This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
The PROD tag is coming off. Rivers are inherently notable per editor consensus and routine snowball keeps at AfD. Google searches show the river has WP:RS coverage available.(Google BooksGoogle web) • Gene93k (talk) 22:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Gene93k. The river is part of the River Lea tributary system, which can be seen by the template at the bottom of the page, if the original admin had taken the time to read the page correctly (sorry, I had to take a swipe :P ). This page, along with the others, definitely need to stay. Jamsta (talk) 08:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]