Template talk:NOMIS2011

Discussion copied from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography

 * Thanks Pam, looks like this will cover most of the uses of the old site. Could do with creating a template to standardise on the output and cater for any changes they make as a result of comments on beta version. Keith D (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have made a quick template NOMIS for this. If you have any suggestions/comments then I can make changes before it is used, other parameters as NHLE.
 * produces
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith D (talk • contribs)
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith D (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks, Keith D@undefined, nice work0. As Nomis is just the platform and will presumably in time have 2021 etc I suggest that this template should (a) have a name like NOMIS2011 and (b) more importantly, display the title "2011 Census Key Statistics" to show the true source (and authority) of the data. Pam  D  05:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Pam, do you think that the "2011 Census Key Statistics" should be appended to the title parameter like "Silverdale – 2011 Census Key Statistics" or be part of the work parameter like "NOMIS – 2011 Census Key Statistics"? May be could be used as just the title if not supplied in the former case. Keith D (talk) 11:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have renamed template. Have you any thoughts on location for text? Keith D (talk) 22:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Shall we continue discussion at Template talk:NOMIS2011 to save a lot of pinging? Pam  D  22:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Continuing discussion
I think the template should reflect the placename as given in the NOMIS output - in this case "Silverdale Parish" but in other cases it might be a ward, district, etc. That should probably be the "title". For example you can have "Dorset County" (here).

I think we need to include "Nomis", and "Office for National Statistics" and "Census 2011" somewhere in the reference. ("Nomis is a service provided by the Office for National Statistics ...", from its home page). Perhaps "publisher" could be "NOMIS - Office for National Statistics"? (And we probably need a Wikipedia article about NOMIS, or at least a section within the ONS article and an entry on Nomis (disambiguation)). Pam D  22:35, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Nomis is not really the publisher, that is why I put it in the work parameter. Keith D (talk) 23:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably the work parameter should be "NOMIS – 2011 Census Key Statistics" Keith D (talk) 23:47, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Finished
Is this template complete, and if so why isn't it being used yet? I started citing NOMIS the old-fashioned way before Christmas, but stopped when I found this? Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:27, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I had forgotten about this with the Christmas break. was ask about which field to put the "NOMIS" in, which was where we got to. Keith D (talk) 23:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I have a few opinions. I notice that all the NOMIS pages seem to be called 'Local Area Report'. Has using NOMIS as the author been considered (English Heritage is on the NHLE template)? Then perhaps the work field could be something like 'Local Area Reports (2011 Census key statistics)' It is a bit of a fudge, but without something in the author field how do you plan to create a ref that makes some sense with the sfn/sfnp templates? Other than that I can only say that I'm eager to start using it.Trappedinburnley (talk) 17:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I had not considered what will happen with the sfn/sfnp templates, I have just passed the ref though to cite web, if it has been supplied. May be it needs to default to harv if not given, to enable the sfn/sfnp templates to be used. Keith D (talk) 18:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Just had a thought, how would the entries be designated if there is more than 1 entry in an article? Presumable will have to use 2011a, 2011b, etc. for the date or year field. Keith D (talk) 22:16, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The NHLE template achieves a unique ref by effectively using the record ID as a second author. This is slightly less than ideal as the other templates create a ref that looks like 'English Heritage & 235346456'. The question is can it be done any better? Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I could not find a way round the NHLE presentation which is not ideal, may be someone who knows the sfn/sfnp templates may be able to offer a better solution. I assume for what you say that you suggest id be used rather than year for the harv linkage. Keith D (talk) 13:42, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As the year is always going to be 2011, I can't think of a better way than use the ID, people can still force their own ref if they want too. To use the year field would require editors to manually match both templates I think. I believe you added this feature to the NHLE template, can you offer any insight? Trappedinburnley (talk) 14:08, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * @Trappedinburnley: The reason an & now appears is because people have changed the underlying template since Template:National Heritage List for England was written. As an example of how to avoid this see template:London Gazette. It is desirable to have the ability to link the template to a short citation, so that the template can appear in the list of citation in a reference section when short inline citations using the are used. However there are other ways to do this than using dates, see for example Template:acad -- PBS (talk) 19:24, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response PBS. It isn't immediately obvious to me what needs to be altered in this case, but I will try to figure it out. TiB chat  10:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Hallo, sorry to be slow in getting back to this. Without documentation on the template page I can't see how the latest version behaves so can't comment - could you show an example or two here, showing code and output? Thanks. Pam  D  15:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi I know you asked Keith, but FWIW I can't see that anything has changed since the Silverdale example at the top of this page. This ONS link can be turned off with the fewerlinks field. The code is still quite simple, just a list of fields to be passed to Cite web.Trappedinburnley (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * OK I got impatient, copied more from the NHLE template. now produces
 * It was only five minutes work if anyone feels a need to revert. Does anyone have a problem with the output? Trappedinburnley (talk) 21:43, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, many thanks for chipping in with the changes. It looks OK to me. Keith D (talk) 22:31, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I have made a first off cut for the documentation using that from NHLE as the basis. Keith D (talk) 23:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That looks pretty good as is. One obvious issue is the need for more on obtaining the id field. I've just trialed the template at Hapton, Lancashire.Trappedinburnley (talk) 23:26, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Why do we need to display the number "(1170215054)"? It isn't displayed in the output, so isn't something which an editor would include if making a reference by hand for the source, and just seems to add clutter. Or am I missing something? (We don't display the number in imdb title, for example, though we use it in creating the link). Pam  D  23:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * A Harvard style ref would look like this . It should still work without the id in the title, but would not provide the same visual link. Just don't ask me to provide an example article for this style of ref (for census data) because I'm not actually aware of one.Trappedinburnley (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about Harvard refs, but would think that "2011" should be included in any ref in case the same paper has links to another census (eg 2021 if they stick with same system at Nomis). We also don't know whether that unique identifier is unique within 2011 or will reappear for a later census? Pam  D  23:59, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And ...
 * "Silverdale Parish: Local Area Report" would reflect more closely the title as displayed, so might be better?
 * Nomis never styles itself in capitals as NOMIS - see here - so I suggest we should use "Nomis".
 * I'm not sure we need to include the "(Census Key Statistics)". It doesn't appear in the displayed page, and I suggest we offer enough info without it.
 * But thanks for your work on this. It'll be a heavily-used template once people find out about it - and there ought to be a vast amount of work done to upgrade existing dead links, though I'm not sure how that will happen! Pam  D  23:57, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I've removed the capitals from NOMIS, and I don't have much of an issue with the other suggestions, although I think the inclusion of ID somewhere needs a little thought. As I was discussing with Keith, the problem is when someone wants to use this template to cite multiple Nomis pages. As I said I don't think it is essential in the title to make it work. However I've found a problem sufficiently large I've stopped making changes and I'm going to start a new discussion.Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried remove the id from the title and it does break the Harvard ref, so I think we are stuck with it for now at least. To reduce the length of the output a little I've mentioned the #key statistics bit in the documentation and removed it from the output. It does already say UK Census and 2011 so it probably is overkill. I'm pretty happy with both the documentation and template output at this point.Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:46, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried remove the id from the title and it does break the Harvard ref, so I think we are stuck with it for now at least. To reduce the length of the output a little I've mentioned the #key statistics bit in the documentation and removed it from the output. It does already say UK Census and 2011 so it probably is overkill. I'm pretty happy with both the documentation and template output at this point.Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:46, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Not just Local Area Reports
While looking at creating instructions for obtaining the ID field I've found that the Nomis site has more content than the just Local Area Reports. Annoyingly each uses a sufficiently different URL to make it tricky to use this template for all of them. My instant reaction is that we will have to better define this one to be used with only the Local Area Reports which might mean another name change? Thoughts? Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:40, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, perhaps the template for UK census should use a name like "UKCensus2011": Nomis are only the platform through which the stats are made available. The other, non-census, resources seem a powerful set of data which could usefully be added systematically as an "External link" to articles on local authorities and parliamentary constituencies, as providing otherwise unavailable useful extra info.  Pam  D  10:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * On reflection I think I'd favour something like "NomisCensus2011" as it may well spawn other Nomis tempates, but I don't have a strong opinion. Keith? Trappedinburnley (talk) 13:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No real opinion on this one. Keith D (talk) 16:45, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * On further reflection this is not going to become a problem unless the additional templates I mentioned are actually created, so maybe we just cross that bridge when we come to it. Trappedinburnley (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Deployment
Sorry for creating a third active discussion, but raised the issue of replacing the existing 2011 census citations with this template. And I've had a little look into it and it seems that it will require a lot of work. I don't think we will be able to get a bot to do it as there seems to be no correlation between the old an new URLs. However a bot could be programed to add articles with the old URL(s) to a hidden category so as to see the ones that need work. Now at this moment I don't know how to do that, and I'm not convinced it is essential. Ideas? Trappedinburnley (talk) 09:59, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Could we perhaps in the first place have a bot which would look for those 2011 links and add a comment on the lines of "Dead link: Information now available from Nomis", so that readers could get to Nomis and do the search themselves? Editors watchlisting those articles, if not cutting bots out of their watchlists, might also then be inspired to update the links. Pam  D  10:11, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I like your thinking. This certainly seems like it would be feasible and I have found myself responding to the demands of the InternetArchiveBot. Do we know anyone with the expertise to do this?Trappedinburnley (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Would need to work out how to distinguish between the 2001 & 2011 census links from the old ONS Neighbourhood Statistics site so that only the 2011 point to Nomis. Keith D (talk) 16:44, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That could be tricky. However a search of "neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk" only yielded 364 results, or are there other related URLs? Trappedinburnley (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Try searching with " insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk/ " which gives 10,739 results. Keith D (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Well that's daunting! Here are some URLs for 2001 and 2011 data:
 * 2011 Census: Key Statistics: Hapton >> http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=7&b=11124210&c=Hapton&d=16&e=62&g=6440195&i=1001x1003x1032x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1435786809250&enc=1
 * 2011 Census: Key Statistics: Ightenhill >> http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=7&b=11124979&c=ightenhill&d=16&e=62&g=6440326&i=1001x1003x1032x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1435774062110&enc=1
 * 2011 Census: Key Statistics: Sunderland >> http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=7&b=6275267&c=Sunderland&d=13&e=62&g=6360163&i=1001x1003x1032x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1437500829939&enc=1
 * 2001 Census: Key Statistics: Somerset >> http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=3&b=3567644&c=Somerset&d=180&e=15&g=482799&i=1001x1003x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1197641980457&enc=1
 * 2001 Census: Key Statistics: Burnley >> http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=3&b=277016&c=burnley&d=13&e=16&g=461341&i=1001x1003x1004&m=0&enc=1
 * 2001 Census: Key Statistics: Bolton >> http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=3&b=276776&c=Bolton&d=13&e=16&g=349617&i=1001x1003x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1260706006628&enc=1
 * 2001 Census : Parish Headcounts : Burnley >> http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do?instanceSelection=03070&productId=779&$ph=60_61&datasetInstanceId=3070&startColumn=1&numberOfColumns=8&containerAreaId=790436
 * For the key statistics at least it seems to be "a=3b=" for 2001 and "a=7b=" for 2011 (my emboldening) but I haven't found a way to effectively search for that string. ? Trappedinburnley (talk) 18:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The figure drops to 2,309 when you add the "/dissemination\/LeadTableView\.do" for the Key Statistics examples. Though the figures do not add up for the differing searches I think "insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk\/dissemination\/LeadTableView\.do\?a\=3/" will give 2001 and "insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk\/dissemination\/LeadTableView\.do\?a\=7/" the 2011 entries. Keith D (talk) 18:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * LeadTableView seems to be the key statistics pages which should be what we need but there are others of course. Is there any way to do the original search, but add just the "?a\=3/" bit? I'm interested to see what else that would. Trappedinburnley (talk) 19:33, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You could try "insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk\/[a-z\.\/]*\?a\=3/i" or "insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk\/[a-z\.\/]*\?a\=7/i" though unsure how far that will skip between the 2 parts of the search string. The first produces 1,079 results and the second 9,371. Keith D (talk) 23:10, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Great Keith thanks, I plan to find a few functioning archive URLs to see what might be covered at Nomis. Am I to assume from this search wizardry that you might be able to setup the bot? I would be happy to help in whatever probably insignificant way I could (still me). TiB chat  00:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not able to create a BOT you would have to make a request at WP:BOTREQ to see who comes forward to do one. Keith D (talk) 01:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Being unsure of the either the amount of work involved in creating the bot or the likely effectiveness of our strategy, I decided to get on a start using the template. At first I used Keith's insource:/neighbourhood\.statistics\.gov\.uk\/dissemination\/LeadTableView\.do\?a\=7/ search and found a few popular articles. But these turned out to be the most difficult as inconsistences in the data and no way to refer to the previous cite makes things tricky. I then figured out that insource:/nomisweb\.co\.uk\/reports\/localarea\ search would give the articles already citing Nomis, so I focused on updating those, and notifying the editors who had added them. As many where mine already I have ended up with quite a lot in East Lancashire, but hopefully that won't put anyone off. We now have about 60 transclusions which I hope is enough for editors to see it as established and worthy of investigation at least. TiB chat  08:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Widely useful records
I've used the template a little more at York. One issue that arose is the old ONS data offered comparisons with wider areas. And as you would expend this had been used in articles. I've found that although Nomis doesn't offer this on the reports, it does have the data on the countries and regions in dedicated reports.

Regions


Well I'm sure you get the idea. I wasn't sure of the most appropriate place for this info so I put it here. TiB chat  18:34, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

What about other years?
Obviously I don't mean other census years, but nomis labour market statistics such as population and so on are also available for non-census years, such as 2016 for instance. Should this template be generalised to cater for those datasets, or should the regular cite web be used in those situations? I'd prefer the template to be generalised, but in the meantime I have no option other than not to use it for nomis data for non-census years, which seems a shame. Eric  Corbett  11:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The name of the template was changed to indicate usage for the 2011 census with the possibility of other templates for other datasets being created. If a parameter could easily be added to this template to act as a switch to cover other datasets then that would probably be the way to go. Keith D (talk) 17:32, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I thought I had seen the 2016 data somewhere but now I struggle to find it. Do we have a URL I can look at before I form an opinion? TiB  chat  20:44, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

NOMIS url has changed
The template no longer works because NOMIS has changed its format. The new style is https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/localarea?compare=

Compare with As this template is so widely used, would someone else please verify and change the template accordingly? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * which produces nothing
 * https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/localarea?compare=E34005056


 * Done. I was a little concerned that the old record IDs would stop working with this change, but the tests I've tried redirect to the correct records so all seems good. Thanks. TiB  chat  16:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the change. There are about 30 articles that use the old URL directly. Would be worth converting these to use the template. Keith D (talk) 17:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I have now converted these over to use the template. Keith D (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Just for information there are 462 articles that use the new URL directly. Keith D (talk) 22:20, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All 462 of which should presumably be changed to use the template so that we're prepared next time. Are there any identifiable editors who are using it directly regularly and could usefully be advised to use the template? Pam  D  07:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No identifiable editor on the first few I randomly selected. May be an AWB run or a BOT task to change that many articles, some with multiple occurrences. Keith D (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Updates after page moves?
The template currently uses two redirects: should these be updated so that it links directly to Office for National Statistics (United Kingdom) and 2011 United Kingdom census? Pam D  08:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you are correct, so I've changed em. I really must find some time to continue replacing the old dead ONS usages, there appear to still be 1000+ and the next census is not far away. All the best. TiB  chat  18:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Change URL to specify 2011 census
The current URL will probably point to 2021 census data when that arrives. It seems the Nomis site's been prepared for that; it now has pages like https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/census_2011_ks/report?compare=E05005241 with specific "(as of 2011)" headings. Should we change this template from to ? NebY (talk) 20:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * url=https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/localarea?compare=
 * url=https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/census_2011_ks/report?compare=
 * I think "(as of 2011)" is there in your example because it's a ward, rather than because of 2011/2021 changes. But a change to the template, if you've tested a good range of instances, seems a very good move, thanks. Pam  D  06:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * : Ah, you're quite right about "(as of 2011)". I tested a bunch during our discussion at WT:UKGEO (should have spotted that then) and I've tested another batch now, side-by-side. The new url does have the helpful breadcrumbs "You are here: Data Sources > Census > 2011 Census > Key Statistics > Report" and above the search box, "2011 Census Report for areas in England and Wales" but the details look the same. Thanks, I'll just wait another day or so to see if anyone else has any concerns, though at least it would be easy to revert! NebY (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅, seems to be working OK. NebY (talk) 10:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * There are 356 articles using the URL directly, probably need to convert them over to using the template before they change over to 2021. Keith D (talk) 22:09, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I was going to try converting some of the URLs to use the template and the first one I tried gave a problem. E34000058 for Grimethorpe BUA is not located using the new path. Keith D (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ugh. I just tried to use the search box on the new 2011-specific path and it doesn't seem to be offering any BUAs either - for example, try searching for Catfield BUA from https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/census_2011_ks/report?compare=E04006401 . Somehow I failed to test any BUAs before. Sorry. I've reverted the template; until 2021 data seeps in that won't cause any difficulties. Ideally NOMIS have a plan to fix/extend/complete it before then – assuming they're aware. I can't think how we'd make the template identify that we were passing the # of a BUA. NebY (talk) 21:33, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

NOMIS 2001 search page
Hi, all. I have listed this problem on the 2001 talk page but have had no reply, so I am casting the net wider. The search page for the 2001 census template now points to the 2021 census data search page. Nomis Local Area Report search page. This now means that anyone searching for the reference for 2001 data is now pointed at a completely different set of data. This renders any cite listed with the NMOIS template for 2001 as broken - any help?

Example - Cottingham 2001 census listing (cite no 110 on the page). Original access-date kept. Thanks. The joy of all things (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2023


 * Hello, I did contact them back in February and got this response

Hi Keith

I'm sorry, but there is a website problem causing the links to the 2001 key statistics report to go to the wrong location. We are working to resolve this.

Until this is fixed, you can access the 2001 key statistics report using the link below:

https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/published/summaryreport.asp?file=sources/census_2001_ks

Kind regards,

Sinclair
 * They have not fixed it yet, so maybe we should change the template to use the temporary URL and revert when a fix is applied to their web site.
 * Just for information, I have created a NOMIS2021 template for the top level information they have released, will need tweaking when they release the lower level data. Keith D (talk) 21:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks . Thanks also for the 2021 template. Do we know when the parish/ward/ etc data will come out? Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 21:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have not got any time for the parish data, but it is imminent, I would expect sometime in April from things I have seen. Keith D (talk) 23:09, 26 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi guys, I've not been active for a while, but saw this and thought I'd help. I've tried changing the url in the template, only to discover another problem. The reports only seem to work if you search for them in the new link first. If I try to link directly to the report url I get something very different. If you refesh the page after finding the report in the new search, exactly the same problem occurs, so it must be an issue with the NOMIS website. I've reverted my change and will think of another solution. TiB chat  17:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I was concerned about potentially a few hundred nomis links with bad urls. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 18:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If the link is changed in the template, then you get to the right report by clicking on the reference link in an article. The actual URL of the page displayed is not the URL generated, so I am guessing the site is doing some redirecting when displaying the results. Thus, refreshing the results page does not produce anything. Keith D (talk) 22:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The best temporary solution I can think of, is to repoint both the documentation search url and the template url to the temporary search link. A user clicking on the ref link will then stand a reasonable chance of finding the correct info. I've done some quick testing and you can search for the name and the modern style GGS codes (eg E07000117) but unfortunately not the old style GSS codes used in most of the refs. I'll put a note on that talk page, explaining to test the NOMIS site by refreshing the area report page. Unless anyone objects, I'll do this over the weekend. TiB chat  19:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

We still have trouble at t'mill
The BUAs have all disappeared. For ex, this no longer works. It looks like NOMIS have broken it: if you go to the drop-down at https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/sources/census_2011_ks/report and enter Milton Keynes, you get the LA, the silly three-quarters of MK that they call MK (BUSA), the parish, and then lower levels. No doubt the same is true for all the other original BUAs too like Bristol and Reading etc. Could archive.org or the national archives have saved it? This means war! 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Have you emailed them? They are responsive, contact details are via the website menus. The Equalizer (talk) 00:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)