Talk:Southfields

Dunsford

Why is the Southfields article linking to (and claiming to be a former field to south of) the village of Dunsford in Devon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.101.191 (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wimbledon tennis in Southfields?

I think there must be some doubt about the following sentence, which I've removed from the article: "Contrary to popular belief, the famous annual Wimbledon tennis championships do not in fact occur in Wimbledon but in Southfields."

The championships website gives its address as "Wimbledon"; the post code is SW19 - the postcode for Wimbledon (Southfields is SW18); the championship grounds are in the London Borough of Merton which incorporated the earlier Wimbledon Borough Council in the 1960s (Southfields is in Wandsworth); the phone number begins 946 - converted in the 1960s from the old WIM number (946 = WIM on the dial); and the Wimbledon championships were already well established before much of the development around Southfields tube station had begun.

It is true to say that it's quicker to get to the grounds from Southfields tube station (about 20 minutes walk) than from Wimbledon station (about 25 minutes) but that's not the same as saying the championships are actually held in Southfields. Adrian Robson 13:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

District Line trains (with an automated station annoucement system) tell people to "alight here for Wimbledon Tennis", so I think it is worth mentioning even though the AELTC and the Lawn Tennis Museum are just over the border.

Actually the train announcement is "alight here for the Wimbledon Lawn Tennis Club" which doesn't exist. It drives me mad....I even wrote to TfL but of course they took no notice. 86.157.90.44 (talk) 14:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mad John

Does anyone know his actual story? I intend to write a page about him, but without any reliable information, it is rather tricky. ____________________________

I heard he was an engineer back in the days, but that is all i know. Good luck with the article, but someone has to include him here! His real name is John O'shea he lived in a house in Strathan Close from 1960 aprox initially with his family laterly with his brother Don. In his early days he worhed for his father on his road gang but also has done inumerable other things throughout his life as long as I have known him he has been unnaried he is survived by his brother and his sister Mad is never the way I would have described him he was unconventional for sure but if you stoped to listen highly intelegent very knowledgeable with a keen sense of fun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.44.187 (talk) 14:10, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John O'shea aka Mad John lived at an adress in Strathan Close since 1960 approx initialy a family home with his parents brother two sisters laterly with his brother Don as far as I am aware he never married and had no children and is survived by a brother and a sister. When I first knew him he worked for his father in his road gang but he was a free spirit and had many intrests and changes of career. John loved the limelight was unconvential kind very intelligent as anbody that got beyond his outer image would soon find out I would never describe him as Mad just someone enthusiastic about life. Trying to help 1000 (talk) 07:09, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mad John?

I don't know whether adding an article about "Mad John" is really approperiate.

Firstly, 'Mad John' is a pejorative nickname given to the local gentleman, and perhaps even disrespectful to him.

Secondly, seeing as John is not a public figure, you need his permision to publish information regarding him on the internet.

Finally, we must remember that Wikipedia is a worldwide encyclopeadia. Futhermore, it is arguably the internet's most credible encyclopeadia and the authority on online factual information. "Mad John" bears no factual information whatsoever, and the article would probably fit the criteria for speedy deletion and possibly wikipedia abuse.

Please bear these points in mind before you decide to add this article to Wikipedia.

I have also taken the liberty to delete the following sentence: "Southfields is also home to the local legendary hero "Mad John", an old man prone to walking around Southfields shouting at people, his favourite phrase being "Have a nice day!"."

It is completely irrelevant to anything about Southfields, and also disrespectful to 'John.'

It's argueably relevant as he can be quite the local nuisance, especially bothering old women although he does it seemingly unknowingly.

Even if it's not wiki worthy does anybody know his backstory. My parents claim he's been around here since they moved in twenty years ago in much the same condition.

Though the rumors of him having been a succesfull person in a well respected career seem to be reacuring. I've heard them ever since I started at Sherringdale.

Should the high percentage of Asians dominating the local job market be mentioned? and the high degree of mulitculturism in all the local schools be mentioned?

He is very popular though!

A simple search on google for "mad john southfields" brings up quite a number of pages dedicated to him, as well as a myspace page!

South African immigrants

What do people think about whether it's worth mentioning the significant South African population in Southfields? I think this first entered the article in a perjorative way which has been removed, but I wonder whether there is a serious point of information here that might be worth mentioning. --Nmcmurdo 19:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Southfields is, I heard, THE destination for South African migrants... any South Africans able to clear this little mystery? In fact, is there an article on this effect - why migrants of the same country cluster in specific areas? (I'm think the Polish community in Hammersmith, the Australians in Shephereds Bush, and of course the huge Indian/Pakistani/Banglasdeshi communities in Brick Lane and Tooting) Crabsoneyes 15:04, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do people keep removing the photo

This is the only one we have at the moment! Stop taking it off. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.193.153.153 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

John

What on earth do you think gives you the right to: a)mention a local resident who suffers from mental illness on Wikipedia b)call him 'Mad John' c) mention him without his concent? If you knew the tragic story behind his illness, or the suffering it causes his relations and those who care for him, you wouldn't dare.

Whoever called him a local nusciance should be ashamed of themselves, I also attended Sheringdale School (on Standen Road if you don't believe me) but I have respect for him. Just so you know, I'm not a particularly 'high-horseish' person, neither am I religious, but I do believe in respect for others. We are no better or more valuble than he is.

Furthermore, 'Mad John' bears no factual relevance to Southfields, and legally, you aren't allowed to mention him on the internet because he is not a Public Figure, although he is undeniably outspoken.

HOWEVER, I assume no other southfields residents would like to see articles on the internet trumpetting their flaws for the community to ridicule.

Having spoken to John (As it is appropriate to call him) he is a reasonable man, and means nobody any harm. Certianly an article entitled 'Mad John' would be HIGHLY inapropriate.

In respons to the post 'he is very popular though' most of the google search results from keywords 'mad john [or jon] southfields' are utterly unrelated to the man in question.

As you've probably deduced from the tone of this entry, I am shocked and angered by peoples use of the term 'Mad John'. It ammounts to nothing more than racism, or the barbarric practice of outcasting an individual based on characteristics that they have no power over. Is this a normal attitude in a multicultural community? Welcome to the twenty-f**king-first century, people!!

I expect to see no more casually bigoted statements regarding this resident, it is degrading and disgusting.

Right - firstly, how do you know he suffers from a mental illness ? You imply that you know something about his "tragic" story and that it causes "suffering" to his relations and "those who care for him". Do you know that ? Are you one of them ? If not, what gives you the right to make pronouncements about him ? Secondly, how do you know he doesn't cal himself Mad John ? Have you asked him ? I could go on, but the one which takes the biscuit is the idea that calling him Mad John amounts to racism. You need to understand that simply hurling the word racism at people whose behaviour you don't like, but which has nothing whatever to do with racial prejudice simply weakens your arguments beyond the point where they hold any water at all. 86.157.90.44 (talk) 14:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Mad John complaint..

Mad John is his nickname, in public usage. Of course, I call him John to his face whenever I talk to him (word to the wise, try to avoid shaking his hand), but I mean him no disrespect. A friend of my mother's once suffered an epileptic fit in Southfields, and he immediately rushed toward her to sort her out. Moments of lucidity such as this, and the time he punched a mugger, cause him to be something more akin to a local hero than a figure of fun. As to whether or not he is a public figure... is there an actual definition as to what this means? He is, to the residents of a sizable area of South-West London, he iss well-known and immediately recognisable. I am sure that he has featured in numerous media publications, and as such, his mention on Wikipedia is deserved. Of course, any mention sould be a perfectly unbiased, neutral mention of who he is the stories that surround him. Crabsoneyes 23:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you're saying, thank you for your rational response. I just think because he is a figure of ridicule, mentioning him on wikipedia will only bring on further discrimination.

I don't think he's a figure of ridicule. I actually admire the guy. Always smiling, talking, dribbling... bike and radio in tow. London needs more people like him!Boomshanka 07:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John is an important part of the fabric of Southfields. Apart from the group of shops around the station there isn't a lot that all the local residents are able to share as a community. Knowing John is a bond that unites everyone, the long-term residents, the commuters and the short-term renters, most of whom feel very affectionate towards him and appreciate his warm-hearted (if slightly loud and unexpected!) greetings. He isn't a figure of ridicule, he's a valued member of the community. (As far as I know, most people refer to him simply as "John".) Opbeith (talk) 11:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I often saw him walking into the local pub (the grid) shouting his head off about I don't know what,that's all I'm saying! 92.40.212.187 (talk) 07:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

South West Trains

South West Trains do not call at Southfields Station. The District Line has been the only line serving this station for as long as I can remember. South West Trains occasionally send trains through Southfields, but they never stop there. One of the two viaducts that links the disused 'British Rail' platforms at East Putney to the line from Putney through Wandsworth Town to Clapham Junction has now been removed, so this sort of service is not likely to run in the near future.

Some people from Southfields walk to Earlsfield Station and take services from South West Trains from there. It might be worth mentioning this in the Southfields article (and mentioning Earlsfield residents walking to Southfields to get the District Line in the Earlsfield article).

The historical information about the railway opening is not entirely accurate. The railway from Wimbledon via Southfields splits at East Putney (which was built with four platforms). The District Raliway continues north over the Thames, but the other railway line turned east and droped down onto the mainline railway cutting just east of Putney Railway Station. I stongly doubt that British Rail trains ever crossed over Putney Railway Bridge and went to Putney Railway Station. Big Mac 20:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pubs information disputed

One of the pubs in Southfields was actually opened illegally, having been built with planning permission for a restaraunt with a licence to sell drink, so I'm not sure the current description about the abstinance law applies. Also it was a condition set down to people who bought the land from the owners who didn't want pubs (or funeral parlours), so I'm not sure it was a "law". Maybe it was a contract or a deed of some sort. This could do with some research. Big Mac 04:07, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a law, it was a restrictive covenant, which is, as you say, a condition imposed on anyone who bought the land. That's if it ever actually existed. In over 20 years of discussion of this I have never met anyone who has ever seen such a covenant. I once owned a house in the middle of the Grid and there was none on that property (I used to own a flat in South Wimbledon with a restrictive covenant preventing the garden being used as a brickworks !). 90.192.171.164 (talk) 22:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The most famous village on the planet" - ?

who says wimbledon is the most famous village on the planet? i've taken the liberty of deleting this line. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.44.169.107 (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Southfields. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 02:29, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Southfields. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.southfieldsvillage.com/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/LeisureandTourism/Aboutborough/abthistory.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926121302/http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/LeisureandTourism/Museum/StoryofWandsworth/default.htm to http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/Home/LeisureandTourism/Museum/StoryofWandsworth/default.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wandsworthclc.org/main.htm

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) 08:22, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]