Talk:St Leonards-on-Sea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a frequent source of heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when responding to comments on this talk page. How about a nice cup of tea?

Deleted the section on Summerfields School as it refers to the Oxford school. And last time I checked Oxford wasn't in St Leonards.VonBlade 11:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summers Field School

Under 'Trivia' read about a second Summer Fields School. I shall revert the Prince Rainier entry and use the Times obit as a ref and omit using Summer Fields School as a ref
User:Brenont 03:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Looking again at the reference, it says St Leonards-on Sea, Summer Fields, and Stowe, suggesting that he went to some (unnamed) school in St Leonards and then to the Oxford Summerfields. I've amended it accordingly.--rossb (talk) 22:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC) I've now discovered that there was indeed a Summerfields in St Leonards; I've created a page for this and updated the present article. --rossb (talk) 23:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I remember Summerfields School very well indeed. It was I believe part of the Oxford school of the same name. It was clsoed and the contents sold off in 1966: we were setting up home then and bought some of the bales of bedding on sale. I am not sure how long it had lasted, but the honours board in the school hall had many quite famous ex-scholars' names on it Peter Shearan (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Confusion about postcodes

Recent edits have introduced confusion about postcodes. St Leonards-on-Sea is not a postcode area. Morevoer the valid statement about the additional railway stations has been removed. I propose to revert. --rossb (talk) 19:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Agree to revert, some edits appear to have been made which cause unnecessary disorientation to users.Winchelsea (talk) 07:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Postcodes

Sometimes St leonards doesnt include west st leonards, Hollington etc. also everyone says the pier is the boundry but its london road for the postcodes Kentem 13:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

whoever said postcodes were a definitive way of deciding real boundaries? Some parts of Tunbridge Wells, Kent are in East Sussex!Peter Shearan (talk) 18:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image covers up text - needs fixing

My Nov 25 insertion of a line break
to uncover buried words caused by overlapping image was soon reverted. No doubt it wasn't the best solution but it achieved a necessary end. Anyone out there want to tackle the size of the offending image or suggest how to put this right?--User:Brenont 22:25, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rewrite

FM (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)==This article== I have just completed a fairly substantial rewrite of the Hastings article, so I feel I can comment on this one. It is obvious that there is a great deal of unsureness about local government as it affects St Leonards, which is not an inner suburb of Hastings. It is a town, like Hastings itself, and the villages of Ore and Hollington, which help to make up the Borough of Hastings. The term suburb, in any case, is usually meant to apply to large towns and cities (in the UK at any rate) and not to relatively small places such as here. It is complcated by the fact that the town and the borough have the same name, but they don't mean the same thing. nor is it "inner" - the present town stretches to the borough boundary.

It has already been pointed out that this article has no references to the statements made therein. There is a need, like I pointed out for Hastings, for contributors to this article to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements, since there is now a growing need for articles to begin to look the same, thus avoiding two things:

• too many casual statements being made on the basis of hearsay/supposition without factual evidence
• missing out important things to say about a settlement

Both of those occur here.

There are really two St Leonards: the one designed by the Burtons; and the one today. In this article the two seem to be the same. For example, the only park designed by James B was that now called West St L Gardens (look at his map in this ref Visit 1066 Country) Neither Gensing Gardens nor Warrior Square were his: that is specifically stated later in the article. Neither Gensing nor Maze Hill were settlements in the true sense of the term: Maze Hill was just that: a hillside road named after a maze in the gardens. Burton's St Leonards finished well away from what is now the supposed boundary between the two towns.

The whole article, apart from the rather weak sentence under the heading "Shopping" constitutes a hymn of praise to the builders of the new town, and is all history, even though it has separate headings. There is nothing whatsoever about the St Leonards of today, although the External Link "Central St Leonards Renewal", when examined, has a great deal to offer in the way of facts. A reader of today might be forgiven to thinking that St Leonards is a bit like Disneyworld!

The Arts Forum and the Robert Tressell Society might be based in St Leonards, but they actually cover much more, and should be in the Hastings article anyway. There cannot really be a long list of External links without there being some mention about them in the text of the article ... And St Leonards on the map looks suspiciously like Eastbourne! Peter Shearan (talk) 17:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I've begun a rewrite - starting with the intro para, which is obligatory. The second para ("history") does I'm well aware intrude on some of what is said later, but this all needs to be in chronological order: the Burton St Leonards bit must be woven into the first statements, not after the piece about Marine Court (100 years later) and the railway stations (20 years later). There is much more to be said before them! Peter Shearan (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] !!

For gods sake ST LEONARDS IS PART OF HASTINGS AND A SUBURB IS USED FOR PLACES Like Eastbourne which is of a similar size and so why cant it be used for here. you are ruining these statements about this area and wont actually go and see without trying to make your own stupid ideas. FM (talk) 17:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suburb

Ignoring the rude outburst, I suggest you take a look at what Wikipedia says is a Suburb: "residential areas on the outskirts of a city or large town"! The term is becoming widespread in articles and is patently incorrect as far as St Leonards is concerned: it is a town in its own right; as is Hastings, but Hastings is also the name of a Local Government District too, with St L and Ore and Hollington all part of that District. And Eastbourne doesn't have a town within its boundaries: just those residential areas ... My "stupid ideas" as you so charmingly put it, are based on a Geography degree. It would help if you were have you own talk page, then we don't have this kind of altercation in public. Peter Shearan (talk) 07:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Well as a hastings resident I think it whole as one settlement since if you do go there, there is not any separation and you wont even notice.

also the signs welcoming you to Ore and Conquest on the A21 and the A259 all say welcome to Hastings (and st leonards, which is a nickname). lastly on all the tourist attractions it has as if it were one place and its all treated as Hastings. Also the town and borough are the same thing, I mean loads of suburbs of current settlements were once individual. Also how come your saying the exact opposite on the Hastings talk page? Blackwave...... (talk) 19:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Who is this twit Moggie2002?

And does he actually contribute? Seems he just likes rewriting other peoples contributions and deleting. Oh I see he writes about things PHP! Sorry! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smileywebmonkey (talk • contribs) 21:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL. The "twit Moggie2002" as it was so eloquently put, has an interest in many things. As and when time permits, contributions will be made on topics where Moggie2002 is an authority, as well as to entries where the article style can be improved or corrected, plus removing vandalism and keeping articles encyclopaedic. Taking the Amenities section as an example, this was copy edited because "The principal shopping area is that bounded by are London Road,..." and "And old established family business..." is faulty grammar, and was changed with the intention of keeping the facts but correcting the use of English. While Moggie2002 would agree that Wilsons the Bakers are a fine establishment, the text "gives the area an individual feel." is a point of view that is not an established fact and against the principle of NPOV, and therefore inappropriate for the entry. The edit to text for the local restaurant picture was made as it does not describe the picture, and the relevancy of one particular restaurant's historical awards and lunch menu seemed unclear within the context of the article. Edits to text are only made with the aim to make an article better for the reader, and should not be taken as a personal slight :)

Moggie2002 (talk) 12:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)