Talk:Chelsea, London

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chelsea, London, England[edit]

Why Chelsea, London, England? I should have thought plain Chelsea ewas the right place for this page. Or, at worst, Chelsea (England). Tannin

Hmmm: as I thought: on checking, I see that all the other Chelseas are named after this one. Should be at Chelsea. Tannin

Having been brought up just the other side of the river from Chelsea, I would normally agree, however, to many people in Britain, Chelsea means Chelsea F.C.. Of course to USAians it means other things. Mintguy 10:04, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well said. I had to struggle to find a mention of Chelsea FC in the article, but at least it's there! And I agree, to most Americans it would mean nothing. Apparently, the Clintos didn't name their daughter after the football club, but after the part of New York City where they once lived. Millbanks 09:59, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then again looking at the links for Chelsea everything means Chelsea in London. Mintguy 10:06, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Guess we will let it sit and see wha the general opinion is for a while then. I would have thought that this was a clear case of the "Paris, France rule". Tannin 10:13, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Although Chelsea has vast important historical significance, I can't honestly say that the case for hogging the limelight at Chelsea is quite so clear cut as some other places of equal significance. Modern Chelsea is a district rather than a borough or a town, it isn't a place with clearly defined boundaries or a separate administration. Chelsea is part of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Mintguy 10:23, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The Town Hall was opposite the Chelsea Place ^Theater not the odeon cinema which was further along. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.59.115 (talk) 10:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kings vs. King's[edit]

This article uses the phrase "King's Road" but the article it links to is Kings Road. Is one of those incorrect? Joyous 01:24, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

It's not uncommon for there to be a missing apostrophe in street signs in Britain for some reason. At one end of the Grays Inn Road the sign has an apostrophe and at the other end it is missing. Kings Cross is another example of this confusion, see Kings_Cross_railway_station#Spelling. IIRC the signage for the Kings Road uses Kings rather than King's. I worked just of the Kings Road for 5 years, but I haven't been down that way in ages. Mintguy (T)

Bit neglected[edit]

Considering how important this area is, this entry seemed a bit sad to me. I've given it a quick once over, but will add more pix later (I cannot believe there were none!). More is needed too on the World's End as a sub-district, but I am going to create a separate entry for that, it deserves one. Nonetheless the industry round there and the strange history of Cremorne Gardens also deserves a mention here.

Oh - and does Armitage Denton really deserve such an in-depth entry for an important district like Chelsea, nice old codger as he seems to have been? Being an inclusionist, I would suggest giving him his own entry and just a brief mention here. Tarquin Binary 15:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Postcode[edit]

The article says:

However it does give the strange result that some of RBKC is in SW1W.

Why is that a strange result? In England, are postcode boundaries usually coterminus with council boundaries? —Felix the Cassowary 12:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Punk[edit]

"the birth of the punk movement". Correction, the UK didn't invent punk. The Stooges and possibly the Dictators predate London's "creation" of the punk movement.

The "birth of the punk movement" statement is very irresponsible. Try maybe budding of the punk movement. development of, etc.

Famous Residents[edit]

This section is headed with the statement "Chelsea probably has more Blue Plaques than any other district of London. Some of the great and not-so-good who have lived here include:" I will be removing this statement as the use of "probably" doesnt seem very precise or indicate any research. Deckchair 10:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this, should fictiona characters be included in such lists? Deckchair 09:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, so I took them out. MorganaFiolett 16:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged for copyedit[edit]

The tone of this article seems a bit odd throughout- phrases like "Chelsea once had a reputation as London's bohemian quarter, and likes to think of itself as the haunt of artists, radicals, painters and poets." stick out to me (it's an area, it doesn't think at all!). I wasn't sure about the cleanup tags because I haven't used them before so I tagged it for copyedit. MorganaFiolett 14:54, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea.x[edit]

Well i have bee born for 14 years now and know my world quite well,.. i have lost my mum along the way.x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.187.238 (talk) 17:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of name[edit]

Well, I find this a bit contentious. I was previously informed by (insert author's name) that all of the London area names that end in "ee" meant that they were all islands in the swampy lower Thames area. That is to say that the "ee" sound meant "island" in old anglo saxon and that Chelsea, Battersea and Bermondsey were islands and in fact Battersea meant "Peter's Island". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.12.252.111 (talk) 01:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nineteenth Century[edit]

The history section jumps from about 1800 to Swinging London (via a mention of the artists' colony) with no mention of the extensive residential building undertaken in the nineteenth century, which gave Chelsea one of the highest population densities in London. Also, I'd have thought that St. Mark's College - the first(?) teacher training college in England - deserves a mention. Norvo (talk) 01:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Self-contradiction[edit]

The "History" section contains two quite different theories about the name:

  1. "The word Chelsea originates from the Old English term for "landing place [on the river] for chalk or limestone" (Cealc-hyð: chalk-wharf, in Anglo-Saxon).
  2. "In the ancient records, it is written as Chelchith, which Norden, a writer of considerable note, derives from the Saxon words ceale or cele, meaning "coldness", and hyd, meaning "hythe", (landing-place, port or haven)."

Is one of these fallacious/a reverse etymology or is it an example of two similar names merging?

I think the section needs to be re-worded if both theories are included. Grant | Talk 15:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: On a lesser note, if "Norden" is so significant, he should have a first name and be wikilinked(?) Is this perhaps John Norden?

Chelsea FC location[edit]

I think it's disingenuous to say Chelsea FC are "located in Fulham". Whilst Stamford Bridge does indeed sit within the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham, it is not in Fulahm (which is a separate settlement in that Borough). It's reasonable to say Stamford Bridge is in Chelsea, as the district boundaries are ill-defined and stretch across Borough boundaries.

A similar situation occurs where West Kensington (for example) bleeds into Hammersmith and Fulham - though no one would argue that the Olympia Exhibition Centre is "in Hammersmith". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polkatronixx (talk • contribs) 10:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chelsea, 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:

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 04:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chelsea, 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:

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) 02:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where Chelsea actually is?[edit]

The article say Chelsea is in South West London. This link takes you to the article South London which as defined in the article is Greater London South of the River Thames, but this article states Chelsea is north of the river. This hipocritical inconsistency is present on other pages regarding to London boroughs. Should this be altered? As I don't know how many pages this occurs on or am not from London I don't know if this is actually a problem or not just wanted to point it out. Mn1548 (talk) 14:59, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Hypocritical" is a rather unfair accusation to level at Wikipedia editors. I think you just mean "inaccurate". And if you feel it is inaccurate, you can edit the page and change it. Perhaps you could also find a better source while you're at it - the current citation is out of date and doesn't support any claims about the location of Chelsea. Cnbrb (talk) 16:03, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chelsea,_London&oldid=1206638766"