Talk:Mayfair

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Coordinates: 51°30′36″N 0°08′49″W / 51.510°N 0.147°W / 51.510; -0.147
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMayfair has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starMayfair is part of the List of London Monopoly locations series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 31, 2017Good article nomineeListed
May 17, 2017Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Residents[edit]

Unsourced list moved from article. Needs sourcing, and putting into context. Much of these are probably better off being placed in the articles on the streets named. SilkTork ✔Tea time 23:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Albemarle Street:

Aldford Street:

Audley Square:

  • Irving Allen (1905–1987) Polish Film & Theatre Producer – No 3

Avery Row:

  • W H Davies (1871–1940) Welsh Poet, dubbed the 'Tramp Poet' – No 13

Bentinck Street:

Fitzmaurice Place:

Berkeley Square:

  • Horace Walpole (1717–1797) British 'Man of Letters', Politician & Novelist – No 11 Berkeley Square (He also lived at No 22 & No 5 Arlington Street, St James's)
  • Bernard Sunley British Philanthropist & Businessman – Lived at & formed charity at No 20 – Green Plaque
  • George Canning (1770–1827) British Prime Minister in 1827 – No 50 – Blue Plaque
  • Robert Clive, 1st Baron Clive of India (1725–1774) British Soldier & Statesman – No 50 – Blue Plaque

Berkeley Street:

Broadbent Street:

Brook Street:

Bruton Place:

Bruton Street:

  • Frances Carson (1895–1973) American Actress – No 13
  • Harold Fielding (1916–2003) English Theatre Producer – No 13
  • Queen Elizabeth II (1926–) - born at No 21 (since demolished)
  • Edward Marsh (polymath) (1872–1953) English Civil Servant – No 30

Carlos Place:

Charles Street:

  • Archibald Primrose (1847–1929) British Prime Minister 1894–1895 – No 20
  • Ian Fleming (1908–1964) English author of 'James Bond' novels, journalist, and naval intelligence officer – No 21, Hays Mews

Chesterfield Hill:

Chesterfield Street:

  • Beau Brummell (1778–1840) English Socialite, Dandy– No 4 – Blue Plaque
  • Anthony Eden (1897–1977) British Prime Minister 1955 to 1957– No 4 – Blue Plaque

Chesterfield Hill:

Clarges Street:

  • Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800–1859) English Poet, Politician & Historian – No 3
  • Sir Austin Bide (1915–2008) British Industrialist – Clarges House, No's 6–12
  • Edmund Kean (1787–1833) English Theatre Actor – No 12 (demolished?)
  • Elizabeth Carter (1717–1806) English Poet – Nos 20 & 21
  • Charles James Fox (1749–1806) British Statesman – No 45 – Blue Plaque

Clifford Street:

Curzon Street:

  • Harry Nilsson (1941–1994) American Musician – No 9 (Flat 14)
  • Cass Elliot (1941–1974) American Musician died in Nilsson's flat – No 9
  • Keith Moon (1946–1978) English Musician died in Nilsson's flat – No 9
  • Nancy Mitford (1904–1973) English Novelist & Essayist worked at No 10 – Blue Plaque
  • Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881) British Prime Minister – No 19 – Plaque?
  • Francis Chantrey (1781–1841) English Sculptor – No 24
  • Rufus Isaacs (1860–1935) English Politician. Jurist – No 32 – Red Plaque
  • Ronald Firbank (1886–1926) English Novelist – No 33
  • Cicely Courtneidge (1893–1980) English Actress & Comedienne – No 43
  • Jack Hulbert (1892–1978) English Comedy Actor – No 43

Davies Street:

  • John Elliotson (1791–1868) English Physician – No 2, Bourdon House
  • Hugh Grosvenor (1879–1953) 2nd Duke of Westminster – No 2, Bourdon House
  • Beryl Grey (1927--) Ballerina – No 32, Claridge House

Dover Street:

Duke Street (also enters into Marylebone):

  • Simon Bolivar (1783–1830) Venezuelan Revolutionary – No 4 – Blue Plaque
  • William S Burroughs (1914–1997) American Novelist – No 8
  • Edward Lear (1812–1888) English Poet & Writer – No 27 – Blue Plaque
  • Alfred Milner 1st Viscount Milner (1854–1925) British Politician/Colonial Administrator – No 47
  • Thomas Anstey Guthrie (1856–1934) English Novelist as F. Anstey – No 60

Dunraven Street:

  • P G Wodehouse (1881–1975) English Humourist, Writer, Novelist – No 17

Farm Street:

Grafton Street:

Green Street:

  • Alfred Lyttelton (1857–1913) British Politician, Footballer, Cricketer – No 4
  • Alexander McQueen (1969–2010) British Fashion Designer – No 7
  • Renee Vivien (1877–1909) British Poet who wrote in French – No 10
  • Thomas Sopwith (1888–1989) British Aviation pioneer – No 46 – Blue Plaque
  • Beatles British Pop Group. All 4 Beatles stayed at No 57 in 1963

Groom Place:

Grosvenor Square:

Grosvenor Street:

Hertford Street:

  • Wendy Richard (1943–2009) English Television Actress – The Shepherd's Tavern – Blue PlaqueHertford Street:

Park Street:

  • Sarah Miles (1941–) English Theatre and Film Actress - No 58

Possible resources[edit]

British History - Edward Walford:

British History - F. H. W. Sheppard:

@SilkTork: - I am steadily working my way round my Monopoly board with the aim of improving all articles on it, so this is on my radar. If I don't get to it first, maybe Dr. Blofeld can give it a go. Or possibly Scott as he's local. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mayfair. 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) 17:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mayfair/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 15:16, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I will work on the review.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:16, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist[edit]

This article was nominated for good article status. The review began on {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTDAY}}, {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}. Below is an evaluation of the article, according to the six good article criteria.


1. Well written?:

Prose quality: In general, the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct. There are a few comments below regarding capitalization, commas, and wording. Update: Looks good now. checkY
Manual of Style compliance: It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. checkY

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References layout: It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. checkY
Citations to reliable sources: The sources used are reliable sources. Have a question about encyclopedias and formatting the citations with retrieved dates and isbns, where applicable. Update: looks good, not really a criteria, thanks. checkY
No original research: No evidence of original research. There's a comment regarding some paraphrasing. Update: This has been addressed. checkY

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects: It addresses the main aspects of the topic.checkY
Focused: It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.checkY

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias: checkY

5. Stable?

No edit wars, content disputes, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA): The article is stable.checkY

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?: {{subst:#if: |{{{images}}}| Pass }}

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: Yes. checkY
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: Yes. checkY

Overall:

Pass or Fail:


If you feel the final result of this review has been in error, you may request a reassessment. If the article failed to attain Good Article status after a full review, it may be easier to address any problems identified above, and simply renominate it.

Comments[edit]

General comments
Overall, the article is very well-written, informative, and interesting. I particularly enjoyed the historical and archaeological information. Images are used appropriately throughout the article and are supported by content. I have a couple of things to run by you below, but overall it looks to be a very good job.
Lead
  • "It is one of the most expensive districts in London and the world." and " London's largest concentration of five star hotels," should have a citation, per WP:CITELEAD.
Done the first, for the second I have copyedited down to "modern hotels" which is less POV and what the London Encyclopedia actually says Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should family in "Grosvenor Family" be capitalized?
According to http://www.grosvenor.com/about-grosvenor/history/ - no Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great, I changed the capitalization in the lead - it's small cap everywhere else.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Early history
  • "There has been speculation" is used twice in the first two sentences. Should one of them state - by archaeologists, historians, or name specific people or entities?
Fixed, also attributed specifically to Whitaker's Almanack (the Britannica source has been swapped for the London Encyclopedia - see below). I'd go into depth about Roman road alignments but you'd be bored to tears. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks! You might be surprised - I actually became very interested in Roman roads after a trip to St Albans / Verulamium and the countryside.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, well basically if you look at http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Watling_Street - there's a dogleg in section 1c which just looks wrong - if you iron it to be straight it crosses the Thames somewhere around Vauxhall Bridge, the City of London is just out of the way. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:48, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should there be a link for "Civil War" for the non-English / non-UKers?
Yes, I think there should. I've also qualified with "17th century" (the source doesn't say that but I don't think it's original research to give the century the civil war happened in!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, great!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
May Fair
  • Perhaps nitpicky - is "inclusive" needed in "1 – 14 May inclusive"?
Probably not - removed Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Grosvenor family and estates
Didn't realise we had articles on them! Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a specific occupation (city planner, city architect, other) that can be attributed to Thomas Barlowe - just as point of reference since there is no article that I could find on him?
According to the Survey of London he was an estate surveyor. I'm surprised there's not more on him, given that John Nash, who architected lots of Georgian London including Regent Street, is certainly notable enough to have an article Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Linked Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, great, thanks - for all of these.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hotels
  • Should royal families in "European Royal Families" be capitalized?
I would say not - our article on the British royal family isn't Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, great - I made the change.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch. It is, but it should be The May Fair Hotel, as a quick search for sources and the London Encyclopedia all put "Hotel" on the end. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Commas
  • Is the comma needed in "The butcher Allen of Mayfair was based in Mount Street, and founded in 1830."? Same with the later, "The Handel House Museum is at No. 25 Brook Street in Mayfair, and opened in 2001." And, the later "The company's investment funds have been more successful than the FTSE All-Share Index, and the FTSE Small Cap Index." And, "In 2007, Cadbury Schweppes announced that it was moving to Uxbridge, London Borough of Hillingdon, to cut costs." — In other words, would this be a difference between English-English and American-English?
I'll address the other points when I'm next to my book sources, but the comma thing does appear to be a difference between UK and US English, as I recall it came up in Talk:Mersea Island/GA1 and Talk:Liverpool Street station/GA1 - however in those cases it's the other way round in as much as there have been complaints about not enough commas. In the first example, I could probably rewrite that as "The butcher Allen of Mayfair was founded in a shop on Mount Street in 1830" which side-steps the issue, the FTSE stuff I'd say the comma can probably come out, and for Cadbury I would leave the comma after "2007" and rewrite it to "In 2007, Cadbury Schewppes announced that it was moving to Uxbridge in order to cut costs", because whether or not Uxbridge is in a London borough or in the County of Middlesex can be contentious (seriously, ask Russell Grant about the Association of British Counties). How does that grab you? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:27, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That works.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:39, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrasing
  • There appear to be a couple of places where the content could be paraphrased a bit more, particularly the paragraph starting out "In 1725, Mayfair became part of the new parish..." See Earwig's detector feedback.
The detector report looks good now, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sources and citations
  • I generally wouldn't use an encyclopedia if I could find other sources, such as Encyclopædia Britannica. Do you, by chance, have another source for: 6. "Mayfair". Encyclopædia Britannica. Thoughts about The London Encyclopaedia?
Yes, I've swapped it for the London Encyclopedia - basically historians think somewhere around Hyde Park Corner might have been settled before London. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would be good to have retrieved dates for the web citations and isbns for books, where they are available.
I've done what I can - Old and New London pre-dates ISBNs, while British History Online doesn't give the ISBNs for the Survey of London Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great for both of these.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I made some minor edits that you may want to look at in history to ensure you agree. I was going to remove some of the duplicate links as well, but thought I'd mention it here first.

Yup, I noticed, no problems with those. What other duplicate links are they? I fear without some sort of tool it'll be like looking for a needle in a haystack :-( Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There's "Highlight duplicate links" - I'm not quickly finding it in preferences. Do you see it on your left hand menu under "Tools". I don't remember if I had to do something to get it or not. I'll do it real quick.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! It's nice to bring to life the scene of some of my favorite period books and films!–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:53, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CaroleHenson: Cool, thanks for an informative review that ensures us the article is of the appropriate quality. I think I've addressed everything now (more or less), is there anything else? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Let me fix the dupe links and just double-check the most recent edits and we should be good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Richie333 - Ok, I removed the duplicate links and I think we're good to go now - unless you have any questions about my changes to the capitalization based upon your responses or removal of duplicate links.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:12, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@CaroleHenson: Nope, I'm all good, as long as you are too. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am, too. By the way, info for the tool for "Highlight duplicate links" is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Tools. The Roman road map does look strange - it wants me to check it against a map of archaeological sites to see if there's any reason for that.
I have passed it and will take the rest of the steps.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:24, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks for a good and informative review, I had to go back and check a few facts, which is always worthwhile. I have spent the odd afternoon randomly pottering around Mayfair after a walk in Hyde Park wondering how on earth anyone can afford to live there .... but then again, I think Belgravia is even more bonkers in terms of house prices these days. BTW the GA bot seems to have choked on this review and keeps awarding you review points every time somebody else puts a review on the queue - hopefully a close will make it sort itself out. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:27, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. I am not sure how informative it was - you did such a great job that I just found minor items. It was the easiest review I've done. Funny about the counter.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:40, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've had my eye on improving this article for nearly two years (I think there's a note on the talk page to that effect), it's just taken the past week for me to sit down, switch out everything else and just knuckle down and get on with the job. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Ritchie333, the reason that LegoBot was confused was that CaroleHenson used a non-standard status, "pending", in the GA nominee template after she posted her review. Either the status should be left "onreview", or switched to "onhold" if the review is waiting for the nominator to deal with the the requests or suggestions made by the reviewer. (The only other valid value is "2ndopinion"; the field is blank prior to the review being opened.) No harm done, if CaroleHenson doesn't mind the inflated review count, since you dealt with the issues so quickly. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
BlueMoonset and Ritchie - Sorry for the confusion! I will definitely remember that for next time (or at least that I need to make sure that I double-check that I have the right status).–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:57, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mayfair. 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) 15:06, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Butchers in two consecutive sentences"[edit]

What's the point of this edit, which has now been made by an anon IP editor three times in succession? The original text looks fine to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:03, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:08, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What to put in the infobox[edit]

There was a reason the article didn't have an infobox, but I can't remember what. I think it was due to it sandwiching images further down and making a mess. Anyway, I think it should have:

  • A map
  • Not a grid reference (the area covers multiple entries and hence makes no sense)
  • Counties : I would go with Westminster / London. You don't want the Association of British Counties on your back.
  • Parliament / assembly
  • Post town / district - ambivalent, but if people can't bear not to have them then I suppose we'll manage

Anything else? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:00, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A map at infobox size is wholly useless. Really a traditional area like this, which doesn't align with any current political/postal etc divisions is too complicated for an infobox to handle. Obviously the key fact about Mayfair is that only very rich people live there, & no box that doesn't get that up front is worth having. Perhaps this was the "reason the article didn't have an infobox"? Johnbod (talk) 14:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it was - looks like I was struggling to get a working map and couldn't do it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Very wise - to me the version here ain't worth having! Johnbod (talk) 14:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coming late to the punch up- Mayfair is similar to Bloomsbury which has a very pretty infobox. The map however leaves something to be desired but is consistent with similar articles. I have left myself a few notes on wikicartography in my user-page that may be useful or entertaining- as the UK place infobox may not have caught up with infobox school.

Map
About OpenStreetMaps
Maps: terms of use
500m
550yds
none
.
Little Venice

may be what you were thinking about — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClemRutter (talk • contribs) 16:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)‎[reply]

That's a nice map, but much too wide for an infobox, and the rest of the information isn't worth giving such prominence to (which goes for Bloomsbury too). At least let's not have a multiple image - yuk! Johnbod (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • See the infobox in Covent Garden – a somewhat imprecise district which is an FA. For coordinates, I would focus on the site of the original May fair, which was in the Great Brookfield which is now Curzon Street. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:43, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Infobox[edit]

Should we add an infobox after this discussion above, and per previous edit. 112.204.206.165 (talk) 05:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot to mention this edit, where the reason I removed the infobox was specifically "can't get a decent map working". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. It's weird to come to an article on a location like this and not have a map and other summary info in an infobox. The above-mentioned Covent Garden is a good example of what readers are apt to expect.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Neutral per previous threads, simply because nobody could actually come to a consensus what we should put in it. However, if somebody wants to draft an infobox here that looks good and informative, and fits in with the page layout, I'll have a think about it. Indeed, the question of what should go in an infobox is probably a more relevant one than simply having one or not. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes per SMcCandlish. It's very odd for non-stub articles about geographic places not to have an infobox. Covent Garden, Isle of Dogs, Fitzrovia, Dalston, Millbank, De Beauvoir Town, etc. all manage to have apparently uncontroversial infoboxes, and I'm not seeing anything here that can't be accommodated. Thryduulf (talk) 11:17, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes - Infoboxes are extremely useful for finding quick information in a single glance. The contents of the infobox can be argued later, but the existence of an infobox should not be controversial. Incidentally, I see nothing objectional about the suggested infobox below. Fieari (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, please. They are useful for structured information. Contentious entries can just be omitted. I like the infobox below. SWinxy (talk) 23:49, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes - An infobox would be useful in this case. JoseJan89 (talk) 08:57, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not this one below, which is completely useless. Yes, it's in London, that's London, England, and ceremonially it's in London, which is in the UK. Nothing about the most glaringly obvious thing about Mayfair, which any Monopoly player can tell you. Johnbod (talk) 10:39, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Side discussion[edit]

Here is a mockup of an infobox for the article. Comments welcome. I notice that the "Police", "Fire" and "Ambulance" fields are automatically populated, which is actually one of my objections - how is that relevant to the article. But that's a discussion for the template itself. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:16, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I've worked out how to turn these off, so I've updated to follow suit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That looks good. I don't have an objection to police et al, but equally they aren't the most important so I'm happy with them either in or out. One of the district articles I looked at (but I can't remember which one) had a map showing the location in the UK rather than the borough or Greater London, which I think is less useful than the presentation here. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mayfair
Mayfair is located in City of Westminster
Mayfair
Mayfair
Mayfair is located in Greater London
Mayfair
Mayfair
Location within Greater London
OS grid referenceTQ285807
Ceremonial countyGreater London
Region
CountryEngland
Sovereign stateUnited Kingdom
Post townLONDON
Postcode districtW1
Dialling code020
UK Parliament
List of places
UK
England
London
51°30′36″N 0°08′49″W / 51.510°N 0.147°W / 51.510; -0.147
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mayfair&oldid=1208889338"