Talk:Crawley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to places in the UK. If you wish to contribute you can visit the project page where there are resources & guidelines, to do lists and discussions. | |
| This article has been rated "stub" on the Wikipedia Version 1.0 quality scale. | ||
|
On the project page you can find detailed guides on how to write about counties and settlements, as well as where to find statistics, references and other useful things. Additionally, the following have been identified as specific improvements this article needs:
|
||
[edit] History
This article woefully disregards the complex history of the town as it now exists. It is written without regard to the fact that the New Town, like others in the UK, swallowed up pre-existing communities, some of which, like Ifield and Crawley have been around for centuries. The article here covers that history. The listing of all those neighbourhoods simply adds a large number of stubbed articles, again without reference to any previous history. I am not local to the area, simply one who has a little knowledge, so would be loath to do any rewriting - but someone ought! Peter Shearan 16:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have now attempted to right the wrong! I am sure more could be added though to make the article less of a boring listing! We really must get rid of all those neighbourhoods posing as villages (see Category: Villages in West Sussex and the comment on the talk page thereon Peter Shearan 17:13, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- "It is written without regard to the fact that the New Town, like others in the UK, swallowed up pre-existing communities, some of which, like Ifield and Crawley have been around for centuries." - Quite right, and I was wondering if a little something on the Worth controversy should be included. It would be hard to source. Makron1n 01:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links Removed
Was it a policy decision to remove all the local links, except the borough council's? Not sure why they should not be listed. Can anyone explain?Tafkam 19:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- External links should not be advertising things such as local B&B's or shops. They should not be personal blogs, they should be of high quality. I removed the following.
-
- In Crawley (Guide to Crawley)
- Crawley Online; information portal & directory about the West Sussex town
- Crawley Neighbourhood Watch
- Crawley Business Directory
- Francis Frith Photos of Crawley taken by the :Victorian photographer Francis Frith
-
- If you feel that any of these are suitable then make a case for their inclusion and if you make a reasonable case for their inclusion I will not revert your edit. However, when i skimmed through them none seemd to suitable as external links. David D. (Talk) 18:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough - I bow to your greater knowledge of 'allowed' links Tafkam 19:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- I am not dictating and certainly if you really think these links are worth while I will probably accept your view. These are rarely black and white cases. Look at them in light of what i say above and see if you still think they are useful. If you think they are, then put them back in. I will defer to your judgement. David D. (Talk) 01:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
No, I can see your point; I can't say as I feel overly strongly about it either way. We will see if anyone else notices/cares. I only ask really because I noticed it on my Watchlist, and wondered the reasoning. Tafkam 09:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Given the discussion which has taken place, I was surprised to see one of the external link re-appear. I think that it as perhaps the least encyclopaedic value of any of the previously removed links. I am about to revert to the previous version (with only the borough council link remaining), subject to further discussion.Tafkam 13:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Executive Control
As of May 2006 elections, according to the Crawley Borough Council website council composition following results: * 16 Labour * 19 Conservative * 2 Liberal Democrat; thus conservatives have a majority of 51.4% Accordingly, the council's executive is made up of 8 conservative councillors. Therefore, it is clear that the authority is conservative-controlled at present. Accordingly, edits which have changed status to NOC have been reverted twice. Please do not alter again without citation of any change. Tafkam 17:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- Apologies - my mistake; although the council website still shows Conservative control on its elections page, and its executive, the previous editor is correct, as Councillor Marcella Head joined the LibDem party in early December changing the balance. My apologies once again. Tafkam 18:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
It is amazing that the council's own website contradicts itself. Part of the reason for this could be that at the time of elections they can freely note changes, but the defection of a councillor from one political party to another mid-term is maybe harder to make a note of without it comming across as political comment. However the Liberal Democrats have been happy to note the fact on their own sites http://crawleylibdems.org.uk/news/000329.html?PHPSESSID=801ceb21 http://www.brighton-hovelibdems.org.uk/news/000290.html?PHPSESSID=801ceb21
