Talk:Civic Centre, Dagenham

Architecture Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

'Made in Dagenham' filming location

I am unsure as to why Cassianto you are repeatedly deleting this small sentence. I noticed whilst watching the film that the Civic Centre is used as a location and thought it would a nice little thing to add to this Wiki page, albeit sans source. Rather then add an 'unsourced' caveat you instead completely delete it. I re-added with a link to the IMDB Film locations page, this being the only internet source I could find - again you delete it. I then add a screenshot taken from the actual film clearly showing the Civic Centre - again you delete it! Short of tracking down the director and getting a sworn affidavit on the matter I'm not sure what else you want. Sdrawkcab (talk) 11:04, 24 September 2017 (UTC)sdrawkcab[reply]

@Sdrawkcab: - Cassianto removed it because consensus is not to cite IMDB as a reliable source in articles. Simply put, anyone can walk up to IMDB and add absolutely anything; that means it's impossible to know whether or not anything listed on the site is factually accurate and / or important. If the information is truly worthy of mention an encyclopedia, it will have appeared in more reliable sources, such as a book or a journal such as Empire. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:03, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What Ritchie said. Aside from the unreliable source, I feel this information is not encyclopaedic and not particularly interesting. It is a factoid at best. Cassianto ^Talk 23:33, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see - but the factoid about London Road is not... Sdrawkcab (talk) 17:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is not what? A factoid? Yes it is. How does this aid our understanding of the building, its function, or its history? If we are left with a "it doesn't" answer, then it's an uninteresting factoid, sadly. Cassianto ^Talk 19:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So London Road is not being deleted because... it is sourced??Sdrawkcab

Its trivial bullshit and I'd half no problem if you wanted to delete it. Cassianto ^Talk 23:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology

The 'local authorities involved' need to be clarified - Dagenham Urban District (1926-38) would have commissioned the building, and which authority was involved in the 1964 redevelopment - the Municipal Borough of Dagenham (1938-65) or the London Borough of Barking, being set up at the time? Jackiespeel (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]