Talk:Bluewater
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Kent WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the county of Kent in South East England. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.) |
||
| Low | This article is on a subject of low-importance for Kent-related articles. | ||
|
Article Grading: WikiProject Kent tasks:
|
|||
from VfD: Non-notable shopping centre/center. RickK 06:04, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Large, and the article is wikified and a decent stub. Ambi 06:11, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I sometimes wonder if people writing these articles want them deleted. 'large' they say, as if that'll make it important. It's not just 'large', it's the largest in Europe. Keep.Average Earthman 09:38, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Dundrum town centre (Dublin, Ireland) has been the largest shopping centre in europe since March 2005 and even that isn't very impressive in comparison to SCs in Australia, USA and Asia. I thik 'Large' will suffice.
- Keep and send to clean up: The first par is weak, and most of it is written as if it is advertising. Geogre 12:52, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Enormous and one of the best-known shopping centres in Britain. -- Necrothesp 14:48, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep major shopping centres are encyclopedic. - SimonP 15:08, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm surprised there wasn't an article on this already. [[User:Xezbeth|Xezbeth ─┼─]] 17:42, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep -- Jmabel 21:44, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep, obviously. -- Netoholic @ 06:56, 2004 Sep 25 (UTC)
- K What next, Lakeside and Merry Hill to be nominated? I know, let's put New York up. Chris 16:46, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I don't see how this can possibly be put in the same category as an article on 'Sigmund Freud Cocaine' or 'Foreskin folding' Mrsteviec 19:10, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. It's supposedly the biggest shopping centre in the UK and it's really really big. --JuntungWu 13:57, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. If this shopping centre isn't notable, none is. AdorableRuffian 23:37, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Keep, noting however that RickK was entirely right to list it here, given the state of the article at the time and that notability was not at all obvious. Send to cleanup, still needs work. - RedWordSmith 17:15, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
Contents |
[edit] size
Of course the Metro Centre is bigger, it's the biggest in Europe. Yes, when Bluewater opened they did take that title for a short time, but after the expansion of 2004 the Metro Centre is now the biggest again. It does have a theme park, but then that shouldn't really take much away from the size of the shopping complex. Doesn't Bluewater have recreational areas? hedpeguyuk 17:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ownership
Is this quote correct? I think it has changed "and is jointly owned by four major UK institutions, Prudential plc (35%), Lend Lease Europe Ltd (30%), the Lend Lease Retail Partnership (25%) and Hermes (10%)." Can someone confirm please. I have removed it for the time being--Screen42 18:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes it is correct. See: http://www.bluewater.co.uk/bottom-navigation/corporate Pit-yacker 20:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] It's Bluewater only!
I've just done a major cleanup and expansion of the article, based on the Bluewater book published in 1999. What I didn't do, however, was move the article to Bluewater, which is the full name of the shopping centre. I know there's already a redirect there, but it's a matter of doing things right. Maybe locals call it the Bluewater shopping centre, but I don't see the need to make that the title of the article. Besides, there's no need for disambiguation, but in that case the title should be Bluewater (shopping center). Is there any reason not to move the article to Bluewater? --maf 18:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah good work on done here on Bluewater. Its surprising the pages you think would be popular , have little or no content. Thats why I had a go at re-doing it.--Screen42 19:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
- I see that my some of my edits have been reverted, including the naming of 'Bluewater' right at the start. Before we get into an edit war, I've written my reasons directly to the editor on User_talk:Screen42#Bluewater. I would just like to invite everyone to participate in this discussion: is it 'Bluewater' or 'Bluewater Shopping Centre'? Think of other non-"shopping centre" shopping centres: Bull Ring, Birmingham, Brent Cross, Broadway (in Bradford), Centrale, The Oracle, Reading, and so on. This is in part because shopping centres have also become leisure destinations, and a term like "shopping centre" is not a good definition of these centres, including Bluewater. That's why Bluewater is just Bluewater. Thank you. --maf 09:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- 10 days, no comments, I'm renaming the article. --maf 19:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Bluewater (shopping center) is now a redirect to Bluewater, in case any one looks there for this article. Dolive21 10:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edits by 88.106.13.39
I have reverted the edits to this article and Bluewater by 88.106.13.39. The author contradicts himself/herself across the articles. In the Metrocentre article he says the Metrocentre has the largest retail floor area (which AFAICT, is the usual accepted measure of shopping centre size) but is smaller than Bluewater because it has a smaller "multi-activity" area, whatever that is. In the Bluewater article, he goes on to state that Bluewater has the largest retail floor space (which is simply incorrect) not mentioning "multi-activity" area at all.
Secondly the statement that the architecture is copyrighted and permission needs to be sought to take photographs needs a citation before it is returned. I'm slightly confused as to how it is possible to copyright an architecture, or what the centre owners would seek to gain by stopping tourists taking photos around the centre Pit-yacker 14:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- All architecture is copyrighted, at the same level as a musical composition or a book. The author of an architectural piece (err... the architect) can even collect royalties if his work is reproduced (under his permission), and has the right not to see his work changed or copied, just like a composer or writer. That's where prohibiting photography enters... not to bother the poor tourists, but to prevent your lovely mega shopping centre to be faithfully reproduced on the other side of the world (it happens, trust me!)... --maf 23:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Civil law never was my strong suit, but I don't think that copyright in the architecture can be used to prevent photography. They can impose conditions on entry to their land, which might include prohibiting photography, but even if they did, unless they expressly said any copyright in photos taken belonged to Bluewater, then the rights to the photos would belong to the person taking them. They could not prohibit it and take the copyright. It's a tort/contract thing. They do have every right to stop people copying their architecture, but not to stop them photographing it. The essential nature of architecture is not its look as such. Taking a picture of a building is not like taking a picture of a painting. Hope this helped to explain it. Dolive21 10:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
