Talk:Clarence Pier
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]This article is currently miles off the mark. If I have time over the next few days I'll rewrite it to reflect the reality. Nuttah68 21:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Assessment
[edit]I've assessed this as low importance as there's no mention of it being a listed building etc., although I suspect a pier of this age may well be. A quick Google search didn't throw anything up, but if the pier is (say) grade II or II* listed then the importance would shoot up to mid. waggers (talk) 11:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Possible pic
[edit]http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/view-of-southsea-beach-with-clarence-pier-24313
Need to find out when the artist died.
©Geni 03:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Clarence Pier. 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 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110929120405/http%3A//www.portsmouth.gov.uk/media/dc20071219r.pdf to http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/media/dc20071219r.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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 21:51, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Request for comment on whether attractions should be listed in current format
[edit]Currently, this article vastly comprises considerable lists of attractions, current and former. I'd like to determine opinions on whether this content should remain, be truncated or removed in near entirety. It's worth noting that the "pier" is predominantly an entertainment/amusement venue, rather than a traditional "out to sea" pier. The existing prose is entirely making up the lead, itself mostly just mentioning attractions and I feel this should be sectioned with the removal of the list-cruft that currently engulfs the article. Bungle (talk • contribs) 21:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Bungle, I certainly agree that much of what is in the lead should be moved to sections lower down the page. The article is missing a specific History section and most of the prose in the lead would belong there.
- As you say, the subject is more akin to a theme park than a traditional pier. It's a common convention for articles on theme parks to have tabular lists of current and former attractions, so I think these should be kept more or less as they are, although I notice that not all of the information is referenced and that's a bit of a concern. WaggersTALK 11:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)