Misplaced Pages

Talk:Great Stink: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:14, 20 February 2015 editSchroCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers112,887 edits top: removing personal attack / WP:NOTFORUM← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:50, 10 February 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,011 edits Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(86 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Peer review|archive=1}}
{{ArticleHistory
{{WPLondon|class=start|importance=mid}}
|currentstatus=FA
{{WPThames|class=start|importance=mid}}


|action1=FAC
It would be nice if someone could get hold of one of those ] cartoons from the period to illustrate this article - I've seen a few in the past that would do the job - does anyone know how one could get hold of one, and what the copywrite status would be? ] 22:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
|action1date=2015-03-12
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Great Stink/archive1
|action1result=promoted
|action1oldid=650302838
|maindate=23 June 2015
|action2=PR
|action2date=15:41:42 27 February 2015 (UTC)
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Great Stink/archive1
|action2result=reviewed
|action2oldid=941456800
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=FA|
{{WikiProject London|importance = Mid}}
{{WikiProject River Thames}}
{{WikiProject Environment |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Disaster management |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Ecology |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Science Policy|importance=Mid}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(60d)
|archive = Talk:Great Stink/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Press | author = Isha Bassi| subject = article | title = 24 Weird AF Misplaced Pages Pages That'll Make You Say, "Wait, This Actually Exists?!" | rg = ] | url = https://www.buzzfeed.com/ishabassi/weird-wikipedia-pages | date = 27 March 2018 | accessdate = 27 March 2018 }}


== Another mention in media == == Grammar improvement ==


"solutions for the problem" should be "solutions to the problem". Page isn't editable at present. ] (]) 18:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The Great Stink of 1858 contributes to plot development in Jill Paton Walsh's ''Thrones, Dominations'' (1998). <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Hi IP, both are correct. ] (]) 19:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)


== Embanking up Future Problems? ==
==What is this?==


In "February 1864 Bazalgetsectionsn building three embankments along the shores of the Thames". ..."He ran the sewers along the banks of the Thames, building up walls on the foreshore, running the sewer pipes inside and infilling around them. The works claimed over 52 acres (21 ha) of land from the Thames".
{{ping|SchroCat}} Do you have a history with Unbuttered Parsnip? I mean, ]&nbsp;] 05:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


So, all well and good - or is it? For what is not mentioned is that - by narrowing and confining the Thames - the river is now far more at risk of flooding. Given this, is it possible to mention something about the risk of flooding caused by the 'improvements' to The Embarkment/s? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:02, 3 September 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Shit other than yours. -- ] (]) mytime= Fri 13:48, wikitime= 05:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
:No. Or not here, at least. Maybe on the page for the Embankment. - ] (]) 14:07, 3 September 2023 (UTC)


==Down/upriver==
... and one is not even allowed to respond on this talk page --


"discharged their sewage half a mile (800 m) downstream from their reservoir: the sewage was being carried upstream into the reservoir on the incoming tide" should read instead "downriver" and "upriver". The sewage could be carried upstream but upriver by the incoming tidal stream. ] (]) 09:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
:CT. not that I know of, and was as bemused as you by the edit and the non-standard results we ended up with.

:UP, please do not edit war to your preferred version. Please see ] and discuss your proposed changes here. - ] (]) 06:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
:Amendments made. ] (]) 10:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
:: Well, I'm proud to be the new co-OWNer of an article to which my sole contribution is the Don't forget to run any changes by me before you dare to implement them. ]&nbsp;] 07:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

:::PMSL! - ] (]) 07:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
==Ageing==
::: For instance, Only a pigfucking moron doesn't understand the difference between a "constrution" and a "construction". Revert now, and seek my permission next time before you blemish this article further. ]&nbsp;] 07:12, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
{{u|SlyGuyFox}}, can you please stop edit warring and discuss your changes please. As a start, I will point out again that “ageing” is the correct spelling in British English (the variant in which this article is written). - ] (]) 07:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:50, 10 February 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Great Stink article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
Featured articleGreat Stink is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 23, 2015.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 12, 2015Featured article candidatePromoted
February 27, 2015Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Featured article
This article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconLondon Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconRiver Thames (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject River Thames, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.River ThamesWikipedia:WikiProject River ThamesTemplate:WikiProject River ThamesRiver Thames
WikiProject iconEnvironment Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Misplaced Pages:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconDisaster management Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEcology Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconScience Policy Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Grammar improvement

"solutions for the problem" should be "solutions to the problem". Page isn't editable at present. 2A00:23C5:FE18:2701:F0F8:DB57:B640:F8BC (talk) 18:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP, both are correct. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Embanking up Future Problems?

In "February 1864 Bazalgetsectionsn building three embankments along the shores of the Thames". ..."He ran the sewers along the banks of the Thames, building up walls on the foreshore, running the sewer pipes inside and infilling around them. The works claimed over 52 acres (21 ha) of land from the Thames".

So, all well and good - or is it? For what is not mentioned is that - by narrowing and confining the Thames - the river is now far more at risk of flooding. Given this, is it possible to mention something about the risk of flooding caused by the 'improvements' to The Embarkment/s? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.163 (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

No. Or not here, at least. Maybe on the page for the Embankment. - SchroCat (talk) 14:07, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Down/upriver

"discharged their sewage half a mile (800 m) downstream from their reservoir: the sewage was being carried upstream into the reservoir on the incoming tide" should read instead "downriver" and "upriver". The sewage could be carried upstream but upriver by the incoming tidal stream. 217.41.2.97 (talk) 09:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Amendments made. Paul W (talk) 10:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Ageing

SlyGuyFox, can you please stop edit warring and discuss your changes please. As a start, I will point out again that “ageing” is the correct spelling in British English (the variant in which this article is written). - SchroCat (talk) 07:08, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Categories: