Talk:The Bishops Avenue

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the UK Roads WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the UK's road network. 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.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is part of WikiProject London, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to London. If you would like to participate, you can improve the article attached to this page or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, an attempt at creating a standardised, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on London's transport system. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or visit the Portal.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale. (add assessment comments)
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance within the London Transport WikiProject.

[edit] Silly statement & Tabloid style

Curiously, north of Lyttelton Road, The Bishop´s Avenue becomes much less exclusive and desirable.

What's curious about that? On the north end of Lyttelton Road the houses become much smaller, and more importantly that's the East Finchley end of The Bishop's Avenue so obviously it's going to be less desirable than the other end which is near Hampstead Heath.

Yes, property near Hampstead Heath is more desirable than property near East Finchley tube station. I'm glad I could clear that one up.

While I'm here, much of the article resembles a tabloid story with phrases like "ultra-rich", "snap up large grand homes, only to flatten them", "strictly under wraps", "come under fire", etc. This is Wikipedia, not The Sun. 172.144.212.204 23:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Keeping in "The Sun mode" he forgot to mention the posh totty that lives there- corrr

[edit] Missing references and untidy refernces

I've tried to tidy this, but may have made it even more of a mess by mistake! Never been very good at wikifying references. Every time I do get it right, I forget how I did it straight afterwards. The way it was standing before I touched it, there were two identical entries in a notes section and a full and correct listing of the publication in the references section. I've removed the "notes" section altogether. The two referenced parts now say 1 and 2 but don't point anywhere. Both are from the first reference. I also found an 'Observer' article that contained all the information with "citation needed tags", so I've added it to the references and removed the tags. Nothing now points to the references but at least everything in the article is now referenced. If someone wants to tidy this properly, I'd be grateful. Fork me 20:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)