This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Squatting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of squatting on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SquattingWikipedia:WikiProject SquattingTemplate:WikiProject Squattingsquatting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Housing in the United Kingdom, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Social Housing in the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Social Housing in the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Social Housing in the United KingdomSocial Housing in the United Kingdom articles
This article was created or improved during the Wildcard Edition GA edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Green project in October 2022. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green articles
good point, added 2013 Mujinga (talk) 11:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do we know the hostel was called Focus E-15? Source says "a homeless hostel"? Okay, it gives the name in the Watt abstract and the Amara piece in the Independent, please add citation.
How do we know they were under 25? Source says "young", but I note Amara verifies the info. Please add cite to the Independent article by Amara.
done - sideissue, i created the wikiarticle for Pavan Amara, didnt notice that before Mujinga (talk) 11:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Watt is paywalled. Please mark as subscription needed. Also can you input page # via {{rp|x}} throughout, or is it a web view? (I cannot access.) If it is a webview, perhaps mark the reference "(Web page does not indicate pages)" or something similar.
added, dont want to add page numbers as it's a journal article Mujinga (talk) 11:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Evening Standard is paywalled. You either need to mark it as subscription needed, or better yet, remove the live status, as it can be read in full at archive.org
done - prefer to keep the live status as it is live Mujinga (talk) 11:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
failing to show appropriate respect to a member of the public is a direct quote from the source. Either attribute the quote and mark it as such or reword.
Is show flat a model or a showroom? Perhaps link to that?
showroom works! thanks Mujinga (talk) 11:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Would fake living space be better described as a model? It seems to me that if it was designed as a living space, it isn't fake, but the intent is not for it to be habitable.
agreed, i got my knickers in a twist there, rephrased Mujinga (talk) 11:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After and could be lived in can you bundle the refs? I also note that I don't have access to Watt, but I don.t see 4-8 years in any of the links. It is verified in Holdsworth, however.
added holdsworth - will look into bundling Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
there's a gap for me now under ref5 but i don't see a way to get rid of it Mujinga (talk) 15:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, also for me, but that's a technical thing and we all know beyond my skill. LOL
I'll try to rectify that moving forwards but I can't really work out why it's there right now Mujinga (talk) 17:03, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Independent is paywalled. You either need to mark it as subscription needed, or better yet, remove the live status, as it can be read in full at archive.org.
Independent (and Guardian as well) isn't paywalled, it has a soft request to register which you can click through. Or at least for me that's the case? Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can't answer that. I have never been able to access the Independent from Mexico. I am registered with the Guardian. If I don't sign in I can only see a few articles before I have to log in or I get nada.
I note you say immediately went to court, but the article mentions no timeline and says "Bow County Court". I am assuming that is a court in Bow, London, but that is confusing because our article on Stratford, London says it is in Essex County and part of the Borough of Newham. To my unfamiliar eye, it looks as if the city was fiddling with the jurisdictions, but then I see in the Stratford article that it was originally in Bow. Perhaps you should link to Stratford, London? Unsure if naming the court will cause others to have the same confusion I did. On the time, I see the immediacy because Amayra says on 28 September 2014 that the council was studying ways to remove them, but by the time the BBC piece was written on 2 October, they had filed suit. Suggest you add a cite to the BBC piece.
If i look up bow county court it says its postcode is E15 4EG and E postcode area says E15 is partly in bow, so i think that's ok, but you are right the boundaries of bow might well have been redrawn since the court was set up. I don't know if it's necessary to identify the court in the article Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as I said, probably will just confuse people like me .
Are you calling Andrew Baikie "a local councilor" because of BLP concerns or is there another reason for omitting his name?
yes - i don't think he is particularly notable and not sure if his first placed google entry needs to be him saying something about FocusE15 - I'm following WP:BLPNAME here Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I thought probably, but you know I rarely do living people. Dead folks are easier.
Ditto for photographer Jess Hurd, why call her "a photographer"?
likewise although here the reference is more positive ... WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE would also apply in this case Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Telegraph is paywalled and even inaccessible in archive.org. Mark it as subscription needed.
done - did a doubletake on the author being Prymface but it's the truth Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Newham Recorder link is dead, but available in archive.org. Change url-status.
Maybe it's just me, but argued they had been housed permanently instead of temporarily in the hostel is confusing. Seems like they are upset that they were provided permanent housing. Perhaps, "as their temporary placement had stretched on for three years", or something similar.
source says: "she and other residents at Brimstone House were coming together to present a legal challenge to the council over the fact that their temporary accommodation was turning out to be anything but short-term." - i've rephrased 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Mujinga (talk)
Much clearer. Thanks!
More to come. I love your work on housing rights. Such an important issue that is often swept under the rug. Am really enjoying learning about E-15. SusunW (talk) 16:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The mums are a great example of self-organisation Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why input Wellman ref twice? I see no quotations and no breaks with other reference citations. Should be sufficient to show one citation at the end.
just becuase it's different cases and so the two refs might get broken up later on Mujinga (talk) 12:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
to explain myself better, i mean right now the sentences are adjacent but since the refs are citing different things, i'd like to keep them both becuase possibly more information will be added and break up the current structure Mujinga (talk) 13:29, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem, just something I noticed as being different from your usual citations.
I don't see the film reference in Ramiro, but I do see it in Booth. Fix cite.
Insert comma after wider family and replace the mother with "Wood's mother".
source says "Even when her family offered to pay the full amount owing, they refused to let her back in." so I'd prefer to keep it as it is Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Who is she? Clarify it was Wood, not her mother, who was invited to meet with the council.
From the above, i think it's clear it's wood herself Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can't access Newham Recorder again. (Perhaps they are blocking me from Mexico?) Change url-status, as I can access from wayback link.
hmm i'll check this Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
empty East Ham police station perhaps would be clearer by saying "the empty building which was formerly" the station?
agreed it could be clearer, went for "derelict former" Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
possibly omit redundancy by replacing one of the uses of "empty" in the same sentence with vacant?
solved by change above Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After emergency accommodation insert "in 2014", which is implied in the source (18 mos prior to 2016) but stated outright in Hopps, which you might add as a citation to confirm date.
i think i've already fixed this with previous changes Mujinga (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can't access Newham Recorder articles by Hopps, Long (2 articles by Long), or Burford. Change url-status to dead as I can read all of them on archive.org.
darn yeah same for me, they must have trashed their archive since I wrote this Mujinga (talk) 14:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
or moved their server or whatever. Fortunately they were all available in wayback. Good to know it isn't a "Mexico ban".
Insert "in 2016" either before or after to Basildon in Essex
i think i've already fixed this with previous changes Mujinga (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Insert "in 2017" after for 6 months
i think i've already fixed this with previous changes Mujinga (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Insert "in 2018" after won the right to appeal
i think i've already fixed this with previous changes Mujinga (talk) 14:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All of the above dates are fine. Was just trying to build the time line and show it was repeated over a span of time.
So did she appeal? Did they ever find her housing in Newham? (Inquiring minds are curious.)
let's hope so, but there doesn't seem to be any updates in the media Mujinga (talk) 14:42, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dammit! I want to know.
You should make clear that the threatening note was issued by staff of the council
Sourcing appears to be RS, but article names mostly are not in title case. Not a deal-breaker on a GA, but if you are going for FA it should be corrected.
I think it just needs to be consistent rather than any particular style, so I've regularized it Mujinga (talk) 15:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with me.
Image licenses and captions are fine.
Images need alt text
Ooops should have found that on my pre-nom sweep, thanks Mujinga (talk) 13:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I get it. I try to remember, but sometimes this one in particular I forget.
That's it from me. Mostly nitpicky stuff on an interesting and well written article. Thank you for writing it and bringing it up to GA standard. SusunW (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SusunW thanks for a really thorough review! I hope I have replied on everything Mujinga (talk) 15:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mujinga I think we are done except for the one little failure in anonymizing the women who were evicted. If you fix that, I can approve the GA. Truly enjoyed working with you again. SusunW (talk) 16:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK deal, changes made. Thanks so much for a very thorough review! Do you think this could be a FA? I hadn't really thought about it to be honest but maybe I could put it to peer review and see what comes. Mujinga (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am no expert on FA, but I think most articles have the potential to become that. As I said above, I usually work on dead people for a reason. I don't want to spend a lot of time working on an article which will substantially change because life happens. That would be my hesitation here too. It's an active organization dealing with a serious rights issue which could substantially change quickly. I'd weigh that before I put in a lot more work, but I was truly serious that I appreciate your work on housing rights. It is such an important issue. Approving the GA now, but the technical stuff will take me a bit, because well, you know... SusunW (talk) 17:14, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this comment, I think I have similar concerns which have prevented me from having it on my list of FA possibles. Looking forward to future collaborations with you! Mujinga (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.
· 
· 
