Talk:Whitehawk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brighton, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource about Brighton and Hove. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or the Portal.
Brighton To do: Shortcut: WP:BAH Project Finish Project Page Urgent Recruit new members Urgent Articles Add talk page template to articles Identify further articles relating to the project Images Add more images to articles

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in East Sussex may be able to help!
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents 1 POV check 2 Secondary school 3 Major re-edit 4 2nd major re-edit

[edit] POV check

I've added a POV check tag to the page because it's written with a focus on all the bad things of Whitehawk, and at times it lapses into unencyclopedicness, including the hyperbole ("worlds apart") which is POV in itself. I don't have a personal interest and have just heard of this place, but saw the article while reverting vandalism to it and thought it'd be OK to point this out. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I would agree actually. I live in Brighton and although Whitehawk has a bad reputation, I agree this article is highly partisan. --Ben Martin (Talk) 15:48, 05 March 2006 (GMT)

Whitehwawk isn't that bad at all anymore.(Unsigned comment by 217.36.212.194)

I agree as well - the article is a pretty bad case of POV. I hope someone with a bit more knowledge could clean it up. (Although I actually live not too far from Whitehawk, I know too little about it to do something myself about the article.) --A bit iffy 07:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've given this article a major rewrite. I've chopped most of it out. I thought if we go back to the start, we might might be able to put together a more balanced article. But I thought I'd leave the POV check in case anyone else wants to check what I've done first. --Seaweed 22:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

As nobody has suggested the POV tag should stay, I've removed it. --Seaweed 16:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Secondary school

Is there still a secondary school in Whitehawk? I had a feeling CoMArt had closed. --A bit iffy 07:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you're right on that one! I remember when it closed as we got some students come to my school (Cardinal Newman) as part of the closure --BenjMartin

The East Brighton College of Media Arts closed in August 2005. I've edited the article accordingly. --Seaweed 22:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major re-edit

I've expanded this article substantially and added some headings. I've added information about primary schools and the Whitehawk Inn training centre as well as a section on churches. I've also added a bit about the White Hawk hill carving. The section on Stanley Deason/Marina High/COMART has been expanded with dates added. I've also added a load of external links.

Being fairly new to this I'm not sure if it's enough to "de-stub" the article but feel it probably is. Fork me 16:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, so I've removed the stub tag. --Seaweed 17:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello Fork me. Good to see someone editing some Brighton related articles. I think maybe some of the external links you've added might not be appropriate for Wikipedia. You might want to read the External links style guide for more information. For example I don't think the link to Whitehawk Primary School should be added. The guidance that rings in my ears is that "Wikipedia is not a web directory". But anyway, maybe you disagree. --Seaweed 17:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, good to get some feedback so quickly. I wasn't sure about which links to include or not include myself. I looked at the links sections for other local areas before deciding. The Primary school site may be a case in point as it doesn't add much about the area (or even say much about the school itself). I'm happy for it to be removed it that is a general concensus. Fork me 17:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd major re-edit

I've put in a decent history now to try and better reflect how Whitehawk has developed. I'm happier with the article now, although it's difficult to show the character of the area without violating the POV policy. Whitehawk has a lot of positive things going on but also has more than its fair share of problems. Fork me 08:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)