Talk:Luton/Archives/2019/April

This is an archive of past discussions about Luton. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Laundry list.

For general conversation: this edit [1] caught my attention and I've removed the content. (it reads a bit like someone did a Google news search for 'Luton and terrorism' and then entered all the articles. Opinions will probably differ, but I thought it was very much WP:undue. Would appreciate any second opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joereddington (talk • contribs) 15:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for starting this discussion, I was going to say something similar myself. I agree it looks like an anti-islam rant, and that seems possible given the regular edits from fans of a certain infamous far right Lutonian. That and the negative attention Luton sadly gets due to its demographics and history makes me wary. On the other hand, User:Yaakovaryeh said it "included content originally added by an admin in 2011", but I haven't looked into it enough.

Regardless of where it came from, I was planning on putting that content into an "Extremism" subsubsection, trim it a lot by removing the repetition and less notable parts, and try to add some sentences providing some opposing views of the community in Luton to provide some balance. A sort of compromise, but maybe it's not appropriate at all and I was just glad to have some more content, which would probably be better coming from the other sections I'm planning on adding to. I'll have a read of some other similar UK town articles to compare what they do. -- odg (talk) 23:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. The majority does not belong here. The original part I was referring to is here [2] which I think does belong. Perhaps some of the other stuff should go to Terrorism in the United Kingdom &/ Islamism in the United Kingdom? Yaakovaryeh (talk) 02:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

I think the original part is fairly reasonable actually (there might be some OR in it), I'd be quite happy with that being in the article, even if it was going to be the subject of a bit more conversation. Would be fine with you putting that bit in. Joe (talk) 11:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)