Talk:East End of London/Archive 1

Page move

I presume this has been moved from East End to make way for a disambiguation page. If that's the case, I suggest East End of London as a better title here -- it will link naturally in text. -- Tarquin

Gordon riots

Can anyone explain why the Gordon Riots are labelled "racist" if they were against Roman Catholicism?

I believe the Gordon Riots to have been against a perceived more tolerant attitude in government towards Catholics, at the time. The consequences were mainly felt - on the streets - by Irish catholics, who were coming in numbers to London to escape poverty and obtain work. Why ask here? Kbthompson 15:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

East End extent in time & space

The East End has always been one of the poorest areas of London While I agree the geographical boundaries have always been fuzzy; the term 'East End' itself seems to have been introduced in about 1888 (see "Fishman: East End 1888", an excellent source by a local academic & historian) It should also be noted that in tudor times many palaces and rich estates were located in the East End; it's decline as a political centre did not occur until the rising importance of the palace of Westminster, when the locus shifted west ward. Kbthompson 15:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the article to to make it clear in that the separate hamlets east of the tower did not join up into one big urban area until late 18th - early 19th century: "Stepney, Mile End and Bethnal Green, though still surrounded by fields, were distinctly urban communities by 1813, and the roads linking them to the City and each other ... were lined with long ribbons of terraced housing." (Inwood, A History of London, p 257). I can't find a definitive earliest use of the term, though; if Fishman's book has this info, it would be good to add it.--Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 11:16, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I added a lengthy 'contemporary' quote at the beginning, I think (like Fishman) it says it all, however, others might want to bring it down to a sentence, and quote the reference.Kbthompson 13:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you think its a good idea to put a massive quote in the intro section? Anyway, I was thinking that a general 'East End' Category might be conceptually useful. More useful than the unlovely 'Tower Hamlets' and 'Hackney' categories which relate to a post 1965 local gov re-organisation, which may appeal to town-hall bureaucrats but has hardly any resonance with the people who live in the East-End or who are interested in its history and traditions. Colin4C 13:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

In my own defence, I did note that. I've now moved it into a separate section. I think it's a good quote, as it both notes the first use, and gives something of the flavour of what was intended by it. In this edit, I added copyhold, matchgirls strike and revised some of the text. I hope the changes meet with approval. Kbthompson 16:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I like the quote too, but I moved it before I read the talk page - I felt it fitted in nicely with the section on Location. I didn't realise it's placement was under discussion here, or I'd have mentioned it first. What do you think? --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 16:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Practically, perfect in every way (... Mary Poppins) ... My resolution, was clumsy. I added geo Essex to the note about Newham and Redbridge. I'm thinking there's a point to be made also about the 'East End' today, being 'in the head', and extending with the diaspora as far as places like the Isle of Grain (in Kent) - where I stumbled upon an East End night (including cockney songs, eels, pies and the whole caboodle). Oh, and making a comparison with 'cockneys' who were essentially residents of the city Need also to note, in Medieval times, much of the land around the river was marsh; so Ratcliffe and Wapping were easier to get to by boat, than by the single dangerous road across the marsh. For the same reason North Woolwich was in Kent until about 1902! Kbthompson 18:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The Ratcliffe (literally Red Cliff) Highway was high above the marsh, and probably an old Roman road. It is on the plateau at the top of the eponymous red (sandstone) cliff, which sloped steeply down to the marsh. I have actually been privileged to see said red cliff when on an archaelogical excavation below it (opposite St George's church) back in 2002...But yes, otherwise: 'roll out the barrel'...Colin4C 19:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, I knew of the 'red cliffe', but roman road, where did it go? The Ratcliffe Highway was much of the modern Cable St, I think. Surely, it just got into a corner of the river lee and thames, or even modern wapping - was there a roman port there? I've walked the 'wall' from tower bridge to canary wharf, much of this was created in the middle ages and maintained by the church - with windmills on! Modern wharehouse style appartment blocks sit across this now; but it can still be seen at places like Wapping steps. I thought much of the land behind was just marsh, but you're right about Ratcliffe Hw, maybe that was the sole road? Thinking about it, there is a very step drop down to the river from St George's in the East. Kbthompson 22:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Well Cable Street is parallel to the north, as for where our putative Roman road was heading, I'm not quite sure, but I guess it would be useful for a Roman coastal defence force along the north bank of the Thames: there was some suggestion that there was a Roman signal station where we were digging. But yes, the area to the south of the Highway was the primeval marsh, which was built up in the course of the centuries to its present extent. Also possibly of interest: Ratcliffe Highway was where Dr Jeckyll was returning from, (in the the guise of Mr Hyde) in an episode of the story of the same name and it seems that Oscar Wilde's Dorian Grey used to hang out in this same district. You just can't beat those East-End themed evenings! Colin4C 04:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Things for specific localities should go on the specific pages; Ratcliff itself looks very stubby at the moment, there's a lot more to say about the area - including some of your local colour. It would be appropriate here to give a flavour of the whole area in Roman times - perhaps some of the history of the tower (as it's not a part of the city of london). You appear to keep very odd hours! Kbthompson 15:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen the alternative Ratliffe article The Highway? Would be nice to edit this particular bizarrely amorphous entry, but I fear one might go mad in the process...Colin4C 12:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I certainly see what you mean. A lot of amorphous facts. In writing these articles, one really needs to have a clear story in mind, one that is 'encyclopedically' important. Much of what is there could have been abstracted from a Gazetter. Maybe the tactic for the moment is to incorporate both Cable Street and the Ratcliffe as sections into the Wapping page; create a 'Cable Street, Battle of' page if one doesn't exist - it must do ... as it stands at the moment, there's a lot of duplication between the various pages, and none of them tell a consistent tale about the development of the area. That's my pennyworth! Kbthompson 12:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

To do list ...

• Referencing - well I referenced the bit I added, and most of the article is actually referenced to more narrow articles on the subject in wiki (where I would expect specific topics to be referenced properly).
• Scope & reference - it does indeed ramble a bit, representing heteroglossia
• Matchgirls strike, already covered and linked to main article.

• Poplar rates (1921) :-I put in a short para - which requires work (I left the main date out, for instance); but it links to the requisite article. Which I think is a little deficient ... (it lacks reference to outdoor relief, which was one of the key reforms - no more workhouse).
• West Ham, the initial 'scope' defines the East End as lying to the west of the River Lee; West Ham lies to the East, and was indeed in Essex until metro boro's reform sometime towards end of 19th century (or was it 1906?)
• there are comparison figures for 18th century, 19th century and immediate post-war. The boroughs the fiqures are quoted for disappeared in 1965; so, I'm not sure what's called for here? Irish, Huguenot, Jewish and Bangladeshi immigration are covered in specific articles about their communities. There is some stuff about the number of synagogues required for the expanding community in Brit Hist on-line, but I don't think there's much enumeration otherwise. Kbthompson 16:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I've now added more references, to other bits I didn't add ...

In particular to census data, this is now available by parliamentary constituency, and not greatly comparable with the figures presented. Kbthompson 17:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It is much improved already, but more to do. Expansion eastward isn't properly explained yet. At some stage the East End expanded from a "core" outside the walls of the City. The Metropolitan Building Act was a factor in pushing things eastward to West Ham and Canning Town and this should be mentioned. I've seen maps with Bromley station looking quite rural which would mean the full urbanisation of the area up to the Lee did not come until after the railways. Do you have anything that tracks the growth? MRSC • Talk 17:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

also note prevailing winds. Morwen - Talk 19:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

• I, never bought the prevailing winds, I think its a macguffin ... I've heard the theory before, but never from historians - you find me one historian, OK then two ... in the 19th century, the whole of London was covered in smoke, winds, or no winds (and you tell the prevailing wind theory to the people on Blackwall reach - they know it all comes from Siberia.
• OK, expansion eastwards, that does need to explained, but I don't think we need to go as far as West Ham. Read the intro, read the Fishman book and the Parker book, and just about any book on the east end, and they define it as west of the lea. There are arguments about places like Southwark, but that's essentially a distant echo of the old 'are they cockneys' row.*There's some good books on East End radicals, like Rudolf Rocker, Krotopkin and shit should all rate a mention here; but again better in their own articles, with links. This article should focus on what makes the east end distinctive from (say) tower hamlets.
• Thanks really are due to MRSC for tracking down the source of those statistics; reorganising what was there, and generally galvanising this page into action ... Actually, the figures for Bow are missing - so, not comparable with 1971, 1991 & 2001!
• That 'Bluebird999' non-entity (ie it seems made up, not a login) blatted the German website over much of Tower Hamlets, Whitechapel, Spitalfields and various other places ... The pix are pretty, but unless the owner is prepared to load (one of) them under spitalfields, to illustrate the article, they have no place elsewhere. Kbthompson 00:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

But as Ripper is both an East-End legend (and contemporary tourist attraction) and is mentioned in the article, what is the objection to this external link? There is even a German film (Lulu?) which features the Ripper's sanguinary activities in this area. Pari passu the 'East-End' is a (legendary?) concept as much or more than an (ill)defined area of land. Colin4C 10:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't take it out, they are nice pix; most of them are around Spitalfields, so poss appropriate there; but I thought the En wiki guideline was that external links should be in English, and that it shouldn't be advertising - the site is self advertising for the photographer, who appears to have no specific link with the area.

I put up a load of links to galleries under Hoxton, but they were specifically galleries that had a profound impact on the area; I've added a link to flikr for LBH, as Finn specifically put up an area there for people to add their pix of Hackney.

I'd probably err for no as to linking to the german site; I think there is a line, and this is on the other side of it.Kbthompson 11:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. You nearly had me there: There was not a metropolitan borough of Bow, it was part of Poplar so the three metropolitan boroughs are a fair comparison with Tower Hamlets. see here MRSC • Talk 08:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, am I mistaking old parliamentary boundaries for geographical entities? It was late, I was, er ... stoopid ... yeah, that's probably it. (stoopid enough not to sign this, kb).

Also, this article now seems to be pretty firm on when the term East End came into use: was the term West End already in use by this stage? It was I suppose an analogous usage. Morwen - Talk 11:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I think (which often means I am wrong), the term West End came into being in opposition to the term East End. (In the West End article, the canard about prevailing winds is repeated ... and in the disamb ...). A quick online search shows nothing for the etymology ... Dictionary of London (1918) doesn't acknowledge the term; it probably grew up with the use of the term in theatre.Kbthompson 11:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Google books is good for this (and is surely going to revolutionise OED's practise of finding earliest cites for things). I get 185 hits for books using the term "West End of London" published before 1850, and 139 hits for "East End of London" . There is a 1715 work: "The Englishman" which describes the "slums of the West End and East End of London", a 1790 work which talks of a "Chinese colony in the East End of London". Having said this, I don't think these paticular dates can be accurate. But there is certainly much usage of both in c. 19th works. Morwen - Talk 12:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Mills places West End as 'early' 19th Century (before East End which he descibes as coming into use in the 'late' 19th Century). Interestingly he says it is west of Charing Cross (I've never had that specific idea before). It includes Oxford Street, Regent Street, Mayfair and the parks. MRSC • Talk 18:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

In 16th and 17th century works (such as Shakespeare's Henry IV part 2) I have found references to 'the town's end', referring to suburbs such as Shoreditch as places where the destitute and/or mad would end as homeless beggars...The word 'suburb' itself in Shakespeare's time had a somewhat racy connotation as a place where gambling houses, theatres and brothels (plus bowling alleys....) would set up shop beyond the jurisdiction of the City Fathers. The old connotation of 'suburb' was more like what we would describe as 'inner city' than the modern bourgeois connotation. Colin4C 16:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Looking at the google books search, prior to 1880, it seems to bring up the phrase 'the east end of London', after you get refs to the 'East End' (capitals, and no qualifier). I think this is what Freeman and Palmer are on about. I wonder what it does for 'West End'? I wrote the promised para on radicals - it probably needs to be translated into english - and a bit on downstream developments. I tried looking up the Metropolitan Building Acts, and the only ones I found were actually related to construction to prevent fire - including the max volume a building could be to allow a fire to be put out! I think MRSC got me back, as it were ... I have no electrickery tomorrow, so shall be silent for a while (not sulking). Kbthompson 18:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The article is much richer for the recent additions. What I want to get some evidence for is when and why development moved eastward. Certainly after 1844 industry (and with it population) moved east of the Lee. Was it this pull eastward that caused the "filling in" of the East End or was it already fully urbanised at this point? MRSC • Talk 18:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I have seen it blamed on Jack the Ripper! His activities allegledly drawing attention to the conditions in the East End, especially the Jago resulting in slum clearance efforts and a displacement of population.Esthameian 06:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry, its in the maps! MRSC • Talk 18:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Surely our work here is not done? 8^) East Ham looks a good candidate for a rewrite! Some mention should be made here of early immigrant communities - chinese in Limehouse, asian and black sailors in Ratcliffe. All connected with the sea. Kbthompson 19:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Please check, there was (may still be) separate entries for East and West Ham as County Boroughs (up to 1965)Esthameian 06:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Re the drang nach osten of the East-Ender and the search for lebensraum in Essex maybe mention should be made of Southend as representing the ultimate paradise for the local inhabitantsColin4C 20:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I am going to take another look when I have fresh eyes. It is coming along nicely now. :) MRSC • Talk 21:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Formal boundaries

Come to think of it, the City of London is a definite western boundary and the River Thames is a physical southern boundary. Should this go in the intro? MRSC • Talk 18:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't the boundary of the City and the East-End marked by the 'Aldgate Pump' or somesuch???Colin4C 10:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

it was marked by Alegate itself (and the wall and ditch), which was taken down as an impediment to traffic at the end of the 18th century. Subsequent distances (milestones) to Essex, and the east, were measured from Aldgate pump; which itself has subsequently been moved. Kbthompson 11:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

If I remember correctly London over the Border was an ecclesastical term, not administrative?

Prior to the formation of the LCC (London County Council) the area east of the city and west of the Lee/Lea (both spellings are used) was part of Middlesex and east of the Lee was Essex (with the exception of the anomalous North Woolwich). When the LCC was formed in the late 1800s, the boundary was the Lea (except, again, for North Woolwich) West Ham became a County Borough roughly equivalent to today's unitary authorities; i.e. a separate independant administrative body. East Ham followed suit in 1916 and the London boundary remained the Lea until the formation of the GLC when East and West Ham and North Woolwich were merged into Newham. A point to note is that the public records of both County Boroughs upto 1965 were sent to, and are held at Essex record office.

At one time one of the more optomistic local politicians campaigned for West Ham County Borough to become the County Town of Essex! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.111.163 (talk • contribs)

I think that's mostly right and dealt with on County Borough of West Ham and County Borough of East Ham - if you can find a reference of the local politician story, then add it to West Ham. These people were extraordinarily proud of their new 'suburbs'; you can see that in the way they approached the creation of their town halls. East Ham used to have a magnificent assembly room at the town hall, that was torn down, because it was going to cost a few grand to repair the roof. Kbthompson 23:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

Overall, this article is very well written, includes useful, fair-use images, and informative. The citations are sufficient, although there are still a few minor gaps where citations should be added (first part of history section, population, and today), but serious issues with citations. The one sentence that really does need a reference is, "With rising costs elsewhere in the capital, the East End has become a desirable place for business." -- but I won't hold up GA status for this statement. Other than that, looks good! Dr. Cash 19:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Now we need to decide whether to head for FA status, or bring the West End article up to a similar standard! Kbthompson 19:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I have added an external link to the Victoria County History of the area (although I think the version available at British History Online is out of copyright and directly quotable)Esthameian 06:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

It's already extensively referenced in the article. The Victoria County History online is in copyright, because the online version was created in 2002 - although some elements of the text version are out of copyright. Volume 11 is mainly 1960s, so remains in copyright for a few more years. It's best to paraphrase since here we are creating an article that introduces the important elements, and provide the background for readers to examine the full text if they're interested. Kbthompson 12:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

• The lead does not adequately summarise the article.
• References should state the author, publisher, publishing date and access date if known.
• Only full dates need linking.
• Please provide citations for these statements:
  • "Parts of the London boroughs of Newham and Waltham Forest, formerly in an area of Essex known as London over the border, are sometimes considered to be in the East End. However, the River Lee is usually considered to be the eastern boundary of the East End and this definition would exclude the boroughs but place them in East London. The common extension of the term further east is probably due to the diaspora of East Enders who moved to suburban east London, in particular the new estates at Becontree and Harold Hill, or otherwise left London entirely."
  • "This led to a demand for 6d per hour (2.5p), and an end to casual labour in the docks."
  • "The building of the Royal Docks between 1880 and 1921 "
  • "Lansbury Estate in Poplar, which was built as a showpiece of the 1951 Festival of Britain."
  • "Brick Lane has been extensively regenerated and is famous, amongst other things, as London's curry capital"
  • "the hospital's clinical facilities are undergoing a £1.2 billion refurbishment and expansion."

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GA/R). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAC. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Regards, Epbr123 09:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've converted that to a 'to-do' list, and began referencing items. I'll do the best I can. The problems I can see are:

1. the text is already a summary of much more detailed articles (and where there isn't one, there should be!). Condensing it further, to provide an introduction will necessarily provide a 'fact sparse' text (if I can convey my meaning properly). Perhaps you can refer to an example that has passed the process.
2. that first statement, you need a reference for, was actually the result of 'robust' discussion. I think the district would be defined in East End 1888, or Palmers' The East End - actually, there's probably a defn in there that agrees with the one that appears in the article.
3. formatting the refs properly may take some time, as will removing the date links. These days, I'm of the opinion they shouldn't be, but I understood that the policy was a recommendation, not Gospel.

I hope that goes some way towards meeting your concerns. Kbthompson 15:31, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

1. For an example of an article composed of the summaries of subarticles, see Brazil.
2. The statements need a reference. If they were derived from discussions amongst Wikipedia users, it is original research and doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.
3. The issue of dates is part of the "overlinking" guideline. I will help delink the dates myself. Epbr123 16:33, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll take a deep breath and have a go at an intro tomorrow. I identified the source of the phrase London over the border, and showed that the boundary is contested in the footnote. I've clarified the diaspora section, and will justify the statements by reference to the Victoria History articles on West Ham and East Ham. Hopefully, I'll struggle to a justification without substantially changing the outcome of the previous discussions. Then move onto to standardising the references, probably section by section. Kbthompson 17:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've largely met your unreasonable demands 8^). I still need to go through the refs one more time (just for luck); review that intro, and tidy up the language, add refs from within the article. The page design could also do with a tweak to take care of the whitespace around the TOC. Please let me know if there are any more issues to be dealt with.

I must thank you for your constructive criticism, exercises like this can only improve articles. Kbthompson 09:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

GA Pass

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Epbr123 21:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your constructive criticism. It is very helpful. Kbthompson 22:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Copy edits

I am working my way through and copy editing. I hope this is useful.

• Unless UK and U.S. punctuation differs in this respect, "which" should generally be preceded by a comma, while "that" should not.
• The punctuation in the footnotes has not been standardised and could use attention. I will try to look for it as I go, but it would be worth a systematic examination, since this article will be FA-class soon. -- Ssilvers 21:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
• In the beginning of the "History" section, you have 4 bullet points. I find these to be intriguing but insufficiently fleshed out. Unless they are each explained in greater detail later, I would suggest making them into a narrative paragraph (or two) with a few more sentences of explanation about how each of these factors contributed to the poverty of the area. This seems like an important enough point to require more clarification before proceeding and might even be worth a subheading like "Causes of poverty." -- Ssilvers 21:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that, someone has already pointed out my propensity to overcommerise (sic). Unfortunately, I used to mark up scripts and my use of commas tends to reflect the way I read it! I appreciate you taking the time, and my inclination was that people would follow the links for further explanation. To some extent the bottom three are examined further in the text (below), but perhaps copyhold could do with further explanation, and the link made specific for the others in the lead for the section. Kbthompson 00:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who's ever had a hand in this article. Kbthompson (talk) 23:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1867 NationalStandardTheatre.jpg

Image:1867 NationalStandardTheatre.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

-fixed, it's pd-old (1867) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbthompson (talk • contribs) 09:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup needed

Mainpage in 12 hours, and there are no publishers on citations (I hope they are all reliable sources, since it doesn't appear anyone reviewed for that at FAC). I also noticed WP:DASH issues throughout, example: Limehouse is also the scene of the Fu Manchu films - based on Sax Rohmer's novels. I haven't checked other issues: anyone around to begin cleanup before tomorrow? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• • I believe I have fixed -dash problems. Kbthompson (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistent date formatting. Some of the sources say Date accessed: with a full, linked date; others say accessed with an unlinked, abbreviated date. Which is it? I was going to start ref cleanup, but don't know how regular editors want to address the inconsistency. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:53, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• • Fixed dates. Kbthompson (talk) 19:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I'll try to go through publishers later. Kbthompson (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• Throwing my hat into the ring, I find it very, very unlikely that Image:Sir Alf Garnett.JPG is correctly licensed. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 00:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• You may be right, but the uploader claims to be the creator of the image, and released it GNU.

The articles now on the main page, so I'm not going to make any more changes - but I think I got most of the web publisher formats that SandyGeorgia mentioned. Kbthompson (talk) 00:36, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I erased an erroneous text

Text erased

Leon Trotsky, Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin ... plot the October Revolution.

I erased these lines for :

1/ It is a well known fact that Stalin never travelled out of the Russian Empire. 2/ In 1906, nobody could "plot the 1917 October Revolution". 3/ Iskra was a newspaper, not a party. The wikipedia page about the Russian Social-Democratic Party tells that the 1903 meeting was in Belgium.

I do not know when and were Trotsky and Lenin have been in the London East End, but certainly it is possible to find it.

ttotto 23 February 2008

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttotto (talk • contribs) 05:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, I'll chase it up when things quieten down a little. The Encyclopaedia of Marxism describes "In 1903 the Second Congress of the party met in Belgium and England with this dispute comming to the forefront. After the congress the party split into the Bolshinstvo (Bolshevik -- majority party) and Menshinstvo (Menshevik -- minority party), with the Mensheviks believing in Stagism/Reformism, while the Bolsheviks demanded outright revolution." The original text probably lacked clarity and should be revised - and it looks like individual words should be ref'd! Kbthompson (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

As for 'well known facts', see Joseph Stalin#Early years as a Marxist revolutionary, 1899–1917! - about Joseph Djugashvili's stay in Tower House, in Whitechapel. What's wrong with describing Iskra as a 'socialist' newspaper? We'll return to this. Kbthompson (talk) 09:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The text has been replaced, in a more carefully phrased form. Multiple references to the events available, including Russian (in English) sources. Kbthompson (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations

I know it's not the 'done thing' for this kind of comment on a Talk page but I wanted to congratulate the editors on what is a truly stunning article. Dick G (talk) 06:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

{Blush} ... it was a collaborative effort and stands on the shoulders of the many more detailed wikipedia articles about the individual topics. Kbthompson (talk) 08:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

No Stalin in London: I maintain...

East End 260207

I maintain what I said some days ago.

Stalin could not be in Whitechapel in 1906, as he never left Russia (or the U.S.S.R.) before 1943, when he met Churchill and Roosevelt at the Tehran conference. In the years 1900, Stalin was almost unknown by Russian socialists. His activity was intermediate between banditry and revolutionary action in Baku, Azerbaijan. There are some evidences he was actually during this period an Okhrana agent. This part of his life is explained in the Wikipedia Stalin page.

I do not have the time to check for exact references, but it is possible to refer to the Trotsky memories (My life), or to Lenin writings. My sources are historians I read in the years eighty. I never read that Stalin was a delegate in any congress in western Europe. What is your source for this assumption ? (Stalin, then known as Joseph Djugashvili, stayed in Tower House, a hostel for itinerant workers near the London Hospital, for two weeks, paying sixpence a night for a cubicle. He was the delegate from Tbilisi.) This is something new.

Lenin wrote he met Stalin for the first time in 1917 in Petrograd. He called him the marvelous Georgian. This is during this period (the Kerensky government) that there was a plot for an October revolution.

In december 1905 Trotsky was arrested in Petrograd and spent the 1906 year in jail. He escaped in january 1907 and travelled once again to London.

This story is explained in the Wikipedia Trotsky page.

In My life Trotsky mention a party congress in London in 1907. He say he met Maxim Gorky and Rosa Luxemburg.

Trotsky told about Stalin in another book about his policy (Stalin) as a philistine, ignorant in foreign languages, and this is obviously what he was. He was not exactly a globe-trotter. He travelled out of Russia once to Tehran (1943), and once to Potsdam (1945).

Trotsky My Life, extracts: Trotsky My Life @ http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1930/mylife/index.htm

CHAPTER XVI

MY SECOND FOREIGN EXILE: GERMAN SOCIALISM  

The party congress of 1907 held its meetings in a socialist church in London. It was a protracted,crowded, stormy, and chaotic congress. ... On one of the first days of the congress, I was stopped in the church vestibule by a tall, angular man with a round face and high cheek-bones, who wore a round hat. “I am your admirer,” he said, with an amiable chuckle. “Admirer?” I echoed in astonishment. It seemed that the compliment referred to my political pamphlets that had been written in prison. My interlocutor was Maxim Gorky, and this was the first time I ever saw him. ... At the London congress I renewed acquaintance with Rosa Luxemburg, whom I had known since 1904.

This page about the East End is great and should not be weakened with an erroneous statement.

I did not change the page. It has been changed many times today, and I suppose Kbthompson had a heavy work after my deletion.

Ttotto —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttotto (talk • contribs) 20:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, I did take your concern seriously, looked at reputable sources and added that info back only when I was sure that the text did not go beyond what was said in the references - a number of sources concurred. Particularly a number of Russian sites claimed:

1898-1900, Under the leadership of J. V. Stalin, V. Z. Ketskhoveli and A. G. Tsulukidze, a central leading group is formed within the Tiflis organization of the RSDLP, which passes from propaganda in study circles to mass political agitation. The group organizes the printing of manifestoes and their distribution among the workers, forms underground Social-Democratic circles, and leads the strikes and political struggle of the Tiflis proletariat.

and later

In 1907, On returning from the Fifth ("London") Congress of the RSDLP, J. V. Stalin visits Baku and Tiflis and delivers reports on the congress at meetings of the Social-Democratic organizations of Baku, Tiflis and a number of districts in Western Georgia.

In the cited reference in the article, it states

... Stalin, then Joseph Djugashvili, spent a fortnight there in a sixpence-a-night cubicle when he attended the Fifth Congress of the Russian Social Democratic and Labour Party across the road in Whitechapel. Lenin, meanwhile, preferred to commute from Bloomsbury where he could also visit the British Museum. The congress, to which British intelligence turned a blind eye, consolidated the supremacy of the Bolshevik party and debated strategy for communist revolution in Russia. Stalin never wrote or spoke about his stay in London and most Russian witnesses to it were wiped out in his Great Terror.

I'm not trying to undertake original research. The original ref against the statement you removed made much the same case - but, as you pointed out was poorly worded and went beyond the strict facts. I think the point made in the article is really about the sheer quantity of notable radicals visiting the East End during that period and not specifically about Russian politics (or indeed, Stalin) - and I am very grateful for your corrections. Beyond that, the criteria for inclusion of material in wikipedia is for verifiability, not truth in a reliable source. As it stands the article meets that criteria, but when I have more time, I will revisit the issue - as personally I think the truth matters. I'm not sure how I can satisfy you though, as there are sources that say Stalin visited the 5th congress in London (in 1907); and, as you claim, contradictory sources that say he didn't leave Russia until the 1940s.

I'll certainly have a look at the Trotsky memoires, there's more material there that can expand on the 1907 congress. Thanks Kbthompson (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Kbthompson

thank you for your attention for my comments.

I understand this is not an article on the Russian revolutionaries, but this "Stalin in London" looks like an uchronia. I was so astonished I decided to register for the first time after many years of reading Wikipedia, and erased the lines ( waiting for a reaction ).

You say that there are contradictory sources about the travels of Stalin in this period. I am not surprised by a special Russian version, on this issue, as on many other.

Falsification of history was one of the specialities of the stalinist and neo-stalinist regimes, and you could find special Soviet versions of the generally admitted world history, until recently in the U.S.S.R. ( see the good old Novosti agency pamphlets of the seventies for instance).

This language <<Under the leadership of J. V. Stalin, etc./ ...leads the strikes and political struggle of the Tiflis proletariat. / The congress, to which British intelligence turned a blind eye, consolidated the supremacy of the Bolshevik party ...>> is a good example of the stalinist or neo-stalinist propaganda language.

This statement can be taken as a proof of the version I defend : << Stalin never wrote or spoke about his stay in London and most Russian witnesses to it were wiped out in his Great Terror.>>

I was just wondering why Stalin had not boasted about having been so close to the great Lenin so early, ten years before the October revolution, when he was merely a secondary leader during this event in 1917. What you found on this Russian site is a kind of response.

More probably, Stalin never wrote about this London travel, because he never went in London. (Occam's razor)

Of course, Trotsky was not a neutral observer, but you certainly can believe him when he says he was in London in 1907, and the congress was just a sort of chaos, nothing important.

Another strange issue is a Joseph Dzhugashvili traveling under his real name in England when he was theoretically on the lists of all the polices. The European countries polices were not less efficient than today, and a similar congress in the People House in Brussels had been previously forbidden. So, the "marvelous Georgian" was touring incognito in London ? Or, maybe as an agent ?

The usual Western university history says that Trotsky was the great man of the 1905 Petrograd soviet, and, from 1917 to 1924, the number two of the revolution; that Stalin became a real big leader during the civil war, after the Brest-Litosk treaty (1918). Maybe Russian non historian or nationalist sources do not agree with this story.

What are these Russian sites ? I had a look on [ http://www.stel.ru/stalin/Russia_in_World_War_1912-1916.htm] (example) This is a full Stalin fan club site, not a serious reference !

bye bye Ttotto

Here is another source placing Stalin in London[1]. The AHR is long running and sufficiently well-known to have a Wikipedia entry and appears to be less biased than Trotsky would be.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, for that. The source listed in the article is a British broadsheet newspaper. One of the reasons this is a reliable source is that they employ fact checkers. There are a number of sources that make the same claim - one said he was there, he did not speak, he did not contribute - you have to remember this is a fairly early stage in his career. Another did suggest that he was an agent of the secret police. I don't make this stuff up, yes one source might be mistaken and an aberration, or a plant - but a quick google shows up between 6-10 reliable websites showing the same information, and it shows up in google books too. (The latter being peer reviewed historical publications). All I can say is that his presence can be justified for inclusion in wikipedia - even if it is the subject of controversy. Kbthompson (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The references to that article are interesting: The first volume of Stalin's Collected Works dating from 1901 to 1907 includes twenty items in Georgian and only six in Russian, but four of these are unsigned collective editorials in Russian language periodicals, and the other two are his speeches at Stockholm, which were not published in Georgia at the time. The second volume contains eight articles in Georgian before the report on the London conference. The text of the article notes that on his return from London Stalin published his first work in Russian in Bakinskii proletarii - so, anyone got a first edition of Stalin's works that can settle this once and for all! Kbthompson (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've added that ref to the article. That's a good reference; scholarly, peer reviewed journal. Probably as good as we'll get for a ref for his time in London. I've also noted that it doesn't appear in his memoires. I haven't added that the Georgian Mensheviks challenged his credentials - or the speculation that he may have been there as a police agent. Can we agree that this is now well referenced, and as near factual as we can achieve without actually being there? Kbthompson (talk) 10:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it's certainly put to bed any idea that he wasn't there. Obviously the other points are more appropriate to the article on Stalin or one on the conference than to an article whose many subject isn't even political.--Peter cohen (talk) 12:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving the Political Centre

I am puzzled by the assertion at the start of the history section that there was a 'relocation of the ruling court and national political epicentre to Westminster'. As far as I know Westminster was the seat of power in London since at least the time of Canute. Could you provide a reference for this claim? PoochieR (talk) 09:15, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Mainly introduction to Alan Palmer (see book list). There was a palace at Westminster, but it did not come into it's prime until Charles I/II. William I held his first courts at Barking Abbey, there were a couple of palaces in the East End to access the hunting grounds, including Epping Forest and the marshes. John had a hunting lodge at Poplar and Henry VIII at Bow. Edward II (?) established the major royal palace at Greenwich - which remained popular until Charles I and the interregnum. The parishes of Stepney and Hackney were particularly popular with the Tudors for the amount of ecclesiastic land that was appropriated for their country estates.

Prior to Charles II parliament met irregularly, and the epicentre of power was the Royal Court. If you find it confusing, it probably requires expansion/revision - but it's difficult to retain the focus of the article in explaining everything. Kbthompson (talk) 09:43, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

There is some expansion of that point further down the para, referenced to the Victoria County Histories (Brit History online). cheers, Kbthompson (talk) 09:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added some details of Stratford Langthorne Abbey, and Edward II. There was also a bishop's palace near Victoria Park (Bonner, Bishop of London) - the park was partially established on the remains of his deer park. Not sure about including him - need to keep the focus on 1850-200?. Maybe spin off a history of the parish and manor of Stepney? Kbthompson (talk) 16:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Issues to follow up

1. Stalin, Lenin and Trotsky
2. Political epicentre phrase, needs revision - or tighter referencing.
3. Immigration - the recently added distinction between rural and foreign immigration could do with rephrasing. It's not that I don't disagree that incomers also came from the British countryside. The focus of the article is the end of the 18th century and, partly, the ways in which successive waves of immigration changed the character of the area over two centuries. Around 1881, for instance over a third of the inhabitants had been born in the parish (census) - and by the end of that century, Jewish immigration still amounted to only 20-25% of the densest area around Whitechapel, Aldgate and Spitalfields. I think if we include rural immigration to the district, we really need some reference for it. It's true for the main body of London, but what were the effects on the East End? Kbthompson (talk) 13:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Minder

Was Minder (TV series) set in the East End? If so it could be mentioned in the TV section. PiCo (talk) 12:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe it was made by Euston Films at their Teddington studios. The only plausible link to the East End was Arthur Daley's faux cockney. Some of the derelict sites may have been in the East End, but I think the predominant locations were in West London. Kbthompson (talk) 12:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

London docks

Sorry to nitpick about an excellent article, but I notice another instance of a link of the text "London docks" to the article London Docks. This is confusing to the casual reader since the East End article refers to the London docks closing in the 1980s (which is true when using the term London docks in the broad sense to mean "the enclosed docks of the upstream part of the Port of London within the area of London Docklands", but the London Docks article to which it links says that they closed in 1969 (which is also true). Taking the article's tight definition of the East End to exclude the Isle of Dogs and all points east, the East End docks all closed in the 60s. Perhaps 'local docks' or something similar might be better? Pterre (talk) 15:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, clarity was sacrificed on the altar of brevity, and the expression got linked in a way that was not intended. I notice the reference in the Dock section also contains nasty subordinate clauses that make it hard to read, too. I think I've clarified both occurrences. Kbthompson (talk) 16:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletions from the article

During the last two days, this was deleted. Should it have been?: "Leon Trotsky, Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin all attended meetings of the socialist newspaper Iskra in 1903; three years later they met in a warehouse in Whitechapel to plot the October Revolution."

Also, the External Link to the "Jewish East End" site was deleted (see Feb. 22 state of the article). Should it have been? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:26, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for checking those, I did notice. I didn't think it worth digging into those while it was on the front page. Many of the changes were fine, some need rewording, some need putting back, some elements of the original text could do with revisiting.

I was going to check whether the Jewish East End site is still going before adding it back. I let the communist triumvirate deletion stand because the original text was poorly worded. I have evidence that they were here in 1903 and 1907, and that in the 1907 meeting they decided to ferment revolution in Russia - but October, who knew ... Otherwise, some good points were raised and the article stood up reasonably well to the battering ... (chips with that? - which was, naturally an East End invention!). Kbthompson (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Few accents are heard?

That's a very, very strange statement to make - anyone who lives or works in East London or London in general (especially in working class areas) is likely to disagree with it. Some Cockney features are certainly less likely to be found in the speech of youngsters but the sentence should be corrected to reflect that. If anything, things such as th-fronting, the dropping of Hs and the glottalised T, have become more common, the only speech features which seem to be in decline are the changes in the way certain vowels are pronounced. Sorry to complain, /Rant over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Makist (talk • contribs) 21:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

No, the article is improved through such whingings! Much of that material was summarised from the cockney article. Yes, I was brought up in the East End and still live in the area. I would say that estuary English is the predominant accent in London - sharing with cockney some of those aspects you identify. With younger speakers, there's also an introduction of rising intonation from strine (watching too many soaps, I guess). I'd also say I don't hear many Yiddish, Romani and costermonger borrowings anymore - with modern introductions coming from Bangladeshi and other patois'.

The predominant ref there is from Rosewarne, if there are other ref's that contradict him, then we can look at changing it. Kbthompson (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I've changed that to a long decline and rephrased. Hopefully, that's acceptable. Kbthompson (talk) 13:04, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Wrong number of nights?

Between 7 September 1940 and 10 May 1941, a sustained bombing campaign was mounted, and London was bombed for 57 successive nights, an era known as 'the Blitz'.

This reads wrong. I assume the 57 nights occurred at some point within those two dates but it sounds like the writer of the sentence made a math error. Could a knowledgeable person rephrase suitably? Tempshill (talk) 23:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I've clarified that by stating that the attack began by targeting London for 57 successive nights (72 if you count the one where it was too cloudy for bombing). I believe that after that, they switched to targeting air-defences - but that is beyond the scope of this article. Kbthompson (talk) 00:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Opening statement

The second sentence here reads:
“Use of the term began…
…and arose…
…which led to extreme overcrowding…”
I’m sure that’s not what is meant so I’ve changed it. Swanny18 (talk) 11:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, I’m not clear from this why the term “East End” is significant; I know the area has a particular identity, and East-Enders see themselves as a particular community, but it really isn’t clear from this. Any ideas? Swanny18 (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem achieving clarity.

The term arose in the 1880s - see quotation from The Nineteenth Century, it was then synonymous with poverty and crime, and became a metaphor for them. The area of the East End has a historic and literary significance. The article draws that out over time, as the meaning of the term changes with time. Later it becomes a synonym for pluckiness and resilience under fire; in modern times themes of kinship are drawn out - I don't think there's a definitive answer. I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. Kbthompson (talk) 11:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that a term cannot "begin" AND "arise". That sounded like two separate events. I put a quick fix on the sentence. I also agree that "arise" is a funny word to use, even if a source uses it. How about "popularise" or "spread"? Suggestion: "Use of the term, coined in the late 19th century, spread with rapid growth of the area." -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It's moving away from the primary meaning: which is that an essentially pejorative term came about to describe disgusting human conditions. It is beginning to say something less punchy and with less consequence - what about Use of the term began in the late 19th century and arose with the rapid expansion of the population in London, which led to extreme overcrowding throughout the area and a concentration of poor people and immigrants.? Kbthompson (talk) 18:53, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I clarified that it is a pejorative term, but a term cannot "begin" and also "arise". See if the new sentence works. If not, feel free to rewrite without using "began" and "arose" in the same sentence. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Poor, poor Shakespeare ... still, she'll do ... Kbthompson (talk) 16:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear, it looks like it's me that wasn't being clear.
My first point was only that it wasn’t the use of the term that caused the unemployment, which is how it was reading, and I thought I'd fixed that.
My second was that the article starts by saying:
“.. the "East End"... is the area of London east of...the City of London...although it is not defined by universally accepted formal boundaries”.
Which raises the question, so why is it significant? It sounds like it’s merely a geographic abstraction.
I would have thought the answer was that the “East End”, wherever it actually is , has a particular character, and “East-Enders”, whoever that includes, are a recognizeable type (stereotype?). A sentence on that was what I thought was needed, somewhere in the opening; though I didn’t feel qualified to write it, not being an East-Ender.
Swanny18 (talk) 18:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The term arose in the late 19th century popular press - in that sense, it is an abstraction - but one about which have been written a significant number of scholarly books, government studies and something that has a character. The East End is a geographic district - roughly the parish of Stepney, and as is explicitly stated at the end of that first para: Over the course of a century, the East End became synonymous with poverty, overcrowding, disease and criminality. As to the nature of East Enders, that depends on which period you're asking about, that's not a static property. It's fashioned through circumstance and the interpretations forced upon it - (say) by newspapers, governments, and in literature.

Significance, is another aspect that changes with time. The aforesaid poverty and suffering. The formation of trade unions and the labour party. The infrastructure for trade to create an Empire, the first council houses, the suffragette movement, an end to the Poor Laws, the general strike, Target area 'A', post-classic theatre>

To provide such a sentence would ignore change and ignore time - for instance, is an East Ender: poor basal stock, a huguenot, irish, jewish, or bangladeshi? Is an East Ender, a 19th century slum dweller, or a 21st century stockbroker living in a former warehouse overlooking the river? There's really no such characterisation possible. Kbthompson (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:D017.JPG

The image Image:D017.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• Image:Rachel Whiteread - House.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Image is PD-UK. Noted there. Kbthompson (talk) 08:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Nope, despite an unknown photographer and date, this is claimed to be a german photo - which has a +70 year PD expiry. I have a crashed one to use if all else fails ... Kbthompson (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, replaced by an official Air Ministry photo - which is PD-UK. Almost where we started, but the prior aerial version featured the Isle of Dogs. Kbthompson (talk) 14:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

In popular culture

In view of the length of the main article, I'm considering splitting off the section In popular culture to a new article East End of London in popular culture - a copy of the introduction would remain here, but the three sections would be moved in their entirety. Any thoughts, objections? Kbthompson (talk) 12:05, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Done, this allows expansion of that article. Kbthompson (talk) 10:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The Olympic Park

According to the boundaries defined at length earlier in the article, the Olympic Park is not in the East End, so why is it included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteste (talk • contribs) 22:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Local authority "harassment" NPOV?

Is it NPOV to say local authority harassment? In one sense there is a reference so it is substantiated, but I still think something more neutral like "attempts by the local authority to stop it" would be more NPOV. SimonTrew (talk) 20:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually yes (I didn't write that sentence), but anyone in that particular business is likely to be the subject of licensing restraints and conditions that constitute harassment. It's almost certainly supported by the existing reference. I'll change it to the less charged 'restraints' - but I suspect it'll be reverted. Kbthompson (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Bangladeshis ?

there is nothing much about how Bangladeshis have influenced the East End, the history of racial hatred against them, establishment of Sylheti-owned Indian restaurants and such many more. I clearly do not think this article is complete without these informations, even though they are an immigrant ethnic community, but however thriving and well established in the East End especially in Spitalfields, Whitechapel (Tower Hamlets area). History of Bangladeshis in the United Kingdom may help, or British Bangladeshi can also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.14.119 (talk) 23:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Well add it then. Go careful with the accusations of racism. SimonTrew (talk) 23:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The main intention of this article was to provide a well-referenced history of the East End. The main academic article on Sylheti migration to the district is referenced in the article - but I really couldn't find much else. I'll revisit the matter over the next few days, and probably solve the matter by finding a way to introduce those links into the text. It's always more difficult to deal with a current phenomena using reliable sources than something that has an established history of published academic research. You could also say that the Huguenots (who founded much of the district you refer to, and lived there for two centuries); or the Jewish population of the 1880s (a far larger group numerically); are under-represented in the article. Of necessity, the article is an overview and an attempt to interest the reader look at the links to more detailed information on individual topics - many are covered in single sentences. I recently expanded Ethnic groups in London, which included information on the Sylheti community - you may wish to review that; and by all means expand it, or correct it - I've added a link to that article at the head of the population section.

Simon, I don't think the contributor was trying to establish racism in the article, but rather to say that the difficulties experienced by that community were under-represented in the article. That violence is mentioned in the article, but not in detail - I think Altab Ali (he's a redirect) is probably worth mentioning, as the demo protesting that death was a turning point in community relations - it was not just Bangladeshi on that protest. By comparison, most individuals mentioned in the article relate to their influence on national politics, or social reform. The main point is that any changes need to be referenced to reliable sources; there are some in that article - but not as many as in this, and it is important to maintain the quality of this article. Hope that helps Kbthompson (talk) 01:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm also inclined to mention the achievements of Pola Uddin, Baroness Uddin. Comments? Kbthompson (talk) 01:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to impute racism and if it sounded that way I am sorry, I was just saying go careful. I did look on :WP to try to find policies but there really aren't many except for racial abuse against other users (unless I am looking in the wrong place). SimonTrew (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Some of that has been done; small expansion of 1971 arrival and 1970s racist attacks to come. The prime directive on wikipedia is verifiability - so, it's OK to quote cited racist opinions - see Evans-Gordon, 1902, about the Jews; much the same was said about the Irish, a century earlier (actually much worse); and previously about the Huguenots. That quotation was particularly good, because it was from an MP and member of the ruling party; you wouldn't want a quote from a modern fringe politician. The quote also has the advantage of distance; you can see echoes in what is said about ethnic minorities today - but that was said about a group a hundred years ago; the sky didn't fall in and the group (like those before) became integrated into a wider society. So - it places it in context. Most editors would take a dim view if you expressed such thoughts as your own opinion. The difficulty is obtaining a balance, so there is no undue weight given to either group - difficult when a community is under attack and suffering violence and abuse. The beneficial effects of immigration tend to be intangibles; and only really appreciated in a historical context - so, few contemporary references. Throughout Britain, the majority of curry houses are run by Bangladeshis; and it's a business worth about £4bn - difficult to tease out the effect on the local economy. Like our IP friend, I've seen it's thriving - but to include it in wikipedia I need somebody from a university to do a study. Most of the possible refs are a bit iffy for FA - articles like the Guardian Style section, and such like. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Sally Army

My family are all east end cor blimey luv a duck etc. and I would actually like a sec on the sally army to slot into around about the 1930sish-- it was incredibly strong during the Great Depression. But I have to do my research first. SimonTrew (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Try to aim for brevity. The foundation is dealt with, but yes, little of the 1930s soup kitchens, and expansion of the hostels (the City paid for them, but insisted they weren't located in the City! - although I'd be hard pressed to ref that). Any major text should expand Salvation Army. That brings to mind, I'm not sure if Ghandi got a mention - I'll check that. Ultimately, this article is near the recommended limit for size; so, pithiness is a virtue. Kbthompson (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I agree with you on pretty much all points. Usually when I edit an article it gets shorter (though in talk I am more verbose). I did mean the sally army specifically as it was in the East End and not just the whole organisation generally.

We've rather hijacked "Bangladeshi" so I am gonna split this out into another section outSimonTrew (talk) 10:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

59 Brick Lane

I think there should be some mention or an article about 59 Brick Lane. This one of the famous historical buildings in the capital, and I believe an article should be available, which is an important part of the East End of London. This building was home to successive immigrant communities in the East End, a former Protestant Church, A Jewish Chapel, a Methodist Church, a Jewish synagogue and today a Mosque, ethnically to the French, Jews and Bangladeshis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.185.85 (talk) 12:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Well add it then, nobody's stopping you. Look at Brick Lane and the "See also"s therefrom, if it is very significant it may be better to make a separate article. Personally I've never heard of it. SimonTrew (talk) 22:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

There's a para about the history of the building at Brick Lane; here it would probably amount to undue weight since, it doesn't really have national significance. Otherwise, why not mention the nearby 19 Princelet Street, or Dennis Severs' House - there's a line gotta be drawn in such a large article; and this is the level of detail that's best dealt with in more local articles. Thanks Kbthompson (talk) 23:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

OK must be pretty obscure then, I didn't even spot it in the Brick Lane article (perhaps my naive search for "59" was the trouble?). So, agree; this article refs brick lane, which then goes on to see also more specific articles. SimonTrew (talk) 23:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

La Neuve Eglise, or London Jamme Masjid; Wesley's first sermon was preached across the road - but not here. It is too fine grained for this article. Kbthompson (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, 59 is not actually the mosque; it's the building next door. The mosque probably deserves its own article - not sure why this one is nominated though. Kbthompson (talk) 09:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Crime

Hi All, KBthompson, SimonTrew, IP people and anyone else
great article! But did notice one sentence in the crime section that came over a bit odd

"...Unlike the former constables, the police were recruited widely and so were initially disliked"

I imagine that i understand the meaning of the sentence reasonably well, but exactly why the wide recruitment meant that the police force were initially disliked is not necessarily clear from that statement
eg. Why is 'dislike' percieved to be the natural response. I think that the sentence needs a 'because' and v. brief explanation as to why they were initially disliked.
Anyway, great article - the bit that i have mentioned is not a major part of it, and may come across as nit-picking in the greater scheme of things - Well done all Darigan (talk) 12:56, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi ya; and all comments - positive and negative are welcomed! Before the Met ('cepting the runners); London was policed by a system of parish beadles and constables. They consisted of one man elected from the parish they policed, this had advantages - they had mates - and disadvantages (they had mates!) - they were open to corruption, bribery and not above pinching the odd thing that wasn't nailed down on their own behalf. They were paid: sometimes by the parish, more often by shop keepers and by what they could get by extortion. Essentially, it was an 'unpaid' civic duty, in some districts, lamplighters also carried rattles to raise the alarm.

The first met officers were paid professionals - and paid by a levy on the parish - ie from rateable householders. That wasn't popular. There was once a rule that policemen could not police the neighbourhood they lived, or grew up in. I looked for some back up to that; and when it was introduced - no luck! I did find some evidence in an OU course - in which it says "around 10% of recruits for the Metropolitan Police were born in London during the first half of the nineteenth century. This figure rose to 25 per cent during the twentieth century." This indicates the contrarywise notion that 90% came from beyond London - but equally it does not account for people who had moved to London; and subsequently joined the met.

If it causes confusion, maybe best cast as "Because they were widely recruited, unlike the former parish constables, they were initially disliked". It's actually a bit stronger than that - the first two constables killed on active duty were recorded at a coroner's court (by a jury) as "justifiable homicides" ... Kbthompson (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Known 'vernacularly' as "the East End"?

Is it really known vernacularly as "the East End", or is it just known as "the East End"? I think the self-appointed grammatical pomp of some Wikipedia contributors leads them to assume that because something seems to be a contraction, that that contraction exists and is somehow false. No one ever calls the East End 'the East End of London' except to differentiate it from other 'East Ends'. There is no 'official full name', the only name is the East end - just as the West end is the West end.

When people say "the East end" they are not being more vernacular, they are just being less specific. When people say "the East end of London" they are not being more formal or more 'proper' or 'official' or using its 'proper name' - they are just being more specific. It doesn't have a proper name, and there is no formal terminology, therefore there can be no 'vernacular'. You could be even more specific and say "the East end of London, England" or "the East end of London, England, Great Britain, United Kingdom etc etc". Just as you could be less specific and just say "east" - as in "I'm going east" (which can mean "I'm heading in an easterly direction by the compass" but which can also mean in London "I'm going to east London"

This, I think, is one of those gestures toward sounding 'more academic' or 'more smart' that I think Wikipedia contributors sometimes fall foul to.

94.193.101.49 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I don't think 'vernacularly' is even a word (it's usually expressed 'in the vernacular') but in this case a phrase like 'also known simply as "The East End"' would be better. I've been bold... Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 13:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

"Vernacularly" is definitely a word. tomasz. 07:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Seems reasonable - I don't know where the word crept in ... Kbthompson (talk) 15:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Enfranchisement of women?

There is a claim that the rise of the Labour Party and the enfranchisement of women were somehow created (and implicitly linked) in the East End. The Labour Party was not particularly involved, having refused Pankhurst membership because she was a woman, and the Liberal Party give partial franchise in 1918 (or 1919), followed by equalisation of franchise in 1930 (Stanley Baldwin, Conservative). Wee Jimmy (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

"Maps that show the East End's goath"

Its "goath"? tomasz. 07:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the term "East End"

The article quotes an 1888 publication as saying "[The] invention about 1880 of the term 'East End'", but the term appears frequently in literature predating 1880. For instance:

From 1862:
"The antipodes to the fashionable world is Petticoat Lane... It is to the East End what Regent Street is to the West." (The Criminal Prisons of London and Scenes of Prison Life, Mayhew and Binny, pg 47.)

Mayhew and Binny style it differently when referring to direction: "the very east-end of the town" (pg 59).

From 1870:
"Pleasure gardens and dancing rooms in the East and West End of London" (Prostitution, William Acton, Table of Contents.)
"...in the West End of London. In the East End and over the water..." (pg 16).
"Some shades of prostitution unknown to the more fashionable West are to be discerned in the East End of London." (pg 22).
"...to the "young man" of the East-end warehouse..." (pg 41).

Those are but a couple examples. Others are easily found by Googling. Now I don't want to mess with so distinguished an article, but the term "East End" certainly seems to have had a much earlier birth than suggested and perhaps that portion of the quotation ought to be removed or at least flagged as inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poluistor~enwiki (talk • contribs) 19:24, 25 July 2014‎

Interesting. I've just checked it in the OED. The earliest citation there is from 1742, from the New & Complete Survey of London, "From the West ... to the East End of London"; and the next is from 1831, Encyclopedia of America (but referring to London), "In the East End are found the docks and warehouses connected with ship-building". It does look as if this needs some revision. GrindtXX (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on East End of London. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071206110526/http://www.museumindocklands.org.uk:80/English/EventsExhibitions/Themes/DocklandsWar/Docklandsatwar1.htm to http://www.museumindocklands.org.uk/English/EventsExhibitions/Themes/DocklandsWar/Docklandsatwar1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070716200107/http://www.met.police.uk:80/msu/history.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071219182742/http://www.eastlondonhistory.com:80/east%20end%20at%20war.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/east%20end%20at%20war.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071011014206/http://www.whitechapelsociety.com/London/life_leisure/peoples_palace.htm to http://www.whitechapelsociety.com/London/life_leisure/peoples_palace.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070126051950/http://photography.about.com:80/library/weekly/aa112000d.htm to http://photography.about.com/library/weekly/aa112000d.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:47, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on East End of London. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071213173030/http://www.bbc.co.uk/homeground/archive/2003/bethnal-green-tube-disaster.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/homeground/archive/2003/bethnal-green-tube-disaster.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070701014040/http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/london%20from%20the%20air.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/london%20from%20the%20air.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080311191342/http://www.met.police.uk:80/msu/history.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070408151116/http://eastlondonhistory.com:80/yiddish%20theatre.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/yiddish%20theatre.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070126051950/http://photography.about.com:80/library/weekly/aa112000d.htm to http://photography.about.com/library/weekly/aa112000d.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928000306/http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway1.shtml to http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway1.shtml#ecr
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050322222303/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu:80/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on East End of London. 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/20060403181403/http://www.met.police.uk/news/stories/copeland/job/1.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/news/stories/copeland/job/1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080311191342/http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 16:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on East End of London. 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/20120525050352/http://www1.salvationarmy.org/heritage.nsf/titles/1878_Foundation_Deed_Of_The_Salvation_Army to http://www1.salvationarmy.org/heritage.nsf/titles/1878_Foundation_Deed_Of_The_Salvation_Army
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090725034410/http://www.lse.ac.uk:80/resources/LSEHistory/webbs.htm to http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/LSEHistory/webbs.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140606224517/http://www.libraryofmu.org/display-resource.php?id=375 to http://www.libraryofmu.org/display-resource.php?id=375
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060403181403/http://www.met.police.uk/news/stories/copeland/job/1.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/news/stories/copeland/job/1.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050322222303/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 16:27, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on East End of London. 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/20100529162701/http://www.barnardos.org.uk/who_we_are/history.htm to http://www.barnardos.org.uk/who_we_are/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070213043838/http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/battleship%20potemkin.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/battleship%20potemkin.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701014040/http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/london%20from%20the%20air.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/london%20from%20the%20air.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070716200107/http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/msu/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070408151116/http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/yiddish%20theatre.htm to http://www.eastlondonhistory.com/yiddish%20theatre.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011014206/http://www.whitechapelsociety.com/London/life_leisure/peoples_palace.htm to http://www.whitechapelsociety.com/London/life_leisure/peoples_palace.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928000306/http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway1.shtml#ecr to http://www.cbrd.co.uk/histories/ringways/ringway1.shtml#ecr
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050322222303/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0140

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on East End of London. 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/20070325000011/http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10186353&c_id=10001043&add=N to http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10186353&c_id=10001043&add=N
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927201255/http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10088628&c_id=10001043&add=N to http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10088628&c_id=10001043&add=N
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070324042547/http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10207101&c_id=10001043&add=N to http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10207101&c_id=10001043&add=N
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080914224638/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/modesoftransport/tube/linefacts/?line=central to http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/corporate/modesoftransport/tube/linefacts/?line=central

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 04:01, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on East End of London. 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/20071024154617/http://apps.newham.gov.uk/history_canningtown/cdickens.htm to http://apps.newham.gov.uk/history_canningtown/cdickens.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131103014542/http://www.mcmullencarpentersandjoiners.co.uk/what-lies-beneath-east-end-of-london/ to http://www.mcmullencarpentersandjoiners.co.uk/what-lies-beneath-east-end-of-london/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040822181125/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/corporation/lma_learning/schoolmate/Irish/sm_irish_stories_detail.asp?ID=246 to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/corporation/lma_learning/schoolmate/Irish/sm_irish_stories_detail.asp?ID=246
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930035156/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/EDtoynbeeH.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/EDtoynbeeH.htm
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120801112844/http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/106.5/ah0501001651.html to http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/106.5/ah0501001651.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150919145143/http://www.bardaglea.org.uk/docklands/6-strike.html to http://www.bardaglea.org.uk/docklands/6-strike.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110902030212/http://webapps.newham.gov.uk/History_canningtown/page18a.htm to http://webapps.newham.gov.uk/History_canningtown/page18a.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061023204408/http://www.onwar.com/articles/0205.htm to http://www.onwar.com/articles/0205.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.eastlondonmosque.net/uploadedImage/pdf/FAQ%27s%20ELM-LMC.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10108275&c_id=10001043&add=N
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130303203844/http://www.met.police.uk/history/records.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/history/records.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090426000459/http://www.met.police.uk/history/timeline1829-1849.htm to http://www.met.police.uk/history/timeline1829-1849.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071201205044/http://billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk/files/Home/Home3/04.STRs/STR02_Archaeology/Part%202%20Central%20Route%20Section/03_Appendix%203%20Red%20Lion%20Theatre%2C%20Whitechapel%2C%20Documentary%20Researc/0004_R_%20RedLionTheatre.pdf to http://billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk/files/Home/Home3/04.STRs/STR02_Archaeology/Part%202%20Central%20Route%20Section/03_Appendix%203%20Red%20Lion%20Theatre%2C%20Whitechapel%2C%20Documentary%20Researc/0004_R_%20RedLionTheatre.pdf
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120723024600/http://www.craxford-family.co.uk/crauart1.php to http://www.craxford-family.co.uk/crauart1.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100923030902/http://www.uel.ac.uk/2012/office/partners.htm to http://www.uel.ac.uk/2012/office/partners.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.harpercollins.co.uk/News_and_Events/News/Pages/Hopping-by-Melanie-McGrath.aspx

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 04:22, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on East End of London. 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/20050426214348/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0141 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0141
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050322221519/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0142 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0142
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050322222303/http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0143 to http://nils.lib.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A4000.01.0143

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 13:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on East End of London. 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/20160303234222/http://www.qmul.ac.uk/alumni/alumninetwork/qmandw/qm_origins_history.pdf to http://www.qmul.ac.uk/alumni/alumninetwork/qmandw/qm_origins_history.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 04:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on East End of London. 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/20070314102254/http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadDatasetList.do?a=3&b=276772&c=E1+4LP&d=13&g=346818&i=1001x1003&m=0&enc=1&domainId=46 to http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadDatasetList.do?a=3&b=276772&c=E1+4LP&d=13&g=346818&i=1001x1003&m=0&enc=1&domainId=46
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613024003/http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadTrendView.do?a=7&b=276772&c=tower+hamlets&d=13&e=13&f=24451&g=346968&i=1001x1003x1004x1005&l=1812&o=254&m=0&r=1&s=1237123476500&enc=1&adminCompId=24451&variableFamilyIds=6374&xW=1010 to http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadTrendView.do?a=7&b=276772&c=tower+hamlets&d=13&e=13&f=24451&g=346968&i=1001x1003x1004x1005&l=1812&o=254&m=0&r=1&s=1237123476500&enc=1&adminCompId=24451&variableFamilyIds=6374&xW=1010

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Potential further reading

One book that may be helpful to add to the further reading section is Forty Years of Scotland Yard, as the majority of it talks about his experiences with the East End. 69.73.22.22 (talk) 17:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Featured article review

This article no longer meets Wikipedia:Featured article criteria. There are unsourced paragraphs, unsourced statements, unattributed quotes, weasel words without attribution, a section consisting largely of quotes, inconsistent citation styles and short, stubby paragraphs that do not meet the prose criterion. DrKay (talk) 14:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)