Talk:Picketts Lock

East Anglia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia 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.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

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

Name[edit]

Sources I've looked at back to the Godfrey map of 1894 call it Pickett's Lock with an apostrophe. any objections ot renaming the article?

Hi.Pterre. Thankyou for your edits. Renaming the article shouldn't be a problem. Maybe a separate article for Picketts Lock (lock)? I was used to play as a young boy in this area before the Picketts Lock Sports Centre was built and have many memories of this place. In Terry Webb's book An Edmonton Boy he wrote about the area which he described it as " as one big playground ". In the Wikipedia article there's a reference to Shell Oil, can't remember that.Northmetpit (talk) 10:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I lived the other side of Bounces Road for a while in the 1980s and used to run down Picketts Lock Lane and up the towpath to the Ford works, or the Small Arms if I was feeling extra fit. In those days such activity was a bit of a rarity in the area (lots of hurdling over fishing rods and baskets required) and used to get plenty of sarcastic comments from the factory workers safely across the water. I haven't come across enough info on the lock itself so far to make an article -perhaps it could be a redirect to a small section in the Lee Navigation article? Also I see you have made a redlink to Deephams. I agree this should be an article (several other articles mention it), but again I have little info, beyond remembering the smell as I jogged over the railway bridge. The Shell depot is mentioned as current in the text of the Godfrey 1894 map (published 1998-ish I think) and gives various hits on Google so I suppose it is still there. I think it is a bottled gas storage depot, presumably located there to be as far from civilisation as possible, rather than because it relies on supertankers coming up the Lea. Pterre (talk) 11:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reply. Sorry to hear about the negative reaction to your running exploits, it always was a dangerous place. You're right concerning the Deephams stench- I did read that it was one of the reasons why the World Games 2005 were cancelled. Deephams is on my to do list, I'll try to make a start one day. Going back to Picketts Lock, on the R. Lee. Nav page there is a list of locks and weirs, so that's a start. Cheers Northmetpit (talk) 13:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lock itself[edit]

I have propsed a merger here as it is just really a local feature and can be easily incorporated. Simply south (talk) 19:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Simply south. The merger sounds OK . But what happens if I write a article on Aqueduct Lock for example? I've noticed the River Thames locks have their own pages.Northmetpit (talk) 13:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As indeed do several other Lee Navigation locks. I suggest putting headed sections for each lock on the River Lee Navigation article and creating a redirect to each River Lee Navigation#Lock name, with a separate article split off as and when there is an adequate amount of info on a specific lock. Pterre (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good Pterre. In the article the first reference concerning gravel extraction leads to an empty page. Any ideas? Cheers Northmetpit (talk) 14:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, thought I'd replied - must have forgotten to save it! I mended the link a couple of days ago - it had a stray full-stop in it. You may know that this source generates a citation to itself if you do a trivial copy and paste from it, but this has to be edited carefully to "cite web" format. Pterre (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not just a feature of the place - it is part of a chain on the Lee navigation. A year ago most of the Thames locks had smaller articles than this- now they are all well filled out. Please take away the threat and encourage people to build up a useful information source. Motmit (talk) 22:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think threat is just a little over the top, this merger was just a suggestion. There is a complete difference. You can remove the proposed tag if you want if you feel it can be expanded greatly so go ahead. As for placing notability, that was not me. Also i think Pterre has the best suggestion (3rd comment). Simply south (talk) 09:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch! done - regards Motmit (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]