Talk:Wessex Lane Halls

Photographs

I will try and take a picture of montefiore 3 and connaught, althogh be warned I'm not photographer! :-) Supposed 02:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Great! Could you also try and get a good shot of the nice bit of Stoneham at the same time please? All my old photos seem to have half-naked drunk people lounging around outside the bar. Quite what that tells you I'm not sure... Pyrope 07:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

sorry this has taken so long, I haven't had a camera. I will take some in the next few weeks Supposed 22:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

ta da..

Taken on an n95. Images are a little noisey but seem ok. I missed out the monte one because the image was poor. It includes a skip! Will try and get a good pic another time. Supposed 11:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Great work. The new Stoneham picture is particularly good - well done. Waggers 11:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, nice one. Pyrope 12:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

hehe cheers. I'm a little worried about the Glen Eyre Halls entry. It's currently being redirected to University of Southampton because someone decided to speedily delete it arguing "it's not notable whatsoever". [1].Supposed 02:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's notability guidelines are weird and somewhat self-contradictory. They say that notability is not the same thing as popularity, but then define notability as being something that's been written about a fair bit - in other words, something that's popular! The things to do are: (1) add any relevant information from the Glen Eyre article to the University of Southampton article for the time being, as a WP:merge, since that's in keeping with the redirect; (2) Add references to the article wherever possible - I'm sure Glen Eyre must be the subject of "significant coverage" in some of the University of Southampton history books and/or some local history books; (3) remember that WP:N is a guideline/convention, not hard, set-in-stone policy. Waggers 09:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes it's quite confusing. I'd go sofar to say that any building which has been written about in several independent sources is notable. The main problem I have with notability guidelines is that notably tends to reflect bias in the media. This is evident when you're a company and have a good PR engine. WIkipedia should decide what's notable based on the merits of the content rather than how much money someone is paid to spread the word. I had to leap through hoops to get this site included. It was notable because of what it represented in a notable industry. In the end it got included only because of a biased review against it by a friend of another company. Supposed 22:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Connaught

In my time there (2007-2008) I remember reading a book in the library that was a reprint of certain newspaper cuttings. (A small, A5ish black bound book) Inside it spoke of Connaught orginally being called "New Hall" and built around staircases (now called blocks) with individual study bedrooms "as opposed to bedroom-sitting rooms". This book indicates that it was purpose built as accomodation for scholars, and was not previously a boarding school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleevicus (talk • contribs) 23:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Noise

Quote: "Although generally well built, sound insulation was left out, and noise has been an ineviatable problem." Problem for the Students or the Local population in the surrounding area? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrZoolook (talk • contribs) 21:57, 30 September 2011 (UTC)