Jump to content


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


Photos were requested and have been added. - The Blackfriar 13:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having spent some time rationalising the presentation of this useful section, I came to the conclusion that it needs some ruthless pruning, of which I give prior notice. For instance, while it's relevant to outline the achievements of the celebrities, there's no need to list an actor's plays or films--which are properly accessible via his/her wikilink. Since the whole article is about Paddington, I've already pruned out a lot of unnecessary reiterations of the place name. I think the section can be made better and more relevant by more editing. I would welcome any comments. Incidentally, I spent most of my childhood in Paddington, so know my way around it. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 15:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the WP:MoS it asks that such sections be restricted to the most notable, and that they be referenced - otherwise the list grows long and is unverifiable. You might want to check How to write about settlements for suitable advice on formats. For these sections, it certainly asks for notes on the notable residents to be presented as unbroken prose (ie not a list) - and there certainly should not be any unnecessary enboldening of name's, etc. - maybe present a para on each period (eg Victorian, modern, etc). Any such section should concentrate on their association with the area, as longer details of their careers will be under their respective articles.
It should also be noted that 'Paddington' has never been a London Borough, being formerly the Metropolitan Borough of Paddington - an entity having a different legal meaning. The section on the locality is way too short for an article on the place - and should be extended. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 16:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map problem[edit]

The thumbnail map shows the location of Paddington. When I click on the thumbnail for the full image, the Paddington marker disappears. Defeats the purpose, don't you know. A map that locates the subject should be one of the most important elements of the article.

MarkinBoston (talk) 19:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I have deleted the purported 'Economy' section, because it was merely the beginning of a potentially interminable list of businesses with an office in Paddington. The editors who inserted company names made no effort to establish notability, relate the businesses to any significance in terms of economy, or even say what the companies did. Anyway, Wikipedia is not a directory. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 04:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Central or West London[edit]

Is Paddington (and every over district located west of the Inner Ring Road but still within Zone 1) classified as Central London or West London? Justgravy (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The City of Westminster identifies Paddington Station as "within central London". On the other hand, the W postcode area reportedly covers "part of central and part of west London". Is there any need to pigeonhole the whole area one way or the other? Bjenks (talk) 04:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice to have some kind of boundary yes. For example, Wikipedia goes with the notion that if an area is in a London Borough then it is in London rather than Postcodes, M25, 020 etc. It might be nice to have something for Central London. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justgravy (talkcontribs) 23:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you could try looking for a definitive official citation. It's certainly not for WP to publish an original view on this matter. Bjenks (talk) 05:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Changed Railways section to Landmarks and Transport[edit]

Felt the 'Railways' section was beginning to dominate and when content began to specifically go into depth into one route to Ireland (with omitting that of the rival company Irish Ferries) it seemed to be going over the top. The destination list actually missed the Cheltenham/Gloucester/Newport/Worcester and again was beginning to get over the top. The details can really be left to the London Paddington station article anyway.

It is now appropriate the Elizabeth line crossrail project should be mentioned so that has been done.

I've changed the section to two section to comply with WP:CITIES section naming, and split out the architecture and transport elements of Paddington Railway section to the Landmarks and Transport sections, which has given some leeway to add a mention of TfL to the transport section.

The result needs improvement, but I'd hope it is in a better position to grow, particularly the landmarks section.

I have some concerns on the overlap and linking of this article and the Paddington Waterside article, but that is a different section.

Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:25, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paddington Waterside Article[edit]

Am I right or alone in feeling if there seems to be some over domination of the Paddington Waterside article over the Paddington Article? A lot of stuff I'd expect to see under the Paddington article is actually under Paddington Waterside, but somehow I didn't fell well led across. I'm really unsure of what to suggest ... but is some form of merge required? Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK I see a number of sub areas within Paddington have their own articles. Paddington Waterside, Paddington Basin, Little Venice, and Paddington Green. I've used the about disambiguation template to refer to these as a quick win. Under WP:UKCITIES this 'should' be part of a 'Geography' Section but pragmatically as an interim measure I may (or may not) treat some of these area's as landmarks as a useful interim step. Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For better of worse I've worked over the article, for the most part using the landmarks section to link to sub area articles. I've generally left most existing content as, and added a small amount of low level detail and citations. In general it's been more about links. The result is imperfect but I hope the edits give a better overview of the Padding district. My thoughts on future development would be: - Create a Paddington Central Article. - Move some details from the Paddington Waterside article into the Paddington Basin and Paddington Central Article .. ( and St. Mary's Hospital? ).. Ensure the Waterside Article focuses on the Developments and the organisation and management (possible rename or redirect?) - Finally ban all pictures with a trains ... or at least where the train itself has over prominence .... pet hate of mine. i.e. Paddington station good ... focus on trains in Paddington station bad.

Feel free to improve stuff I've just done. It's about 20 years since I was in Paddington so there's better out there than I to look at it. Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC) Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:42, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well and good--thanks for the time and thought you've put in. Prior to copyediting this long article, I've studied a printout and found there are a few problems. Quite a few typos, duplications, inconsistencies, etc, mostly being the inevitable result of piecemeal editing, special-interest contributions, etc. I believe the article must now be professionally reworked as a whole, and I will take this on, initiating discussion and hoping for some critical cooperation. Bjenks (talk) 00:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks ... I think this article (and perhaps some closed associated ones) are in need of a good work over. Particular apologies for typos ,duplication. Hopefully between all that there was some useful stuff. Good Luck! Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh/Nonconformist influence[edit]

Should there not be a mention in the history section about how it used to be a Welsh/nonconformist area (because it's next to Paddington Station, where the Welsh get off the train to London). There were, I think, a number of famous nonconformist chapels around Praed Street and nearby Westbourne Park, and some of the buildings are still there.Paulturtle (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight on Transport[edit]

@London cyclist: I have a concern this edit has put too much WP:UNDUE weight on transport in this settlement article . It also has a WP:CFORK with some information that is better described in Paddington Basin or have there own article such as The Rolling Bridge. I'll simply make this comment and probably not try to fix but I think I'd like input from others.Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:55, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is Paddington in the West End?[edit]

Though the definition of London's West End has no strict borders, it is debatable whether the area of Paddington sits within the West End of London. The opening paragraph of the Paddington article states that the area is located within the West End, though no sources are cited. Moreover, there is no other mention of the West End within the Paddington article other than that opening paragraph, nor is there any mention of Paddington in the West End article.

Further external research will show that many sources draw the western border of the West End area in Central London at Edgware Road. Citing the West End article itself:

According to Ed Glinert's West End Chronicles (2006) the districts falling within the West End are Mayfair, Soho, Covent Garden, Fitzrovia and Marylebone. By this definition, the West End borders Temple, Holborn and Bloomsbury to the east, Regent's Park to the north, Paddington, Hyde Park and Knightsbridge to the west, and Victoria and Westminster to the south. Other definitions include Bloomsbury within the West End.

In conclusion; the paragraph should be edited and the statement 'located in the West End of London.' should be removed from the Paddington article.El_Maniac(talk) 12:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by El Maniac (talkcontribs) [reply]