Talk:Worthing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Glaxosmithkline

Worthing is home to Glaxo smithkline. One of it's many factories is based in East Worthing. The pharmaceutical plant has been a big source of employment for those in and around the area.

[edit] Other citizens

I removed: "Chris Baldwin, a high-profile campaigner for the legalisation of cannabis and member of the political party Legalise Cannabis Alliance;" because it was inserted in a way that directly implied he was a member of The Worthing Workshop, which he isn't. If you want to re-add this sentence so it flows with the rest of the article, or create a section for other notable citizens (specifically those not categorised as 'Artistic and Literary') and re-add him then go right ahead, just don't dump a name into the middle of an unrelated sentence. Newsmare 16:24, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] See Also\External Links

Why has this been removed? I can understand conforming to a manual of style but this information is now missing!! Can someone explain why & how this has benefited the article Infomonkey 10:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move, of course, per clear primary meaning. —Nightstallion (?) 08:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Support for sure, as primary topic disambiguation. — sjorford (talk) 14:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Support this is going to be a hard one to lose, seeing as almost the entirety of 'Worthing' traffic is actually for Worthing in West Sussex. Don't get complacent though, if you read/edit Worthing, West Sussex then it doesn't take a moment to add support. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 05:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose as this is completely counter to existing naming conventions for places. What you should do, and can do without needing an admin or WP:RM, is move Worthing to Worthing_(disambiguation), and then change the redirect at Worthing to point to Worthing, West Sussex. Then add an {{otheruses}} template. See Boston for an example. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 23:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Rubbish. This proposal is not counter to existing naming conventions. There is a naming convention which states that when a topic name's primarily in use is for one particular placename or one particular person e.g. Exeter, Durham, Winchester, Birmingham (and a host of other places) or Michael Jackson this it takes precedence. The suggestion you have made however IS the norm for places in the United States where the "placename, US State" is commonly used and that is why Boston, Mass is not at Boston and Atlanta, Georgia is not at Atlanta. The only exception to this ruling for US places AFAIK is New York City, where New York, New York was deemed inappropriate. Outside of the US this ruling does not apply. Jooler 00:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Cannabis culture

While I support the mention of cannabis cafés in this article, the amount of information presented in this section really needs trimming down or entering into a seperate article or articles, as it's dominating the page. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 20:25, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the comment above, there's more about the cannabis culture than the town itself. --Frenchy21320 20:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gang violence

Cut from the main article:

"The 'tradition' in Worthing of gang violence, as with the Skeleton Army and others discussed above, continues to this day. Currently, the town's two main gangs are the East Worthing Mafia[citation needed] and the Worthing Crew[citation needed] - led[citation needed] by the recently released from prison 'one-boy crimewave' Andy Dillon. [2] Both hail primarily from the East Worthing area[citation needed] . Encounters between the two groups are (given the nature of criminal gangs) surprisingly rare; feuds with similar groups from Lancing, along with attacks on the public [3], are far more common[citation needed] . Members have been responsible for[citation needed] , among other things: numerous racially motivated assaults [4][5], attacks on policemen [6], and even attacks on persons present at meetings for the prevention of gang violence. [7]"

"The East Worthing Mafia has been known to boast of its answer to the Chelsea Smile - the Worthing Smile - which consists of the removal of the victim's eyeball, followed by defecation in the newly empty eye socket[citation needed] . It is, however, highly unlikely that this procedure has ever been performed. It should also be noted that the group appears to be a mafia in name only, though it could well be responsible for some or all of Worthing's crack cocaine sales[citation needed] . [8]"

I was going to enter all the requests for citations on the articles main page, but it made it look so poor I cut it out and put here until such time as it's sourced correctly. The linked articles, as they stand, do nothing to prove connection between any of the incidents and the alleged gangs named in the contribution. If you want to add truely notable crimes or criminals from the Worthing area, then feel free - but avoid the urge to document stuff you've seen, stuff you've heard, or create some no-mark scroats wet-dream version of a vanity page. Seriously, I'd welcome the inclusion of gang culture if it were actually notable, but as it stands it's just the same shit that's been happening since the year dot i.e a bunch of local fuck-ups hang out together, occassionaly get caught breaking the law, some go to jail, some o.d., some grow up and move on to bigger and better... and no-one much cares but those directly involved. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 14:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

If you must make criticisms of things posted here, you'd do well to a) give valid ones and b) do this in an adult manner. Your personal opinion on who 'cares' about the matter in question is completely irrelevant, and your talk of 'wet dreams' and such speaks for itself. The idea that every single sentence requires citation is especially ridiculous given that the majority of this very article lacks verification. If you'd kindly take the time to look around Wikipedia you would soon find that gang activity is found to be noteworthy - please find somewhere else to enforce your opinions. LukeMcCabe 00:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Ok, let me make this easy for you. You're attributing crime to the above named gangs. You. Not the articles you're using as support. Without citation. That makes it unverified. It also makes it original research. We don't take that here. If you don't like these facts, then look elsewhere.
Show Wikipedia one article that actually names the gangs, one article that confirms your claim as to who leads them, one article that claims the named gangs are responsible for the crimes you've attributed to them, one mention of the Worthing Smile or the alleged gangs' dominance in Worthing's crack distribution. Show us how a source other than yourself has tied all of this together into the picture you're trying to paint here. Then we'll take what you've offered, as you've offered it.
You've obviously got an interest to have rounded up the newspaper articles, so go the extra mile and make it count, if you think it does and if you can. All the best. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 01:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to add that if I could think of a way of cutting out what is uncited from the section in question without totally decimating it, I would have. However, I'm unable to do so, just as I'm unable to find cites for the questionable stuff anywhere. All I would be left with after removing those parts would be something along the lines of: "Worthing, like many other towns, has ongoing issues with youth criminality. Here's a list of some external articles from local papers detailing some...". If LukeMcCabe can do a better job, then I hope they go ahead. The only other option is to keep going around in circles until mediation is required. I'd rather resolve this simple dispute without such measures though, so I'll leave this article alone for a while to give LukeMcCabe or other interested parties time make the necessary citation. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 02:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Somehow the fact seems to have eluded you that news reports give names only - and this is very rare - in the event of there being undisputed evidence proving that the gang or member in question is actually responsible for whatever is being reported. As a resident of Worthing I am well aware of the prominent gangs here; if you also live here, as would seem likely, you have surely noticed their grafitti everywhere. With regard to your last statement it is fair to say that I have gone quite far enough (see aforementioned point about lack of citation in the rest of the Worthing article) and that you are in no position to be challenging me to do anything.Lukemccabe 02:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I have to say that what I do or don't know about gangs/graff/gear in Worthing is not something I'd publicly distribute, and even if I was that way inclined I'd not do so as you have, because I'm able to comprehend what will and won't stick to the walls here.
Anyway, I left the matter alone for long enough. You obviously can't accept that your contribution is, at the least, original research and won't stop reinstating it after removal by myself and another established editor, WorthyDan. So far you've not shown interest in resolving the dispute, but as a last good faith attempt at resolution would you consider the 'further dispute resolution' steps outlined in Wikipedia:Resolving disputes or do you want something more final?
It's your move, as mediation can't really be requested if you're not willing to participate. I'm removing the disputed content from the article, so you have a simple, clear decision to make. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 01:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll say this in as few words as possible seeing as anything more is unnecessary... I did cite sources. Lukemccabe 21:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

None of the citations prove any of your claims, except maybe that one of the two alleged racist attacks by a group of teenagers was racially motivated, and that verdict in itself rules out gang related motives. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 03:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh and allow me to mention again (seeing as you have so conveniently ignored it the last two times it has been mentioned) the fact that the majority of the Worthing page lacks citation. In fact the 'Gang violence' section contains by far the most sources on this page. Either cite sources for everything else on the page or request that it also be removed.Lukemccabe 21:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, useless sources that are only there to back-up original research, and fail miserably to do even that. As for me 'ignoring' the other parts of the article that aren't sourced - they didn't jump out at me as some retarded fantasy, simple as that. Feel free to tag whatever catches your eye though and if it's an area I can help with I'll try and provide, as I've done for this article in the past. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ► 03:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Just read through the discussion here - there is enough sources for some coverage of gang trouble, but there is not enough coverage to draw the conclusions made here. We do not have reliable sources for the gang names, the tying of these particular gangs to these particular crimes, the gang feuds with Lancing, and the prevalence of public attacks over inter-gang attacks. The Worthing Smile section is completely unsourced, and just appears gratuitous.
WP:NPOV also talks of undue weight; is there any evidence that this violence is significant in the scale of overall crime in the town? Or perhaps that this gang violence is significantly more prevalent than in similar towns? Reports form the British Crime Survey would be useful. As it is, the news articles do not show a particularly notable level of violence compared to my experience of several comparable towns; the crime is indeed extremely unpleasant, but you have not yet established what is noteworthy in the encyclopaedic sense.
As it is, it's better to make the section absolutely watertight with further sources here than putting it on the article and having it picked to shreds by editors keen on strong citation. Strong claims need strong evidence - you have been asked for a higher level of citation, because the information has been challenged. If you want to challenge the veracity of the unsourced parts of the article, that is your prerogative, and will probably improve the article in the end. Aquilina 21:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm gayLukemccabe 02:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/o/r/Talk%7EWorthing_d941.html"