Talk:Tottenham/Archive 1

Archive 1

Grime

Grime? Mentioned before Tottenham Hotspurs Football Club? Surely this is some kind of joke.

Somebody trying to earn a bit of publicity for themselves methinks. I live in Tottenham and I've never heard of this Music genre or the people mentioned. Why does this information feature so highly in the article?

If there are no objections I will delete this section as it is irrelevant to the area of Tottenham.

sure, if you think it's a spam.. then delete it. I only left it there because I wasn't sure as I'm not so up-to-date with the area. To be quite honest I was waiting for someone to mention it.--I've deleted it - but if anyone has a problem with that, we can always restore it. IsarSteve 20:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm quite happy to start adding references to the countless muggings that began to happen in Tottenham in the 1970s - anyone object? Tottenhamlad 22:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

and it's not moronic to add Grime music to the Tottenham page.. There happens to be a page on it on Wiki..most of the people that are involved in it are also Born and bred in Tottenham... Know what I mean mate.. --IsarSteve 00:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

OK. Here is what I am going to do. I am going to bring back the Grime bit but as part of a section on the local music scene. That way it can be expanded to include other musical styles. I am going to link the main Grime musicians from that and not from the list of notable residents. I hope this is satisfactory to everybody. Personally I can't stand Urban Music but that is not the point. It exists. It has been noted externaly to Wikipedia. It is related to Tottenham. You don't have to like it to see why it reasonable for it to be mentioned. --DanielRigal 15:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I see that somebody just reverted me while I was trying to make these changes. I don't like the way that this is turning into an edit war! I have now completed the changes. Grime is back but it is lower down the page and in a cultural section, where I think it belongs. If anybody still thinks it is wrong then please discuss why here. In the meantime, I suggest that people add other cultural elements to the Culture section so that it is clear that there is other culture in Tottenham than Grime. --DanielRigal 15:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Considering 'Tottenham', the settlement not the name, exisited before the Roman invasion I dare say that many things have come and gone from Tottenham in that time. The entry on Tottenham is smallish so why should there be a reference to a current 'musical fad' of importance to only those involved with it?

I suggest a link from the 'Grime' entry to Tottenham, but no link in the opposite direction. --Tottenhamlad 15:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think there are different rules for what is "notable now" and "notable forever". I think that it is unlikely that Grime will be on this page in 100 years time, but it is a notable element of Tottenham's culture right now and I think that is enough to grant it a little coverage. For all we know Grime might turn out to be genuinely important in the long term. I doubt it but we are not yet in a position to know. If we follow your logic then we would remove all references to all modern popular culture from the article on the grounds that it is unlikely to be of very long lasting interest. If you think the reference to Grime is too great a proportion of the article then I think that the best solution is for the article to be expanded to include more about the history and culture of Tottenham so that all elements are covered in adequate depth. Grime is now cut down to a single paragraph. Where is the harm in that? --DanielRigal 16:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

There may be a link, in some peoples minds, between 'Grime' and Tottenham but I note there is no reference to Tottenham in the 'Grime' entry. Once again I would suggest that Tottenham may be important to 'Grime', and hence there could be a link from 'Grime' to Tottenham: but 'Grime' is not important to the two thousand year history of Tottenham, so why should there be an entry on 'Grime' within the entry about Tottenham?

I was under the impression that Wikipedia was an on-line collaborative encyclopedia and not a current affairs magazine for 'youth' culture. Tottenhamlad 23:03, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

OK. There are some fair points there, although I disagree that the presence of a section of current cultural activities undermines the History section. What I am going to do now is ask for help on the Talk:Grime page and see what they think over there. --DanielRigal 00:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, directed here from the request on Talk:Grime. JME and Skepta are indeed notable artists, and from Tottenham, and thus the Boy Betta Know label, which is also fairly notable, is based in Tottenham. Tottenham is one of various places that Grime is made and is popular and influential on local youth culture, but I don't know enough about Tottenham to advise on how important Grime is compared to other aspects of its cultural life. As to the passage in question in the music section, I would replace it with: "The urban music genre of Grime has local influence in Tottenham. It is home to several recording and production outfits, spearheaded by JME and Skepta, with their Boy Better Know label." Since the genre is almost by definition an almost entirely amateur one, most of the artists involved with it won't have wikipedia articles. This does not mean the culture is not important in Tottenham. Jdcooper 06:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you Daniel and I think it's OK to list Grime under the sub-section Culture, BUT I still think Grime Music has something to do with Today's Tottenham, refelecting as it does Tottenham in 2007. Therefore a mention (It doesn't have to be a tome) should also be made there. Currently Grime can only be seen as a passing "musical fad" but who knows how things will develop. --IsarSteve 10:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't really want to repeat myself but:

"I was under the impression that Wikipedia was an on-line collaborative encyclopedia and not a current affairs magazine for 'youth' culture."

I've looked at the entries for surrounding boroughs and notice that they all start of with the History section.

Also when population make-up is mentioned it is is within the section Demographics.

Lastly what exactly does the wording 'Tottenham is a multicultural hotspot' mean? I'd suggest this is not NPOV as it implies an approval of multiculturalism and immigration.

Therefore I'm intending to:

-Make history the first section.

-Move mentions of population make-up (all of which need citation) into a Demographics section.

-Remove 'Tottenham is a multicultural hotspot' and associated POV wording.

Tottenhamlad 16:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to repeat yourself. We've all read through the lines of what you write. Tottenham IS a multi-culti hotspot (not my entry) and it would be illusory and ludicrous to deny it, but perhaps you enjoy denying events in the past? You write "I was under the impression that Wikipedia was an on-line collaborative encyclopedia That's correct... but where are the entries of the supporters of your views?? --IsarSteve 09:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

multi-culti hotspot sounds like something you'd find in a trendy listings magazine targeting middle class readers. What exactly is it meant to mean?

' but where are the entries of the supporters of your views?? ' - collaboration can be between those of differing views; I just want the Wikipedia entry on Tottenham to be as NPOV as possible, and with all lines such as Tottenham probably has the largest "Jamaican population" as a percentage in the United Kingdom. to have some sort of reference.

Tottenhamlad 11:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Jessie Wallace

There is no mention of Tottenham in the article about Jessie Wallace. What is the connection? Coyets 17:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Public transport

The Piccadilly Line has been deleted from the list of railways in the History of the railways of Tottenham sub-section of the History section of Tottenham because it does not run through Tottenham. However, the sentence The Piccadilly Line, which opened in 1932 has one station Turnpike Lane which was the first Underground station within the Tottenham Borough boundaries. has been left in the Public Transport sub-section of the Today section. This is the wrong way round. According to the Wiki article, Turnpike Lane tube station used to be within the Tottenham Borough boundaries. So the reference to the Piccadilly Line should have been kept within the History of the railways of Tottenham sub-section of the History section, and removed from the Public Transport sub-section of the Today section. Coyets 11:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll revert it to save an edit war as it's an arguable point - Langham Road formed the boundary between Tottenham and Hornsey, and Westbury Avenue/Turnpike Lane the southern boundary of Wood Green (easiest to see on a map showing postcode boundaries, as N22 follows Wood Green, N8 Hornsey and N15 Tottenham). Because of this, although the station building itself was in Hornsey, the exits led onto all three boroughs — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

It's quite complicated, but I'll think you'll find the address of Turnpike Lane station is Langham Road, London N.15 (Tottenham) and by the way, the station Buildings were not on Hornsey Territory at all. The whole of Ducketts Common was in the Borough of Tottenham. The Hornsey /Tottenham boundary did not follow eactly the postcode areas, but ran close to Green Lanes at the Harringay end but was more westerly at Turnpike Lane.

Ref: Bartholomew's Reference Atlas of Greater London (11th edition 1961).--IsarSteve 14:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Harringay Arena

Stadium and Arena were never part of Tottenham (Town). They were part of the borough, but not the town, They are covered on Harringay page. Mind if I delete them from this page? hjuk 23:00, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Tottenham Town vs Former Municipal Borough

Just realised maybe what the issue is re Arena etc. This page seems to mix "Town" and former Borough. There's already a page on the former borough. I just added it to the disambig page. This article refers to districts of the former mun borough. Some stuff needs transferring to former mun brg page - happy to do that if the lead editor on this page (if there is one) doesn't want to. hjuk 23:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the deletion of Tottenham from the Harringay pages and have made a comment there about it. I'm happy for you to do it as you know the current situation better than I do. But as I mentioned on Harringay, I hope your reasons for doing it are "honourable"--IsarSteve 11:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Historically, Harringay and Tottenham were connected and I would be happy to see "just" a mention in the Historical section.

I am prepared to accept that the deletion of Harringay from the Tottenham page may mirror todays Tottenham, of which I know too little, as I have lived outside the UK for over twenty years.

Lastly I never remember Tottenham being referred to as a "Town". Although there may have been an amatuer Football team with that name. Tottenham was always a very proud and "upright Borough" and some might argue that its decline has something to do with the merger with the other Haringey constituent Boroughs, who would probably both argue the same point. "Haringey" is the problem!! --IsarSteve 11:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree re "Town". I just used that to distinguish it from the borough. I think Wikispeak is "urban area" - but I mean the same thing. As for my reasons for the change, I hope they're what you'd think of as honourable. It's just around clarity. Harringay ain't in Tottenham. It was in the 'Borough of..' and I've made that clear in the running-away-with-itself history. But today, I don't think anyone would consider it as being in Tottenham in any sense. An expat, eh. Hope you're somewhere with weather a darn sigt better than we're getting in blighty this summer. hjuk 19:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Neighbouring Areas

Ya got me all paranoid now Steve. Just deleted Haringey as a neighbouring area - hope you agree - it's in it not near it. Then I was going to delete Hornsey and Fins Pk, co for my money they're not neighbouring to Tottenham today - they were to the borough.....but hey...What do you think? hjuk 19:50, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Haringey is the name of the borough so yes that's fine, but Harringay does neighbour Tottenham. Anywikiuser (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The Town Hall

The caption for the image says: The old Tottenham town hall, now Haringey Council offices. (November 2005). I thought the Haringey Council were based in Wood Green. Is this incorrect? Anywikiuser (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The council's head offices are Wood Green Civic Centre, but they have offices all over the borough - Tottenham & Hornsey town halls, a big block at the junction of Lordship Lane/Tottenham High Road etc. — iridescent 17:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The Old Town Hall offices are still in use by Haringey Council see here Tmol42 (talk) 17:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

My mistake. Anywikiuser (talk) 17:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Infringement?

http://www.rudi.net/pages/16383 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.8.28 (talk) 21:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to give us some kind of clue. I can't see any copyvio there. Are you saying we've violated them, or they've violated us? – iridescent 21:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The provider of the photo is recorded as Fin Fahey who has a whole collection of such images on Flickr here but not this one. Its just as likely he provided the image to rudi also Tmol42 (talk) 22:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Steffen Freund

I would like to gather other editors' opinions on the inclusion of a section on Steffen Freund. The section I added regarding him has just been removed and I suggest that this should be undone.

Freund is well respected worldwide as a footballer, celebrity and humanitarian. Much of his fame developed during his exploits at "The Lane." Surely we owe it to Tottenham's most famous resident to include a section on him? Comments welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.230.233 (talk) 22:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

No, because he already has an article about him. We don't want to give a shorter, less complete outline about him here (which would duplicate what was in his own article) when it is easier and more useful just to link to his existing article and let people read it in full, if they want to. Notice that this is the same as the way we treat all the other notable residents. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

When I said "Other editors" I meant editors other than the one that removed my comment. I think I gathered your opinion on Tottenham's greatest resident. I hardly think that other editors will agree with you though. 79.72.230.233 (talk) 22:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I've removed him from the "Individuals associated with Tottenham" section as well. Freund is no more associated with Tottenham as a geographical area than any other long-ish term THFC player, of which there are thousands; he doesn't live in the area (or the country, for that matter), wasn't born in the area, and had no particular impact on the area. You'll note we don't include Venables, Lineker, Klinsmann, Hoddle, Gascoigne… – iridescent 22:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ooops. Sorry. I just assumed that he must be a resident as he was being referred to as one. After all, residence of Tottenham is not something many people would want to claim spuriously. ;-) --DanielRigal (talk) 23:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

the other Tottenham

Good stuff about Tottenham UK but is anybody aware of Tottenham Australia. Yes, Tottenham (population200) is located in central western New South Wales and is actually the geographical centre of the state. Get that up you, you pommies.Crebert116 (talk) 12:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)