Talk:Howth

Images

What is the problem with the two images? They appear to have copyright releases attached to them.... JXM 07:18, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstating them on the page as copyrights are fine. Deadstar 08:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for the template: Please note that the red dot in the map shows Sutton rather than Howth. Deadstar 08:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is now fixed by ww2censor - thanks. Deadstar 07:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Broken Wiki markup

I've noticed that the section for "External links" has two edit links - the first refers to the relevant section, but second to the previous one! Not only that, but they appear just over halfway down the section. I've tried to fix the problem, but haven't succeeded. Could someone more experienced than me explain to me what's broken?

The two edit links you see there are caused by the picture placement and are one each for the See also and External links sections. I don't think there is an easy way to fix that without moving the pictures to a different location on the page. I have seen this before and tried to fix it on some other pages but either I am not experienced enough or it is not possible to fix. Their location also depends on the window width of your browser. Try making your browser window much smaller and see what happens! Then go and buy a 30" screen and it will likely look fine. BTW, please sign your comments by adding 4 tildes (~) after your comment. ww2censor 18:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation - I wasn't sure what was causing it. I normally sign my contributions, but it slipped my mind that time. Autarch 17:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Socially diverse or affluent?

I think "socially diverse" is a great improvement on "affluent", and I don't understand why it was reverted. Not all of Howth is by any means affluent. I am reinstating "socially diverse". Snalwibma 22:44, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Socially diverse" isn't what first springs to mind when I think of Howth. Perhaps "generally affluent" could be a compromise. Halib Frisk 05:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like we're trying to use these words as polite metaphors for something else. But, semantically speaking, the two terms are basically independent. "Socially diverse" implies variations in family heritage, educational achievement, religious background, and so on. OTOH, "affluent" refers specifically to financial wealth. Why not devise a descriptive sentence that uses both terms? JXM 07:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I take your point Jxm but it seems to me that Snalwibma was using "socially diverse" to mean "economically diverse" since he was using it to replace "affluent". Obviously not everyone who lives in Howth is wealthy but the area is significantly less economically diverse than the State as a whole. (according to 2002 census figures for socio-economic group and social class. www.cso.ie) I don't know how to break out census figures at the local level relating to educational attainment but I imagine they would show a similar pattern. It is possible that Howth is slightly more religously or ethnically diverse than the state as a whole but in the absence of any evidence of even relative diversity I'll (respectfully)delete "socially mixed" for the moment. Halib Frisk 07:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Halib! I'm not going to argue about this... On reflection, I suppose anywhere you care to mention is "socially diverse", "mixed", etc to varying degrees! And I concede also that Howth is probably more affluent than your average Irish town/village. But it might be good to anchor the statement in fact somehow, to avoid the appearance of POV pigeon-holing. Could we (I mean you, of course!) construct a note based on CSO data? Snalwibma 10:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]