Talk:Stroud & Swindon Building Society

Fair use rationale for Image:StroundSwindon-BS-logo.gif
Image:StroundSwindon-BS-logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge?
The City & Metropolitan Building Society has already merged with the Stroud & Swindon Building Society in real life. Since the City article is almost a redirect in the way it is written; I propose it be merged. --Stormbay (talk) 21:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree :
 * To follow this logic, the Stroud & Swindon article will need to be merged with the Coventry Building Society article in a few months time. (And a few years down the line we'll just have a Nationwide Building Society article, but that's another story.)
 * The City & Metropolitan Building Society stub invites the addition of more detail. If it's just a footnote to the Stroud & Swindon, nobody's going to add anything. Bazj (talk) 05:28, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Two weeks later and no support for the merger. I'll remove the tags. Bazj (talk) 11:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't have strong feelings about the merge. I had hoped to elicit some interest in expanding City & Metropolitan Building Society which will probably remain a "one liner" and could have, in my opinion, been as well served by a short section in the other article. If nothing is added to it to discuss its notability, it really doesn't show significant importance for a "stand alone" article. However, you have made the call and, I'm reasonably sure, no one else cares. Cheers! --Stormbay (talk) 21:25, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Tagged C&M for the Business & Cooperatives projects. Hopefully that'll drum up some passing interest. Regards, Bazj (talk) 17:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)