Talk:Telegraph Hill, Lewisham

Untitled

I don't really find the result of the 2006 borough council election interesting enough to justify the amount of space given to it, but I accept that this is just my personal taste, so I've left it in. However, the statement that Respect DIDN'T stand in that election seemed too trivial to keep, so I deleted it; there are lots of parties that didn't stand in that council election - surely we don't have to list them all? Dodo64 20:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I can see how the political detail may seem somewhat arcane - I'm sure the neighbourhood's political representation in the borough council doesn't play any major role in its day-to-day life. :-) But to someone with an interest in local politics, the results of this particular ward are striking: it really makes the ward unique among all of London's 624 wards. When I was poring over the election results, Telegraph Hill's result was one of just a handful that stood out as constituting an extreme in the city.

I'm no big fan of Militant/Trotskyite politics myself, but its contemporary success in this one ward as well as the record cumulative score for the parties left of the Lib-Dems are definitely elements of Telegraph Hill's profile that makes it different from any other London neighbourhood. The results table illustrates that.

Of course I'm really glad however that you added some "beef" about the actual issues dominating local politics. Now the info is more rounded off for general interest, and not purely focused on just the statistical side of things anymore! And deleting the bit about Respect's absence seems fair enough. No-itsme 16:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of politics summary from introductory section

The latest edit which removes from the introductory section the sentence detailing the ward's political uniqueness, on the grounds that this is adequately covered in the "Politics" section, is a misunderstanding of the function of the introductory paragraph in Wikipedia articles, which is to summarise matters expanded on in subsequent sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkbrown (talk • contribs) 22:21, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Wording Re: Politics

At some point, my original addition to the article that Telegraph Hill was unique among London's 624 wards politically, because it had the largest share of votes for parties to the left of Labour and the LibDems, was changed to say that it was the ward with the highest share of the vote for non-mainstream parties, tout court.

I'm not sure if this is true, since rightwing or local-interest parties may have captured significant shares of the vote in other wards. I've therefore changed the wording again to say more specifically that it had the largest share of votes going to "non-mainstream, left-wing" parties. I did that in both places where it was mentioned.

I did so without first signing in, sorry about that. No-itsme (talk) 02:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Telegraph Hill, Lewisham. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131207021428/http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/TelegraphHillConservationAreaCharacterAppraisal.pdf to http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/TelegraphHillConservationAreaCharacterAppraisal.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101012123722/http://www.haaf.org.uk/index.php?%2Fabout%2Four_history%2F to http://www.haaf.org.uk/index.php?%2Fabout%2Four_history%2F
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.europeana.eu/portal/record/92037/F596980985317341491A8D18B50F8B09660C6E20.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/getinvolved/localassemblies/telegraph-hill/Pages/Telegraph-Hill-Assembly-funding.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205015304/http://www.haaf.org.uk/index.php?hatcham%2Fwelcome to http://www.haaf.org.uk/index.php?hatcham%2Fwelcome
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604100156/http://www.london.gov.uk/archive/gla/publications/factsandfigures/boroelec06-all.pdf to http://www.london.gov.uk/archive/gla/publications/factsandfigures/boroelec06-all.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929002033/http://www.haaf.org.uk/f/fHaberdashers.htm to http://www.haaf.org.uk/f/fHaberdashers.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 19:40, 7 December 2017 (UTC)