User talk:MRSC/Archive 19

Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Dorset County Council.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Dorset County Council.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Staffordshire County Council.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Staffordshire County Council.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Core Cities Group Logo 2012.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Core Cities Group Logo 2012.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Roger 8 Roger
User:Roger 8 Roger is once again vehemently insisting that places in Greater London that used to be in Kent or Surrey should be described as being "in the historic county of Kent/Surrey", and should *not* be described as being "historically part of Kent/Surrey and forming part of London since 1889/1965".

He's done it on the Beckenham article, where he has also had a bit of a pop at User:CastleCapt: "Pls don't fudge. Your sentence is good faith but amounts a nonsensical form of synthesis. You have two or three separate issues crammed into one sentence creating confusion. Is there some reason why you cannot simply say what and where it is?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beckenham&diff=947507115&oldid=947500412

He's done it on the Chislehurst article, too, although he hasn't had a pop at other users there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chislehurst&diff=901352557&oldid=900009996

And he's done it on Addington, London as well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Addington,_London&diff=959841741&oldid=959755084

And quite likely several other similar articles.

I can understand his views, and he's perfectly entitled to them too - but there's definitely something off-putting about the way he's going about expressing them. To me, it's as though he's *forcing* everyone to agree with him. I'm fairly sure you simply cannot do that - just as you cannot force everyone to agree that Scotland should separate from the rest of the UK, or that Oasis was the best Britpop band ever. (For the record, I think Scotland *might* be better off going its own way but can't say for sure that it *will* be, and I think Blur were at least as good as Oasis, if not better.)

And I know from looking at the histories of these articles on places formerly in Kent/Surrey that *you* don't particularly like the way he's going about things either. Wonder, then, if it's time to take firmer action - to make him back down a bit and find alternative, non-off-putting ways of expressing his views, and also make it that bit clearer to him that *not* everyone can or ever will agree with him, no matter how good his intentions are?

Thanks. 80.233.55.197 (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with your statement. While everyone is entitled to their views, it shouldn't be enforced. I do remember when my changes on Beckenham were reverted. Maybe there needs to be some sort of consensus, perhaps on WikiProject? What do you think ? --CastleCapt (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

There already is a consensus. We do not take the view that the historic/ancient/traditional counties still exist with the former boundaries. WikiProject UK geography/How to write about counties. If he does it again start a thread on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject London and we'll start repairing the damage whilst taking action to get him blocked from editing. MRSC (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I am beginning to tire of their antics to be honest. Some of their posts come across as quite pompous and I definitely feel an air of them trying to cram their opinions down my throat. They cannot seem to separate their personal opinion from hard facts. They drone on and on about "common usage" and what “the large majority of people” refer to a place as, despite me pointing out several times that these are opinions (based on misinterpretation of data) and therefore irrelevant. They just cannot seem to grasp this. Justgravy (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)


 * This user is once again adding historic county information in the present tense to articles on London neighbourhoods, thus implying that these historic counties persist, against the guidelines in paragraph 3 of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_UK_geography/How_to_write_about_counties#:~:text=Avoid%20using%20headings%20that%20arrange%20the%20history%20of,A%20note%20on%20the%20geology%20of%20the%20territory.. He has done this in the lead of a large selection of London neighbourhood articles, but mostly to those outside the area for which the LONDON post-town is used (in itself a violation of WP:NPOV). This is clearly his pet project, but I have tried to explain to him that Wikipedia guidelines are reached by consensus, and that the consensus is that historic counties do not persist. It is not for one person to unilaterally decided that they do and change articles based on that (he believes something that is false, but more importantly, the consensus does not reflect his belief). I have suggested that he be consistent if he wants to add historic county information, and put it in ALL London neighbourhood articles (Westminster as well as West Ruislip!) in a way that clearly states that the area in question is no longer in that historic county, eg: 'Prior to 1965/1889, X was in the historic county of Y'. His scattergun approach is causing a real headache trying to correct. Would appreciate comments on the talk page discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Addington,_London Uakari (talk) 14:30, 19 August 2021 (UTC)


 * See the discussion on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_London. A supposedly separate user is now making identical reverts to those made by the subject of this thread, thereby seemingly trying to trick editors into RRR. Surely there must be some action administrators can take against this/these editor(s), who is/are effectively vandalising pages about London areas because he/they has/have not achieved consensus for their false belief in the persistence of historic counties?Uakari (talk) 21:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * As a heads up, it is happening again. I am aware of a number of pages they are trying this on, but see Romford in particular where one editor is edit warring his version in. may also want a heads up. I think  and  are inactive. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I intend to do a bit of clearing up on various pages once the usual supsects have calmed down again, although no doubt they'll be back sooner or later! Uakari (talk) 15:33, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

"County Borough of Worcester" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect County Borough of Worcester. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 9 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The Banner talk 10:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Leeds City Council logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Leeds City Council logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Rcsprinter123  (blab)  00:41, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rush Common, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salient. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Would Appreciate Your Help
I haven't reached out to you before, but I think we are allies fighting the same cause. Could you please help me and provide some input here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_London. Thank you. Justgravy (talk) 22:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. I would appreciate your help in dealing with Roger again. He talks a lot, yet manages to say absolutely nothing at the same time. He completely disappears when we refute his argument. Yet just when you think all is calm, and everything is done he pokes his head out again. Justgravy (talk) 21:20, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

He tries to abuse the system here by saying there is "no consensus" because he doesn't agree. But he will never agree with what we, and the long established right way, are telling him. Yeah I've bashed heads with him in the past, said some things I probably shouldn't have to him, but I am a reformed character. But him, he has had this almost backhanded fairness since day one. I see above a few other users have reached out to you about him (I wasn't active on Wikipedia at the time) but I say now is the time to take action against him, his POV is ruining this part of Wikipedia for everyone. Justgravy (talk) 21:48, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution
Hey MRSC. I am just letting you know that I have become so fed up with Roger that I filed for a DR == Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion == This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

and included you in it. I would really appreciate it if you could join. Justgravy (talk) 09:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Why Will You Not Help Me
Hello again MRSC. I hope you had a great festive period. I was just wondering why you have become so silent regarding my ongoing issue? We are both after the same end goal but I feel that I am fighting a one man battle against everyone for it. I do not understand how Wikipedia can allow mass changes with no consensus and yet when they are discovered and attempted to be reverted everyone says consensus is needed for that, it's ridiculous and proves just how flawed the Wikipedia system is. Justgravy (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Barnet history
Template:Barnet history has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Lord Belbury (talk) 12:11, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

District splits
I have produced a list at User:Crouch, Swale/District split updated from you're 2009 one at WP:UKDISTRICTS, what do you make of it?  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Finchley 1961.png


The file File:Finchley 1961.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused file, superseded by SVG map already on Commons."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Lewis Cawte (Talk) 15:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Southgate 1961.png


The file File:Southgate 1961.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused, image superseded, would be of little/no use transferring to Commons."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Lewis Cawte (Talk) 15:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Local authorities in Northamptonshire


A tag has been placed on Category:Local authorities in Northamptonshire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 14:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

"London Buses route 614" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect London Buses route 614. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 9 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:41, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Lincolnshire County Council.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Lincolnshire County Council.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:14, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Enfield 1961.png


The file File:Enfield 1961.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Duplicate of SVG file on Commons with no inbound links and no reasonable use in articles https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Enfield1961.svg"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sennecaster  ( What now? ) 12:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

ANI notification
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JimmyGuano (talk) 13:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Well done and thanks for doing this. MRSC (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

New historic counties discussion at Wikiproject:UKGeography
I believe that your input would be extremely valuable in this new discussion, as it has ramifications for many of the articles you have been involved with: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Historic_counties Uakari (talk) 00:35, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

I thought you would want the chance to use the support / oppose comment system in relation to the following numbered list of items I have made about the issues mentioned so far in the above discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography#Finding_a_way_forward_from_here

Uakari (talk) 20:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Southend
Thanks for your work on stopping the vandalism on this page. A request has gone into temp block the pageDavidstewartharvey (talk) 16:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Stratford (high-level) station layout diagram
Template:Stratford (high-level) station layout diagram has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Stratford (low-level) station layout diagram
Template:Stratford (low-level) station layout diagram has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:North East London image map
Template:North East London image map has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 00:18, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Southwark St Margaret for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Southwark St Margaret is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Southwark St Margaret until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hyperwave11 (talk) 07:41, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:London Fire Authority Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:London Fire Authority Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

"Beckton Riverside station" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Beckton Riverside station and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 6 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 16:34, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

"London Energy" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect London Energy and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 1 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Bonoahx (talk) 21:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of List of mayors of Lewisham for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of mayors of Lewisham is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of mayors of Lewisham until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AusLondonder (talk) 23:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

London River Services
Hi, found the problem, the actual page cited shows all the River Bus stops, ending in Woolwich Arsenal. The map on the status page doesn't appear to show Barking, which doesn't help. Ironically, if you look up a different route from the right hand menu box, it will give you RB1 to Barking. Apologies for the confusion. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for the nice note. MRSC (talk) 10:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Havering Residents Association logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Havering Residents Association logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB1
Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB2
Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB4
Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB4 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB6
Template:S-line/LRBoat right/RB6 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB1
Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB1 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:36, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB2
Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:36, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB4
Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB4 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB6
Template:S-line/LRBoat left/RB6 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:37, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

"Warley (Essex))" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Warley (Essex)) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 15:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

"Coat of arms of the London Borough of Harrow" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Coat of arms of the London Borough of Harrow and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 23 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. A7V2 (talk) 00:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Category:Railway stations served by Crossrail has been nominated for renaming
Category:Railway stations served by Crossrail has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Jalen Folf  (talk)  09:28, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of North West London (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on North West London (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
 * disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
 * is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:20, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of City of Southend-on-Sea


The article City of Southend-on-Sea has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: '''Almost a duplicate of this page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southend-on-Sea'''

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Slatersteven (talk) 16:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I have returned the page back to it County Borough, as the district City of Southend does not exist, the district is Southend-on-Sea on Sea City Council. I raised an AFD, to ask the community if this should be deleted now as The County Borough or be merged into The current council with a redirect.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 11:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kens&#38;chelsarms.PNG
Thanks for uploading File:Kens&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Arms-sutton-lb.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Arms-sutton-lb.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coat of arms of Buckinghamshire County Council.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of Buckinghamshire County Council.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:English county council coats of arms images


A tag has been placed on Category:English county council coats of arms images indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 01:53, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy New Year, MRSC!


Happy New Year! MRSC, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 04:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops  ⋠ T ⋡ 04:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Htet Naing Soe
I AM SO GLAD ? General One Pro (talk) 05:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Loop line (railway) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Loop line (railway) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Loop line (railway) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Blackpool Council for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blackpool Council is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Blackpool Council until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. DragonofBatley (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 01708


The article 01708 has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines – no sources listed here indicate that this particular code is somehow notable enough to have a separate encyclopaedia entry. See also this discussion."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — kashmīrī  TALK  16:17, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of List of telephone area name changes in the United Kingdom for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of telephone area name changes in the United Kingdom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of telephone area name changes in the United Kingdom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Flip Format (talk) 07:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 0114 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 0114, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/0114 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

CS1 error on Waltham Holy Cross Urban District
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Waltham Holy Cross Urban District, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20Qwerfjkl_(bot)&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 11:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Waltham_Holy_Cross_Urban_District&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1162834574%7CWaltham%20Holy%20Cross%20Urban%20District%5D%5D Ask for help])

Disambiguation link notification for July 27
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Becontree Hundred, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Woodford.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

"Durham City Council" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Durham_City_Council&redirect=no Durham City Council] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 02:52, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Category:Redirects from UK postcode districts has been nominated for renaming
Category:Redirects from UK postcode districts has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. user: A smart kitten meow  10:34, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

St Andrew's (ward)
Hi there! In the St Andrew's (ward) article, could you please fix the date error in reference #12? access-date needs a day (in addition to a month and year). Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 13:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

November 2023
Hello. I have noticed that you edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! 🏴 MrFlyingPies23 ✉ (✍)🏳️ 07:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Casual vacancy
You've added an empty section for the "2023 by-election" to Cazenove (ward). Do you have any information on closing date for nominations, candidates and election date? 31.55.242.67 (talk) 14:23, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. Nothing from the council yet as far as I can see. Should be imminent. MRSC (talk) 14:35, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

"Hoxton tube station" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hoxton_tube_station&redirect=no Hoxton tube station] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Pkbwcgs (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

"Haggerston tube station" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haggerston_tube_station&redirect=no Haggerston tube station] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

"Lesnes Abbey Conservation Volunteers (LACV)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lesnes_Abbey_Conservation_Volunteers_(LACV)&redirect=no Lesnes Abbey Conservation Volunteers (LACV)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 12:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:London bus corridor 15
Template:London bus corridor 15 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ajf773 (talk) 09:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)