Talk:Foulness Island

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Foulness. 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/20100822042814/http://www.rochford.gov.uk/leisure_and_tourism/district_tour/foulness_island.aspx to http://www.rochford.gov.uk/leisure_and_tourism/district_tour/foulness_island.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040929122955/http://www.stosyth.gov.uk/default.asp?calltype=foulnessmar01 to http://www.stosyth.gov.uk/default.asp?calltype=foulnessmar01

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) 19:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 3 August 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: MOVED Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:27, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

---

Foulness → Foulness Island – The island is called "Foulness Island" just like Mersea Island even though the CP is just Foulness. The other islands at Category:Islands of Essex have "Island" apart from Lower Horse which is just that, a move request of Commons was unopposed, we now also have a category for the CP at Commons:Category:Foulness (civil parish) and an article could be created at Foulness (parish) as the parish also includes Havengore Island and New England Island. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

• Support Rreagan007 (talk) 18:27, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support. The primary topic of foulness, if we had it, would be the sense covered at wikt:foulness. Probably the closest article we have to that is Rancidification (although Obscenity and Lascivious behavior would also be contenders). bd2412 T 20:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

1952 activity

Would it be possible to add a small chapter about the settlement of the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment on this island in 1952 (Source: The Art Newspaper)? British first atomic device seems to have been constructed on this island and then shipped to test somewhere else. This would also explain, why there was given so much priority and manpower to repair the damage done from the 1953 flood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.113.209 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

It is possible to add anything that is not WP:UNDUE and properly sourced. In this case my initial impression The Art Newspaper source is insufficiently strong to make any claim re atomic weapons. While the recent military use of the island could perhaps be expanded there is a risk that could unbalance the article. Getting an article published in a newspaper/magazine would be a better way to go as it could then be cited here. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

There are more sources to this. Would for example the following source be credible? https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1411759

If not, what would be a credible source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.113.209 (talk • contribs) 10:41 (UTC)

Regardless well found. That URL's probably OK as RS, the contributions aren't but the reports they link to are, e.g. [1]. For a gentle answer ask at WP:TEAHOUSE or for a definitive answer WP:RSN. Probably the main issue is adding undue content. When I worked for a while at Southend, I recall Essex girls, including a Foulness native, warning me of the perils of Foulness, except for the summer fete, so I shall stell back from more thoughts on the content. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:29, 6 August 2021 (UTC)