h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Southampton Airport, Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK - A61820048
Author: Bluebottle - U43530

A61820048 - 'Southampton Airport, Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK'. It does what it says on the tin.

<BB<

Excellent entry

This is very interesting bluebottle

Can you take a look at footnote 3 which comes after

>>>began at least in 1910

I think the wording needs looking at.



My eyes are a bit wonky at the moment for proper proof reading, but I really like your style and content!



til tomorrow!

Okay, I've rephrased that footnote, so hopefully it makes more sense. I've also corrected a couple of spelling mistakes and added a bit more about the years after the Second World War.

<BB<

Eric Rowland - died in a tragic flying boat accident? Is that correct? If so, could you pop in a quick definition of a flying boat for me? Only, I don't know what one is.
-EDIT: You defninitely did mean flying boat, now I've read the reast. I still don't really know much about them though.

The chunk on Amelia Earhart is interesting, but I think it may only be a useful part of the Entry if she intended to land at Eastleigh in the first place. Otherwise it's not really related to the topic of the Entry.

The War Years (4th paragraph) - the COA factory litte--> light damage.

Post War (paragraph 1) - "...scheduled flights were permitted."

Helicopters - repetition of Company

Sorry about the split - w*rk sort of raised its head and I had to post quickly.

Another fine Entry, BB.

No need to apologise VIP - I know how hard it is to juggle work and h2g2 commitments

Okay, definition of Flying Boat added in a footnote, "Litte" corrected to "Little", "was" now "were", redundant Company removed and whatever the other thing was, I did too. I can't remember what it was now, but I remember I rephrased something.

Regarding the Amelia Earhart paragraph - you've raised a good point there, but it was the only bit that might be of interest to American researchers, as they'd've heard of Amelia Earhart and if they wanted to learn more about her attempt to fly to Southampton, would naturally expect this article to mention her. However, if others feel that this paragraph should be deleted, I can do.

<BB<

Amelia Earhart could be relocated to the end as a sort of trivia thing, although it doesn't really belong there either.
It seems mean to cut her out completely, I just don't feel it belongs as part of the history of the Aerodrome, as it isn't.
I can't see a better place for her to go though.

It's not a big thing, and won't spoil the Entry if it's left in.

I've relegated her to a footnote as you're right, it isn't really an incident in the history of the aerodrome itself, but is an interesting aside about the importance of the area of Southampton in the era of the airport.

<BB<

That fits a lot better.

Hi Bluebottle, nice to see you writing again.

"Yet since changing its name to Southampton Airport, its importance has dwindled to a fragment of its former glory." This sounds a little like you mean that the name caused the decline of the airport.

Unfortunately footnote 6 is too long to be completely readable in the box which shows up when you hover over it. You can read up to 'renamed seaplanes by' and that's it.

"During the Battle of Britain, when on 1st September 1940 Reichsmarschall Goring asked Ace Adolf Galland if there was anything he needed in the Battle of Britain, he famously replied "A squadron of Spitfires"."
Ace shouldn't be capitalised.

"fact that HMS Raven was an aerodrome didn’t prevent German propaganda announcing on radio that HMS Raven had been sunk in the English Channel, much to the amusement of those stationed there."

"opened a factory in Southampton Airportwhere"
Space needed.

Good job.

Changes made.

And of course Southampton airport's importance declined because it changed its name from Eastleigh Aerodrome - the name Southampton is a curse! Just think of that ship, the Titanic, which was advertised as sailing from Southampton...

<BB<

Hi Bluebottle, a nice piece, very informative.
Way too many (and way too long some of them) footnotes for my liking.
Anyway of incorprating some of them into the main article?

Alas I can't log in as Bluebottle at the moment.

I agree that 16 footnotes is one or two too many...

Footnote 9 perhaps should be incorporated into the War Time section, and perhaps Footnote 11 can be deleted altogether.

<BB<

Oh - good luck with getting your sign in sorted out, BB

Any news now the sign in's sorted BB?

I think this is good to go - just waiting for the All Clear!

Log in's still not sorted - apparently I've got a new and unique log in problem never seen before that could take another 2 weeks to fix.

<BB<

minor quibble ... I think a lot of people outside of hampshire have heard of Eastleigh. It was one of the major railway works in the country, so lots of train type people know of it :-p

A good point, but as I am unable to edit the article, perhaps a rather academic one.

But other than for train type people, I suspect Eastleigh is not well known outside Hampshire.

<BB<