Talk:Woolwich

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

'Redevelopment'

The tone of this article towards the 'redevelopment' does not feel genuine. No mention of any controversy, lack of social housing, displacement and rising rents hurting locals and feels like it was written entirely by property developers wanting to market their flats. Terms like 'enjoying a renaissance', 'a more desirable place to live', 'turned its fortunes around' along with the juxtaposition with 'decline' (in itself questionable in that it includes the presence of 'Sikhs and black Africans' as symptoms) creating a narrative of decay to serve as a counterpoint to. It reads like a marketing brochure, not a neutral factual page. This comment was written by User:2001:630:e4:4220::3ff:985f, 19:06, 3 May 2017

You may have a point. I have recently been adding a lot to the article (which was quite outdated) and may be responsible for some of the quoted phrases. Some of that might need modification indeed. The 'decline' of the town has been described in Saint & Guillery's Volume 48 of the Survey of London, using exactly that term. The arrival of Sikhs and Africans happened more or less simultaneously and can be described as a result of economic and population decline (availability of social housing) but should in no way be described as an example of decline.

I'd like to think I write from a relatively neutral perspective as I look at the area as an outsider (I mainly live in the Netherlands). However, neutrality is an illusion. I do follow developments in Woolwich closely and I have come across very little opposition to what's happening in Woolwich. Maybe you know more than I do, so please add and let's make the article better! Kleon3 (talk) 09:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Population

The population figures include Glyndon and Plumstead, both of which are not in Woolwich proper. It's probably worth either removing these or, if we're going by postal district, adding Shooters Hill ward. This comment was written by User:2001:630:e4:4220::3ff:985f, 19:06, 3 May 2017

We could do both indeed. The history of Plumstead and Shooters Hill is closely connected to the growth of Woolwich as a military town. There is no such thing as Woolwich proper. Like most areas in London there are no defined borders. Volume 48 of the Survey of London describes the area within the Medieval parish borders, which includes areas near the Thames Barrier but excludes most of Spray Street Quarter and other town centre areas. Population figures are given by ward but those do not always correspond with what people 'feel' like a certain area comprises. An example is Herbert Road, generally considered part of 'Woolwich'. Yet there is a 'Plumstead' dental clinic and a 'Shooters Hill' RC Church. Perhaps the 'decline' of Woolwich in the 80s and 90s has made people want to disassociate with that name? Kleon3 (talk) 09:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Local Bloggers

Is that ok? As far as I know the blog I've cited is a genuine local commentator. I will try and find more such opinion and remove my edit for now, I think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.35.91.110 (talk) 12:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trams

Re the text

Woolwich was the start of the route of the last London tram, in July 1952 (see http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/6/newsid_2963000/2963092.stm). However this is in dispute as the greenwich guide states. certainly there were no tram lines to be seen in abbey wood by 54 whilst there were in woolwich, The Woolwich area trams were the last to be scrapped, being finally abandoned on the night of 5 July when a special tram was driven through enormous crowds from Abbey Wood to New Cross, finally arriving at its destination in the early hours of 6 July.^[1]

I think the confusion arises because, according to my research, tram route 46 ran from Beresford Square in Woolwich towards Lewisham and beyond, but trams were housed in a depot in Abbey Wood. Accordingly, the tram may have started from Abbey Wood but would only have taken on passengers once it reached Woolwich. Paul W 13:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ http://www.greenwich-guide.org.uk/july.htm Greenwich Guide, day by day

Distance to North Greenwich tube station

How far from Woolwich is North Greenwich tube station? (miles/km/walking time)
Dubidub 10:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of riots?

I don't have time atm to edit the article, but I was very surprised to find no mention of the rioting/looting/arson in the article. References are on the main riots article iirc. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've put in a short bit about the riots today, and also added a little bit to the main Riots page. I will add more photos etc. once I get home from work this evening. I am sorely disappointed there was no mention of Woolwich prior to this! Jinnythesquinny (talk) 13:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Woolwich attack

Please could someone take a photograph of the general area of the attack in Wellington Street, and upload it to Commons.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:27, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crossrail

Transport section needs updating with information on forthcoming crossrail connection

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Woolwich. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100328165151/http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk:80/greenwich/main/woolwich.htm to http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/greenwich/main/woolwich.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.greenwich-guide.org.uk/july.htm Greenwich Guide, day by day

[1]