source, BHO on Clapham (Holy Trinity) at https://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-dict/england/pp616-620#h3-0014, also has "£488. 14", which is unclear and may be a scanning artefact. "£488 14s" seems the most plausible sense. --Frans Fowler (talk) 16:15, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Corrected source name -- Frans Fowler (talk) 16:18, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  £488 14s
Talk:Cockfosters

message: Why was the area information replaced by the band? Isnt it more like an advertisment?
Okay, I'll bite. What is the derivation of the name? Avalon 03:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A man who 'fosters' (looks after) chickens and thus cockerels. At least that's what the status quo says. --80.42.9.199 19:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: One of the short stories features a visit to "lost property" at Cockfosters Underground station
:What does this mean? I'm sure there was never a Lost Property Office at this station. Valetude (talk) 18:19, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why it's in quotes. It's fiction based on the idea that as the end of the line, that's where it would all end up. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: That's useful to know, Phil. But it neeeds to be in there. Valetude (talk) 01:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's attributed to a collection of short stories. Did you go there expecting there to be a lost property office and found there wasn't? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I didn't. I just wondered what the statement was referring to, as most readers would. But thanks anyway for your enlightenment. Valetude (talk) 13:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify, please
Talk:Crayford

message: I am removing contribution by 89.167.173.179 "Child Tv star and model Anthony Forgham grew up in crayford and was set for a life of fame and stardom before he was Questioned for the murder of a classmate on a school trip in the mid 90s."  Many people grew up in Crayford.  Anthony Forgham does not appear elsewhere in the Web and seems to be unimportant. Apuldram (talk) 10:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV Star? 
Talk:Dalston

message: The neutrality and factual accuracy of certain sections of the article are clearly in doubt.
*Redevelopment and future -- this section appears to make value judgements on the benefits or otherwise of urban regeneration, uses weasel words and does not cite sources.
*Entertainment -- I have attempted to remove the most glaring impartialities in this section, but further clean-up is probably required.
*Shopping -- this is the section perhaps most in need of serious revision.
Headlessness 12:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the use of the adjective "lively" also somewhat subjective?  Don't you really mean noisy, disparate, hectic, over-populated, and any one of a number of similar adjectives?Hoovering (talk) 13:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I ask why you are removing impartialities? Sure the objective is an impartial article?46.7.85.68 (talk) 16:34, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed sections 
Talk:Deptford

message: I see that the :Metropolitan Asylums Board operated a fever/smallpox hospital at Deptford - see the external link of locations in that article (it was apparently called South Eastern Hospital) and the brief mention I have just added to :James Niven. I would imagine that there is sufficient information out there to warrant a mention but I would be drifting down yet another byway if I did so myself. So, if anyone has the wherewithal and inclination to pursue it ... - Sitush (talk) 19:57, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. This - New Cross Hospital, Deptford - appears to be the hospital, and there's a bit of information here and here. I'll look into a bit more. SilkTork (talk) 10:13, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hospital(s) 

message: I have referred out to the main article and removed some incorrect and/or unsourced statements, e.g.
*Women "butchered" i.e. slaughtered sheep — an old rumour, founded on a kernel of truth (women and girls did clean sheep and cattle guts from 1891 to 1898, until it was banned), only supported by one junk source and a broken link.  See the main article, The Gut Girls.
*Statistics from an article in The Times.  True so far as it goes, but not representing a typical era for the market.Ttocserp 10:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: History: Foreign Cattle Market
Talk:Edgware

message: Spelling of 'Edgware' in this article is very inconsistent. Also, the statement that the spelling 'Edgware' is incorrect, is itself incorrect. It may be incorrect for the original Saxon settlement, but not the modern town.IxK85 03:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: Come on, you expect us to believe this: "Ecgi's weir" I think you are pulling a fast one. Znethru
See http://www.barnet.gov.uk/archives-edgwarehistories --User:Brenont (talk) 03:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Is someone having a laugh?

message: This section is very vague. Are these people who ever happened to spend a single night in Edgware? Also, it's entirely unreferenced. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 08:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable people 

message: It's in a non-rhotic area.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.149.241.58 (talk) 10:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: pronunciation
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject/Old history

message: I've been thinking of videotaping the syllabus of Ballroom Dance steps I've learned so I can review steps I forget.  But then I figured, why not put it online so the next guy doesn't have to do the same thing?  Actually, Wikipedia got me started on the whole idea of putting them online - what better place for them?  If I get motivated enough to do it, though, it might take some work on Larry/Jimbo's part to host them here and make them available through the wiki interface.  Fantastic!  By the way, Jason and Magnus are both working on uploading programs.  I imagine they'll be ready pretty soon! --Larry
:Presumed inactive.  --Eequor 01:20, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

message: Two items here should either be removed or updated:
*Wikipedia NEWS takes users to Recent changes
*Year in Review takes users to 20th century. Er...the 20th century is not a year. Kingturtle 02:08, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: This page needs updating!
Talk:Heathrow (hamlet)

message: * Are there any old photographs of the hamlet? - Gobeirne (talk) 00:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Photographs

message: * Someone put a humorous version of the timeline which is in this article, at http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/heath-row.html . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Versions 

message: As this article currently stands, there is far too much detail for what is a (former) hamlet of little significance. It reads like a community history project in which every single bit of information that can be found has been included, with no bar for notability - WP:NOTEVERYTHING says "Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful." I cannot think of why Wikipedia should record that a former resident was "Patrick Howell, market gardener. an area on the east side of Heathrow Road, including King's Arbour, where he grew rhubarb under the trees".  On top of this, very little of this information is referenced. I tried to remove a lot of this detail, but the editing was undone and so I wanted to start the discussion. Ilikeeatingwaffles (talk) 08:28, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't argue that the detail is not excessive as judged by the Wikipedia policy. But I must say I found it a very interesting read, particularly when you consider that more or less everything referred to has been absolutely obliterated by the airport. I would hope that the editor who put in all this material, which is now likely to be taken out, might publish it on another website or even as a local history book. The story of Heathrow is interesting in itself but is also relevant to the current debate about the extension of the airport, with one plan for a new runway threatening to largely wipe out the nearby village of Harmondsworth. Dubmill (talk) 09:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive detail 

message: * FWIW (no published source), I attended the school in the 1950s, when it was only known as Sipson Primary School. At the end of lessons, I would have to cross to the south side of the A4 road, in order to catch a westbound bus to go home. The only fellow pupil from south of the A4 lived in one of about four houses at Perry Oaks.PeterWD (talk) 13:43, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Heathrow School
Talk:Heston

message: Why are we advertising a school? I'm going to edit this part as inappropriate. Marinheiro 10:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Second para under "History"
"Before 1229, Heston was part of the parish of Gistleworth (Isleworth) before being taken by Henry III, who subsequently granted it to the Earl of Cornwall. It covered until the late 19th century creation of Hounslow from outlying parts of two adjoining parishes, 3,823 acres (15.47 km2)."
Could the original writer please explain what is meant by "covered" here. --Oldontarian (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Covered"? 

message: The readers of this international encyclopedia might not understand that Charing Cross is a point considered to be the centre of London from which distances are measured. The link to this fact does not appear in articles about places in Greater London. Surely it should not be repeated in article after article without explanation. No wonder Americans say Wikipedia is too British for their liking. --Oldontarian (talk) 11:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charing Cross
Talk:Highgate

message: Highgate wood is not the highest part of Highgate. North Hill is. Look on an Ordnance Survey map. 78.86.18.55 (talk) 18:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: Is anyone able to point towards a map of the area considered to be Highgate? I'd like to research 86.0.203.120's height claim, but it's hard to do when I'm not sure how much of the surrounding area is actually Highgate.
I have found the Highgate Neighbourhood Forum's map, declaring the boundaries of what they consider to be Highgate.
Shane (talk) 07:11, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundaries 

message: Is there really a need for a “Modern Notoriety” section? An unsolved death from thirty years ago doesn’t really seem to warrant inclusion as “notorious”, especially when other - perhaps more significant events, such as the October 1993 I.R.A. bombing of a business in the high street (one of five explosions and a failed detonation on a single day) doesn’t even warrant a mention. Jock123 (talk) 16:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notoriety?