Talk:Parks and open spaces in London
|WikiProject London||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
- It does mention those in passing already:
- Many of the smaller green spaces in central London are garden squares which were built for the private use of the residents of the fashionable districts, but in some cases are now open to the public.
- However, this article is new and hasn't progressed much beyond its original copy-and-paste from the London article. I agree that it should talk about them in more detail (prose would be better than a simple list which can be obtained from the London squares category). I'll kick it off by putting in some sections which can be gradually expanded... --Dave A 15:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Enfield Chase doesn't really exist as a single, well-defined green space any more - it's fragmented into a number of spaces such as the large (900 acre) Trent Park and the smaller (196 acre) Whitewebbs Park. The rest of it is generally private farmland. I would suggest replacing it with Trent Park, which is a well-defined space fitting into the size range implied by "major" (for reference, Epping Forest is 6000 acres - admittedly only a small part within Greater London, Hampstead Heath is 791 acres, and Wimbledon Common is 1140 acres). --Dave A 17:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's not all publicly accessible. Otherwise you could list any bit of non-built-up area at the edge of Greater London as a "major open space", even though largely unusable by the public. For example, vast swathes of the London Borough of Bromley are farmland, as is the huge area of countryside around Harefield in LB Hillingdon and the large area of open countryside beyond Upminster in LB Havering. However, as with Enfield Chase, most of it is private farmland with the odd right-of-way crossing it - which is a far cry from the likes of Hampstead Heath and Wimbledon Common. --Dave A 17:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Squares of London
I've created a very basic article showing, er..., some squares of London. As usual, it needs vast improvement. I will go there and insert at least all the rest of the squares. Am i allowed to copy them from the category?
Obviously, the title of the new article is Squares of London.
Simply south 17:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Ulp! I just realised that some information on the new article might count as plagiarism just because i accidently inserted it when i inserted the Catergory: London Squares into the new article. I am not sure what to do. Simply south 18:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it counts as plagiarism if it's Wikipedia copying itself. As long as you think it's relevant (which it probably is), I wouldn't worry about it! You can always just rewrite it if you want to. --Dave A 08:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)