This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
City of London flag is incorrect, it doesn't apply to Greater London or to those towns/boroughs under the jurisdiction of the GLA/Mayor. Does anyone have a copy of the Teddington crest (a picture of a swan) or failing that a copy of the Middlesex coat of arms?
Somebody is keen to tell us that "Teddington is a leafy, green and highly desirable London suburb" (my emphasis). See the article's recent history for the editor's persistence.
He or she can either (a) provide clear evidence for the assertion that Teddington is significantly leafier, greener or more highly desirable than its neighbours, or (b) see such talk deleted per WP:NPOV. -- Hoary 23:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry what? I was just saying that he or she may of been right. No need to be so rude. 87.112.90.232 10:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Also in this person's defence they probably know a lot more about Teddington than you do. 87.112.90.232 10:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Also I would like to point out that your precious article contradicts what you say. You said that Bushy Park is next to Teddington, whilst the article says that Teddington is "home" to the park. Please don't waste my time with unencyclopedic nonsense and do please remember that this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article, not second-form secondary-school homework. 87.112.90.232 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC) It's pretty widely accepted that Teddington is leafy and desirable - that's why house prices are so high in Teddington. I've worked and lived in the area for around 10 years and most of the roads off the high street (particularly on the river side) are either lined or dotted with trees. There are a few green areas about, the river area of Teddington is lined with trees and Bushy Park borders Teddington (it also borders other towns but it is considered an asset and benefit of living in Teddington so why not list it under the Teddington Wiki page). Have a look at any map of the area and you can see this for yourself. Saying that Teddington is leafy doesn't mean that its more leafy than Richmond etc - just that it's green in itself, as is Richmond. Also using the word 'desirable' doesn't mean it's more desirable than its neighbours, just more desirable than the average town. Waldopepper 21:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Let me get this straight, youre argument for why 'leafy, green and highly desirable' shouldn't be in this article is comparison, ha! It is easy to compare anything to anyhting. For example everyone knows Tokyo is a big city, oh but hold on when you compare it to space it's not so big. Well, there's a shock. So now that I've proven your comparison argument is wrong I shall use the magic of numbers. Teddington is home to the 2nd largest park in London and there are hundreds of trees. 87.113.81.113 22:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Just because you know you are wrong. How much do you actually know about Teddington? Mushimight
OK no worries, I was just answering Hoary's request for evidence (see above), but Wikipedia should not be objective in any case. The description in question could be interpreted as information about the town, but could fall on the side of simply a point of view - it's probably best left out anyway. It's always difficult to judge these comments depending on the article - something like "Hendrix was the most influential and talented electric guitarist in rock music history" is useful information, but still based on opinions, albeit widely accepted ones and it's sometimes difficult to cite collective sources of such views which you should really do. Waldopepper 23:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
OK how about, "Teddington has been described as leafy,green and highly desirable" or something along those lines. 87.112.85.183 10:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Would a reliable source be the people around the area? 87.113.22.38 18:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
This is really getting rediculous and we've got to somehow clamp down on it. This person is so bent on doing this dumb edit, he's created/using multiple IP addresses to avoid banning. I've sent the following message to most of the one's he's used so far and hopefully he'll read it here:
I and many other editors on Wikipedia would be most grateful if you could please do the right and considerate thing and stop this stupid row about "leafy, green and highly desirable" for Teddington which is blatant spamming, impossible to back up with reasonable citations and violates the rules for Wikipedia which the rest of us willingly abide by.
This is not the place for promoting your town, no matter how pleasant it may be, and if you would like to contribute to the Wikipedia community, please do so by making sensible, encyclopaedic edits that truly benefit others and do not reflect your own views.
As I say, we would all be very grateful if you will refrain from wasting your and our time when we could ourselves be making a positive difference to the article on Teddington and others, on this stupid, pointless and unhelpful endeavor.
Thank you. Alexllew 18:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I have put in a request for this to be protected. Alexllew 19:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I went for a walk yesterday and found the place (a) leafy (too many leafs if you ask me, but that's autumn for you); (b) green (positively verdant, this time of year); and (c) highly desirable (as attested to by the exorbitant prices in the estate agents' windows and the corresponding sold boards outside sundry houses). So the case would seem to be proved (proven?). 78.146.152.164 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 09:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
a) I've added the description 'leafy, desirable', sourced to an article in a national broadsheet newspaper b) I had no involvement in the exchanges above, this is the first time I've looked at this article c) I don't live, work or have any other personal involvement in or with Teddington Londonarchitect ( talk) 00:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
The area of south London where I live would never be described in these terms - more like 'urban, gritty', therefore this type of description, so long as it is sourced, differentiates and explains the character of the area. So yes I think this information does help. Londonarchitect ( talk) 10:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Look, i have lived/live in Teddington, and yes, it has trees... well done — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.204.129 ( talk) 17:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
If I were to right a sub-section on the two main shopping streets of Teddington would I be allowed to write the names of the shops or are there rules against that? Thebaronoflondon 18:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I was just thinking of writing a small paragraph on the two main shopping streets, the High Street and Broad Street. But luckily there are quite a few independent shops on these streets. The paragraph will probably be just slightly longer than the MP for Teddington (which I also wrote).? Thebaronoflondon 13:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The allegedly famous residents Charles Duncombe, Daragh Conor and Rufus Ferrabee are so famous that they're redlinked. Duncombe existed. Ferrabee only appears in commercial scrapes of Wikipedia; his article in Wikipedia was deleted. (I've read it; it looks like some schoolboy fantasy.) How about Conor? Without proof that he's notable, I'll soon delete mention of him. -- Hoary 01:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Does any reason exist for the absence of Thomas Traherne in this list? If not, I will add him. The Angel of Islington
Norman Henderson was actually a co-inventor of the Goosay Engine (2 cylinder, side valve, single crank) and the design was significantly enhanced after he emigrated to South Africa in the late 1800's.
Correct. There used to be a plaque about Henderson on Udney Park Road but it disappeared when the big house was pulled down to make way for flats. 78.147.110.67
The infobox tells us that the MP is the MP for Twickenham. He has his own article. I don't see the point of summarizing it within this article too, and so I'm about to delete the section. -- Hoary 23:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
No. Bring it back, please. If someone didn't know who the MP of Teddington was they would come to this page to find out. Thebaronoflondon 15:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In a spirit of openness I have decided to remove all references to Teddington being 'leafy, green and highly desirable'. (this unsigned post was by 87.114.159.105)
Thanks a lot Alexllew 21:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
They are of no use to anyone and simply demonstrate how only a few 'editors' control this page. Nothing more. They are worthless examples portraying the reactions of 'editors' when they don't go their way. So yes, in that case they are invaluable if you want to understand how this page is run. (the previous unsigned comment was by 87.114.142.209)
Bit rude, but I can't be bothered to complain any more. I have lost the will to care. If you are not willing to face up to the fact that you are far too strict on what goes up on this article and if you are not willing to accept this, I can't help you. Several times many people have placed things on this page, all of them with a great depth of knowledge on the whole of the London region. Historians, scientists, all of them with a good knowledge of the area, greater than yours I'm sure, have tried to add sections and every time they have been taken down. Simply because they are newcomers and are not in the group of ‘editors’. It saddens me. ... comment added at 18:12, 1 June 2007 by 87.113.16.60
Oh dear, this is sad. They were only five words. You can't admit when you were wrong as you messed up and missed out on the opportunity to have some great people writing for you. Hoary it's poor. Please don't answer back, I am too busy. Goodbye. ... added at 09:34, 2 June 2007 by 87.113.70.100
OK guys, don't go mad. I've added a very much enlarged history section, tell me what you think. I'm sure it can be improved and changed. I think some more should be added to the modern day bit, but I'm all conked out. Give it a chance. Thanks. Alexllew 16:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia must become a TRUE encyclopedia!!!
As of my last edit, the disgusting evidence of opinion and personal taste that was evident everywhere in this corrupt article that spoils the name of wikipedia has been purged, now we can rejoice. Wikipedia is becoming a harbour of pure fact, soon no intuition, personal thought, advancement or instinct will occur here, just pure logic and reason. This article contained null non-empirical facts. Enjoy fellow editors unite!
77.96.99.100 00:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need so many [ citations]for so facts that no-one of worth is actually challenging? The dramatic language that IP 77.96.99.100 is using suggests this unregisterd user is simply trolling for some sort of reaction and that's what he's getting. Why not simply revert the article to before his changes? Waldopepper 12:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I do, in fact, agree with the 'troll' (please, think of better phrase it is so terrible). He, or she, is raising a valid point, which is that none of these claims were sourced whatsoever. So my message to you 'editors' is simple: pull your act together and get them sourced ASAP or before you know it you will have an army of 'trolls' on your hands. 87.114.135.214 17:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Why is Teddington called "an area of greater London" when it's just a town. Isn't it? Alexllew 16:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Have removed the following unreferenced, non-encyclopedic sub-section:
== Notable residents ==
Among the many things Wikipedia is not, it is NOT a directory. A case might be made for including notable residents in a historical context i.e. dead and gone (but with Teddington being of major relevance in that person's life) - and obviously with corresponding reference. The fact that So-and-so lived - or at present lives - there is not noteworthy. Where do we put the limit: X lived there for over a year? Y was born there but moved when s/he was 3? -- Technopat ( talk) 14:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
(outdent)Greetings Malick78, Hoary, Motmit and All, Best way of getting a reaction is to be bold :)
Malick78, basic Wikipedia guidelines say that unreferenced stuff gets thrown out - and where is the encyclopedic element in a list of notable residents (as in the particular list I deleted, but left here for further consultation)?
Hoary, bluelinks are not accepted as references at Wikipedia - imagine I slapped the bluelinked
Ghengis Khan as a former resident of Teddington High St. What would happen? Someone, not being quite as extreme bold as yours truly, would slap a
citation needed template on it and it would stay there till the cows... As you rightly point out, each individual item would have to be referenced. However, in my pessimism, I foresee a day when the list of "Notable residents" is longer than the actual article itself. (I've seen this happen at
Abbey Road Studios, where the list of people/bands who have recorded there started to get out of hand. Solution? A new article called
Chronological list of recordings made at Abbey Road Studios. The same thing is now happening with the list of people/bands who have recorded there...
Motmit's statement that any truly notable - and fully referenced - resident should be fully incorporated into the body of the text is consistent with Wikipedia. And the context would ensure the required notability.
And just for the record, the fact that other Wikipedia articles have a "Notable residents" section is not a justification... Looking forward to feedback, folks. -- Technopat ( talk) 02:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
(outdent)Sorry! Meant to write English Heritage but my politically correct subconcious got the better of me. The main criteria that most appeals to me re. this issue is, of course, the following:
In order to be eligible for an English Heritage blue plaque, a figure must have been dead for twenty years or have passed the centenary of their birth.
-- Technopat ( talk) 22:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I do recall seeing a plaque (it might not have been blue) on Noel Coward's house 77.102.33.169 ( talk) 17:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
There is no towpath in Teddington. The towpath is on the other side of the river at Ham. The linked article is therefore probably misnamed, and if the murders took place in Ham, they don't belong in the Teddington article. Comments? Motmit ( talk) 08:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Have you a reliable source for that statement? Personal memory is not enough. A quick Google search shows that both of the victims and the murderer were from Teddington. The FOI request, which I added yesterday to the TTM site, explicitly calls the killings the "'Towpath Murders'" and gives "Teddington Lock" as the location. Regardless of where the fatal blows may 'actually' have been dealt, it's Teddington which is associated with them. Moreover, what do you suggest as the alternative? Catiline63 ( talk) 14:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
One of the editors who revert my edits lives in Hampshire and another proclaims that he, or she, is against the censorship of Wikipedia. Hence, the first is ignorant of the area he attempts to edit information on and the other is a hypocrite who is willing to suppress a widely-held opinion.
As an individual I have every right to edit this page as I provide an accurate and fair portrayal of the area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.113.141 ( talk) 03:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I am almost blind, but I feel that the red spot labeled Teddington in the map is on the south bank. pietro 79.54.62.180 ( talk) 08:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC) the problem is that the deep blue lines seem waterways, the river disappears below the black boundaries of the borough and the enlarged map does not mark teddington. thanks for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.54.62.180 ( talk) 08:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Pinging George teddington about his series of edits: George, you do realize that this is an encyclopedia article? Like any other London suburb (or if you prefer, "suburban enclave"), Teddington may well have estate agents keen to attract the free-spending children of Russian, American, Azeri, or other despots/plutocrats; but Wikipedia isn't the place for such advertising.
If I'm missing something and you instead consider your edits as adding neutral, informative material towards an encyclopedic end, please comment here so that I'll understand properly. Thanks! -- Hoary ( talk) 00:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
City of London flag is incorrect, it doesn't apply to Greater London or to those towns/boroughs under the jurisdiction of the GLA/Mayor. Does anyone have a copy of the Teddington crest (a picture of a swan) or failing that a copy of the Middlesex coat of arms?
Somebody is keen to tell us that "Teddington is a leafy, green and highly desirable London suburb" (my emphasis). See the article's recent history for the editor's persistence.
He or she can either (a) provide clear evidence for the assertion that Teddington is significantly leafier, greener or more highly desirable than its neighbours, or (b) see such talk deleted per WP:NPOV. -- Hoary 23:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry what? I was just saying that he or she may of been right. No need to be so rude. 87.112.90.232 10:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Also in this person's defence they probably know a lot more about Teddington than you do. 87.112.90.232 10:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Also I would like to point out that your precious article contradicts what you say. You said that Bushy Park is next to Teddington, whilst the article says that Teddington is "home" to the park. Please don't waste my time with unencyclopedic nonsense and do please remember that this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article, not second-form secondary-school homework. 87.112.90.232 11:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC) It's pretty widely accepted that Teddington is leafy and desirable - that's why house prices are so high in Teddington. I've worked and lived in the area for around 10 years and most of the roads off the high street (particularly on the river side) are either lined or dotted with trees. There are a few green areas about, the river area of Teddington is lined with trees and Bushy Park borders Teddington (it also borders other towns but it is considered an asset and benefit of living in Teddington so why not list it under the Teddington Wiki page). Have a look at any map of the area and you can see this for yourself. Saying that Teddington is leafy doesn't mean that its more leafy than Richmond etc - just that it's green in itself, as is Richmond. Also using the word 'desirable' doesn't mean it's more desirable than its neighbours, just more desirable than the average town. Waldopepper 21:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Let me get this straight, youre argument for why 'leafy, green and highly desirable' shouldn't be in this article is comparison, ha! It is easy to compare anything to anyhting. For example everyone knows Tokyo is a big city, oh but hold on when you compare it to space it's not so big. Well, there's a shock. So now that I've proven your comparison argument is wrong I shall use the magic of numbers. Teddington is home to the 2nd largest park in London and there are hundreds of trees. 87.113.81.113 22:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Just because you know you are wrong. How much do you actually know about Teddington? Mushimight
OK no worries, I was just answering Hoary's request for evidence (see above), but Wikipedia should not be objective in any case. The description in question could be interpreted as information about the town, but could fall on the side of simply a point of view - it's probably best left out anyway. It's always difficult to judge these comments depending on the article - something like "Hendrix was the most influential and talented electric guitarist in rock music history" is useful information, but still based on opinions, albeit widely accepted ones and it's sometimes difficult to cite collective sources of such views which you should really do. Waldopepper 23:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
OK how about, "Teddington has been described as leafy,green and highly desirable" or something along those lines. 87.112.85.183 10:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Would a reliable source be the people around the area? 87.113.22.38 18:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
This is really getting rediculous and we've got to somehow clamp down on it. This person is so bent on doing this dumb edit, he's created/using multiple IP addresses to avoid banning. I've sent the following message to most of the one's he's used so far and hopefully he'll read it here:
I and many other editors on Wikipedia would be most grateful if you could please do the right and considerate thing and stop this stupid row about "leafy, green and highly desirable" for Teddington which is blatant spamming, impossible to back up with reasonable citations and violates the rules for Wikipedia which the rest of us willingly abide by.
This is not the place for promoting your town, no matter how pleasant it may be, and if you would like to contribute to the Wikipedia community, please do so by making sensible, encyclopaedic edits that truly benefit others and do not reflect your own views.
As I say, we would all be very grateful if you will refrain from wasting your and our time when we could ourselves be making a positive difference to the article on Teddington and others, on this stupid, pointless and unhelpful endeavor.
Thank you. Alexllew 18:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I have put in a request for this to be protected. Alexllew 19:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I went for a walk yesterday and found the place (a) leafy (too many leafs if you ask me, but that's autumn for you); (b) green (positively verdant, this time of year); and (c) highly desirable (as attested to by the exorbitant prices in the estate agents' windows and the corresponding sold boards outside sundry houses). So the case would seem to be proved (proven?). 78.146.152.164 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 09:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
a) I've added the description 'leafy, desirable', sourced to an article in a national broadsheet newspaper b) I had no involvement in the exchanges above, this is the first time I've looked at this article c) I don't live, work or have any other personal involvement in or with Teddington Londonarchitect ( talk) 00:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
The area of south London where I live would never be described in these terms - more like 'urban, gritty', therefore this type of description, so long as it is sourced, differentiates and explains the character of the area. So yes I think this information does help. Londonarchitect ( talk) 10:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Look, i have lived/live in Teddington, and yes, it has trees... well done — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.204.129 ( talk) 17:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
If I were to right a sub-section on the two main shopping streets of Teddington would I be allowed to write the names of the shops or are there rules against that? Thebaronoflondon 18:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I was just thinking of writing a small paragraph on the two main shopping streets, the High Street and Broad Street. But luckily there are quite a few independent shops on these streets. The paragraph will probably be just slightly longer than the MP for Teddington (which I also wrote).? Thebaronoflondon 13:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The allegedly famous residents Charles Duncombe, Daragh Conor and Rufus Ferrabee are so famous that they're redlinked. Duncombe existed. Ferrabee only appears in commercial scrapes of Wikipedia; his article in Wikipedia was deleted. (I've read it; it looks like some schoolboy fantasy.) How about Conor? Without proof that he's notable, I'll soon delete mention of him. -- Hoary 01:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Does any reason exist for the absence of Thomas Traherne in this list? If not, I will add him. The Angel of Islington
Norman Henderson was actually a co-inventor of the Goosay Engine (2 cylinder, side valve, single crank) and the design was significantly enhanced after he emigrated to South Africa in the late 1800's.
Correct. There used to be a plaque about Henderson on Udney Park Road but it disappeared when the big house was pulled down to make way for flats. 78.147.110.67
The infobox tells us that the MP is the MP for Twickenham. He has his own article. I don't see the point of summarizing it within this article too, and so I'm about to delete the section. -- Hoary 23:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
No. Bring it back, please. If someone didn't know who the MP of Teddington was they would come to this page to find out. Thebaronoflondon 15:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
In a spirit of openness I have decided to remove all references to Teddington being 'leafy, green and highly desirable'. (this unsigned post was by 87.114.159.105)
Thanks a lot Alexllew 21:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
They are of no use to anyone and simply demonstrate how only a few 'editors' control this page. Nothing more. They are worthless examples portraying the reactions of 'editors' when they don't go their way. So yes, in that case they are invaluable if you want to understand how this page is run. (the previous unsigned comment was by 87.114.142.209)
Bit rude, but I can't be bothered to complain any more. I have lost the will to care. If you are not willing to face up to the fact that you are far too strict on what goes up on this article and if you are not willing to accept this, I can't help you. Several times many people have placed things on this page, all of them with a great depth of knowledge on the whole of the London region. Historians, scientists, all of them with a good knowledge of the area, greater than yours I'm sure, have tried to add sections and every time they have been taken down. Simply because they are newcomers and are not in the group of ‘editors’. It saddens me. ... comment added at 18:12, 1 June 2007 by 87.113.16.60
Oh dear, this is sad. They were only five words. You can't admit when you were wrong as you messed up and missed out on the opportunity to have some great people writing for you. Hoary it's poor. Please don't answer back, I am too busy. Goodbye. ... added at 09:34, 2 June 2007 by 87.113.70.100
OK guys, don't go mad. I've added a very much enlarged history section, tell me what you think. I'm sure it can be improved and changed. I think some more should be added to the modern day bit, but I'm all conked out. Give it a chance. Thanks. Alexllew 16:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia must become a TRUE encyclopedia!!!
As of my last edit, the disgusting evidence of opinion and personal taste that was evident everywhere in this corrupt article that spoils the name of wikipedia has been purged, now we can rejoice. Wikipedia is becoming a harbour of pure fact, soon no intuition, personal thought, advancement or instinct will occur here, just pure logic and reason. This article contained null non-empirical facts. Enjoy fellow editors unite!
77.96.99.100 00:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need so many [ citations]for so facts that no-one of worth is actually challenging? The dramatic language that IP 77.96.99.100 is using suggests this unregisterd user is simply trolling for some sort of reaction and that's what he's getting. Why not simply revert the article to before his changes? Waldopepper 12:28, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
I do, in fact, agree with the 'troll' (please, think of better phrase it is so terrible). He, or she, is raising a valid point, which is that none of these claims were sourced whatsoever. So my message to you 'editors' is simple: pull your act together and get them sourced ASAP or before you know it you will have an army of 'trolls' on your hands. 87.114.135.214 17:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Why is Teddington called "an area of greater London" when it's just a town. Isn't it? Alexllew 16:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Have removed the following unreferenced, non-encyclopedic sub-section:
== Notable residents ==
Among the many things Wikipedia is not, it is NOT a directory. A case might be made for including notable residents in a historical context i.e. dead and gone (but with Teddington being of major relevance in that person's life) - and obviously with corresponding reference. The fact that So-and-so lived - or at present lives - there is not noteworthy. Where do we put the limit: X lived there for over a year? Y was born there but moved when s/he was 3? -- Technopat ( talk) 14:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
(outdent)Greetings Malick78, Hoary, Motmit and All, Best way of getting a reaction is to be bold :)
Malick78, basic Wikipedia guidelines say that unreferenced stuff gets thrown out - and where is the encyclopedic element in a list of notable residents (as in the particular list I deleted, but left here for further consultation)?
Hoary, bluelinks are not accepted as references at Wikipedia - imagine I slapped the bluelinked
Ghengis Khan as a former resident of Teddington High St. What would happen? Someone, not being quite as extreme bold as yours truly, would slap a
citation needed template on it and it would stay there till the cows... As you rightly point out, each individual item would have to be referenced. However, in my pessimism, I foresee a day when the list of "Notable residents" is longer than the actual article itself. (I've seen this happen at
Abbey Road Studios, where the list of people/bands who have recorded there started to get out of hand. Solution? A new article called
Chronological list of recordings made at Abbey Road Studios. The same thing is now happening with the list of people/bands who have recorded there...
Motmit's statement that any truly notable - and fully referenced - resident should be fully incorporated into the body of the text is consistent with Wikipedia. And the context would ensure the required notability.
And just for the record, the fact that other Wikipedia articles have a "Notable residents" section is not a justification... Looking forward to feedback, folks. -- Technopat ( talk) 02:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
(outdent)Sorry! Meant to write English Heritage but my politically correct subconcious got the better of me. The main criteria that most appeals to me re. this issue is, of course, the following:
In order to be eligible for an English Heritage blue plaque, a figure must have been dead for twenty years or have passed the centenary of their birth.
-- Technopat ( talk) 22:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I do recall seeing a plaque (it might not have been blue) on Noel Coward's house 77.102.33.169 ( talk) 17:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
There is no towpath in Teddington. The towpath is on the other side of the river at Ham. The linked article is therefore probably misnamed, and if the murders took place in Ham, they don't belong in the Teddington article. Comments? Motmit ( talk) 08:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Have you a reliable source for that statement? Personal memory is not enough. A quick Google search shows that both of the victims and the murderer were from Teddington. The FOI request, which I added yesterday to the TTM site, explicitly calls the killings the "'Towpath Murders'" and gives "Teddington Lock" as the location. Regardless of where the fatal blows may 'actually' have been dealt, it's Teddington which is associated with them. Moreover, what do you suggest as the alternative? Catiline63 ( talk) 14:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
One of the editors who revert my edits lives in Hampshire and another proclaims that he, or she, is against the censorship of Wikipedia. Hence, the first is ignorant of the area he attempts to edit information on and the other is a hypocrite who is willing to suppress a widely-held opinion.
As an individual I have every right to edit this page as I provide an accurate and fair portrayal of the area. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.113.141 ( talk) 03:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I am almost blind, but I feel that the red spot labeled Teddington in the map is on the south bank. pietro 79.54.62.180 ( talk) 08:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC) the problem is that the deep blue lines seem waterways, the river disappears below the black boundaries of the borough and the enlarged map does not mark teddington. thanks for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.54.62.180 ( talk) 08:41, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Pinging George teddington about his series of edits: George, you do realize that this is an encyclopedia article? Like any other London suburb (or if you prefer, "suburban enclave"), Teddington may well have estate agents keen to attract the free-spending children of Russian, American, Azeri, or other despots/plutocrats; but Wikipedia isn't the place for such advertising.
If I'm missing something and you instead consider your edits as adding neutral, informative material towards an encyclopedic end, please comment here so that I'll understand properly. Thanks! -- Hoary ( talk) 00:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)