Talk:Belvedere, London

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

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belvedere, London. 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) 13:23, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

County[edit]

Updated opening sentence to clarify the Belvedere's relationship with Kent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.16.231 (talk) 06:09, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There should be consensus before making London/Kent changes. The issue is far greater than Belvedere. It seems that the policy on WP is to use ceremonial/lieutenancies Act counties as the default, not historic/traditional counties or administrative counties. This policy, from what I can see, was created many years ago. I think it is the wrong policy because it will inevitably lead to confusion and contradictions, which is what has happened everywhere. You will find different approaches to "counties" taken throughout articles about UK geographical areas. However, I think changing each article in isolation just compounds the problem and solves nothing. Here, the heading is 'Belvedere, London', which is correct from one point of voew. It would therefore be wrong to then say it is in Kent without showing its clear link to London. I have ideas about what to do but I hope the rest of you can throw in some opinions. Unnamed contributors who use different IP addresses do not help.Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:20, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All editors are equal, if they have an account or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:DA42:200:24D6:4A6A:7DC:9913 (talk) 21:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But without a Username there is no talk page, and we cannot get them fully involved in a discussion. A wikipedia edit, is part of the process described in WP:BRD, if I do the 'R' out of courtesy I leave an introductory message on the users talk page, inviting him/her to join in the discussion on the article talk page the D part of the process. Also there is no watch list- so the IP won't be alerted when changes are made to topics he is involved with. To me, as you are watching this obscure page, you are a potential editor with lots of useful local knowledge and possibly a camera-- can you please get yourself a username and then hopefully come up to the London Wikimeetup 124 and discuss this further over a drink. ClemRutter (talk) 21:57, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belvedere, London. 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) 17:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the title Greater London?[edit]

I don't mean the debate of whether this is Kent or London (Kent before 1965, London after 1965 to now, Kent postal county which was only for addressing purposes and no longer used anyway.)

I mean why is the title Greater London not just London? was it an attempt to show it's in Greater London but was not in the County of London pre 1965 and not in the London Postal town? if so it looks odd to me. Generally we use administrative divisions not postal anyway, and generally short hand, not long hand. Compare with Lee, London, Rainham, London, Crofton, London (Crofton also has/had the post town of Kent, unlike Lee and Rainham). I would suggest changing this to Belvedere, London. Are there any other place article that use placename, Greater London format?  Carlwev  18:37, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's Greater London because the policy is to reference places to their ceremonial county, which for Belvedere is Greater London, not London. Even if the article refers to the area of local government, the reference point would seem to be the Greater London Authority Act 1999. Or, if refering to the wider urban sprawl, we are still left with Greater London. Using 'London' instead of 'Greater London' seems to be based on a POV. Even if this POV had been reached by consensus, it seems to contravene WP guidelines. I believe that the situation can be confusing and is far from ideal, but besides that, I am not passing any opinion. The change has absolutely nothing to do with the county of London, with postal counties or (not directly) with the Kent/London debate. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 07:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is now at the wrong title. Per the relevant article title guidelines, places in Greater London are titled "X, London" not "X, Greater London". The page referred to above is about article content not the title.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer. So, WP policy is to refer to the ceremonial county, but not for the ceremonial county of Greater London? Or, does this mean that WP editorial consensus has the discretion to change undisputed facts to suit that consensus opinion? (Changing the name of the ceremonial county of Greater London to London). A more detailed discussion has started here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements Roger 8 Roger (talk) 21:16, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For titling purposes, use the ceremonial county (and for places within Greater London use London). For article content, different rules may apply.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:20, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
London is a special case. There are two ceremonial counties that cover "London", as the City of London is a distinct ceremonial county. That's not helpful, so its best to refer to just "London" - which is the region of England, the area that votes for the Mayor of London etc etc. Belvedere is in London. No ifs, buts or maybes on that, and Greater London is an unnecessary complication.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:32, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belvedere, London. 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) 01:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belvedere,_London&oldid=1206236753"