Talk:Liss, Hampshire

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hampshire Low‑importance

	Hampshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire 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.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR BIAS AND UNFOUNDED BELIEF THAT EAST LISS IS A BADLY DESIGNED AREA. ESPECIALLY THE GREENFIELDS ESTATE THAT I FEEL HAS MATURED WELL OVER TIME.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WIKIPEDIA IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA AND THEREFORE A PLACE OF FACT NOT FOR BIZARRE PERSONAL BIAS OPINION WHOEVER YOU ARE Mr.80.229.218.245

PLEASE GRIND YOUR PERSONAL AXE ELSEWHERE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearboy28 (talk • contribs)

CAPS LOCK. Hmmm angry heh?81.132.7.122 (talk) 20:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

(User:Bearboy28 please sign your posts...)

The above is nearly as POV as the text complained about. I have removed the blatant POV of the original. The article needs a lot more work as to its sources. Djnjwd 00:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oops, didn't sign. Apologies, new to this! User name is Monophysite.

The above POVS

I agree with Djwhatsit - a little too personal!

The large and ever extended estates concerned, built first by mass builder Harcos (who were bankrupted) and then by other uniform estate developers increased the village size at the time by more than 40 per cent. They contain no local style or materials and failed to respect the gradualistic style of development of the traditional Wealden village since the Saxon period. In fact these estates replaced beautiful landscaped gardens, and later important marshland habitats.

However, it may have matured, it is difficult to say that any appropriate design process was enacted in the dash to build in 1964-5 or later, which was very much a central government initiative now vehemently criticised by planners, the CPRE etc.

This argument reflects a classic contemporary argument in British architecture between the camps who favour individually designed houses of local style, characterised by Prince Charles well publicised views, and the other camp, favouring housing of a safe and sound semi traditional nature derived from 30's housing estates, often derided as "Barrett Houses" or "Noddy Houses", where style is characteristically uniform and critic say that any estate can be found in any part of the Country irrespective of tradition or local materials. The debate is largely being won by the former. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monophysite (talk • contribs)

I used bad form to add a reference to this article then Monophysite came along and followed my bad form lead. Thank you Monophysite for your work on the article, I am about to use one of my (personal choice, there are others) preferred citation styles from User:Jeepday/Cite to correctly cite my reference. Jeepday (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monophysite 01:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will try to use good reference form Jeepday when I find out how to do it! One step at a time!

No problem, if you have questions drop a note on my talk page. P.S. Put the ~~~~ directly following your entry on a talk page Jeepday (talk) 01:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeepday! Should all links/referenced be made using the formula? Just external?

Monophysite 16:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC) 16:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Era[edit]

--Alanmort (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2010 (UTC)"Newer, and smaller developments on brownfield sites have been necessitated by increasing population pressure, and government policy which continues."[reply]

The government policy continues to do what? The grammar here needs a bit of work and if you are going to mention government policy you need to explain what government policy you are referring to, please? Alanmort (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liss. 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, 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: 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) 11:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]