Jump to content

Talk:Chessington

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Removed: "Home to Mr Eric P Cains (Laird)". Does anyone know who he is? -- Oliver P. 00:51 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Football

[edit]

What two football teams play in Chessington? Does the article mean Chessington & Hook United F.C., which is a single team?

--JimmyTheWig 15:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will assume I was correct and have made the change. --JimmyTheWig 09:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buses

[edit]

Assuming that the text about the bus routes was not copy and pasted from somewhere else, this is brilliant work. Well done and thank you to the contributor.

--JimmyTheWig 11:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly extensive, but like a lot of the rest of the article it offers opinion and judgement without citation (e.g. "... vital link for the elderly..."). If it's not cut'n'paste, then it's original research. I would love to know what the reference source for the "Chessington rail tunnel" is. Cain Mosni 14:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Buses was my work. It wasn't copied and pasted, which is why i become infuriated when Citation notices are posted on this article. I have experienced all the routes listed for myself and wrote and formatted the whole article. Whether I was logged in was another matter...
--Davidashlinglive 03:29, 17 November 2006 (GMT)
Your infuriation clearly doesn't take into account WP policy, then. It is important that article content is not only accurate, but documentedly and verifiably so. If you don't know and understand this, might I suggest that you do a little policy reading before you pursue more edits that are going to result in responses you don't like?
Your work, though thorough is in direct controvention of the policy on no original research, hence the calls for citation. Your experience cannot be verified, except by others following the same path, which is not sufficient verification for WP, which strives for a quality of reference comparable with printed works of a similar nature. If you cannot provide documentation and citation for assertions then they do not belong in the article, no matter how through or well-researched. The policy is clear. Citations are required, and citation notices are a perfectly valid addition to the article. It's criticism of you or even the quality of your research. The very fact that it is your research puts it at odds with site policy.
To quote only the second paragraph of the policy statement in question:
"Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to demonstrate that you are not doing original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say."
The fact is you are doing original research - you have admitted as much. There are times when I want to put things in articles that I know are true, but without citable references, it's a no-go. Cain Mosni 13:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As an addendum to the above, I notice you cited the Surrey Comet for the comment on the "vital route" statement, but the detail is less than ideal. It really needs the date of publication of the article, if available the author, the article title/headline, publisher, and ideally the page on which it can be found. An easy way of following a standard format for this information is the {{cite news}} template. You might find the general page on citation templates useful. Cain Mosni 14:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the information about railways, which i did not provide, was taken from the Chessington South railway station article, as it sounds very similar.

--Davidashlinglive 03:45, 17 November 2006 (GMT)

Quite possibly. All it really requires is cross-reference to the articles, to be honest. No point in repetition. Cain Mosni 13:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zones

[edit]

Historically, Hook is a separate entity from Chessington (hence the fact that the football club is "Chessington and Hook", for instance). Southborough is, logically enough, the southern end of Surbiton/Tolworth, not part of Chessington, at least geographically. Cain Mosni 15:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Hook is a bizarre one. We live in it, but I'd still say we live in Chessington. Spend many a moment trying to work out where the boundary is.
I'm interested to know why you changed the order of local places around?
--JimmyTheWig 16:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Proximity. The list clearly wasn't alphabetic, and didn't seem to incorporate any particular order, and (unless the convention in these articles is different) it strikes me as logical that the "nearest places" list actually list the nearest first. (I'm Chessington North, BTW.) Cain Mosni 16:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense, but surely Ewell isn't the closest, is it? --JimmyTheWig 08:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't. Somehow I missed moving it to an appropriate place in the list. Cain Mosni 13:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Someone took it out then someone else put it back in again.

I think that the "external link" section on this page should be replaced by a "see also" section, in which there is a link to the Wikipedia article on the WoA. I know there is already a link to it in the article, but it's not easy to find. The external link to the park is, and should be, on the WoA page but not on this page.

Alternatively, the Chessington page needs a disambiguation link at the top for people looking for the park?

--JimmyTheWig 10:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good call.
Provided the reference to CWOA is Wikilinked to the article, it doesn't need to appear separately at all. Rather than re-instating the URL I should have checked the whole article again, and removed the section altogether. Cain Mosni 13:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buses revisited

[edit]

Although the research work on the bus routes is astonishingly detailed and must have taken quite some effort, without reputable independent substantiation it cannot stand. (To be fair, for the nature of the article, it's rather over detailed. Routes are useful, but the minutae about bus types, and such are just a little too anorak to be useful.) Unless references are added fairly soon, I plan on editing the section down fairly heavily before New Year. -- Cain Mosni 15:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since references have not been forthcoming, in line with Wikipedia policy on original research and personal essays I'm about to edit down the buses to simply specify the routes covering the town, removing all the personal analysis and route detail that has not been substantiate by references. -- Cain Mosni 14:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of local pubs

[edit]

I removed the list, as wiki is not a directory. Any that really are notable in their own right should have an article, and then may be put back in, with explanation! Cheers Kbthompson 12:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Churches

[edit]

While I understand that Wikipedia is not a directory, I am puzzled by the removal of reference to St. Catherine of Siena Church and the King Centre, while references to the two C of E churches have remained. I don't mind if this is a tidying up the entry, but if the editor is pushing a POV, then this is inappropriate. I would be happy to put a small paragraph relating to Catholics in Chessington, if the reason for the removal was a tendency towards a directory. The Catholic Church in Chessington has existed there since 1938, and was probably named St. Catherine of Siena by Italian prisoners of war in the nearby POW camp! Pdjenner 14:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chessington's Location

[edit]

Chessington is located in Surrey, not London! GRRRRR!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.173.149 (talk) 18:13, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chessington is Not located in Surrey, and hasn't been since 1966. A little simple research will prove this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.3.122.65 (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chessington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:56, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Local geography' tab should be removed

[edit]

In my opinion, the 'Local geography' tab in this article should be removed as in my opinion it is pointless to have a tab with no information in it. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 07:44, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chessington&oldid=1206648186"