Talk:City of Milton Keynes

message: I've cleaned up this page so it conforms to other similar pages. David 13:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. Excised material was a load of axe-grinding guff.  --Concrete Cowboy 17:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up 

message: Add  * Support  or  * Oppose  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
* Support for the reasons given in the Request to Move.  --Concrete Cowboy 20:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Image:Arms-milton-k.jpg 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 Wikipedia: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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have provided the requested rationale template and deleted the tag. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Arms-milton-k.jpg

message: "The 30-44 year olds in Milton Keynes Borough can be seen as the largest 10-year age group of the population with 35-39 year olds being the largest 5-year age group."
Erm, I maybe be wrong, but I don't think 30-44 represents ten years?  I've tried opening the data source referenced but can't get it to open - can someone else try?  Alternatively could the original editor clarify?ColourSarge (talk) 17:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like someone messed with the page.  Also, the 2007/08 figs are out so I've updated the URL.  Please review. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep this looks good now, have also checked the source and agree with your conclusions. ColourSarge (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population Data 

message: Please contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#Olney, Milton Keynes; Caversham, Reading; Wanborough, Swindon. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names of articles describing villages in the Borough 

message: What on earth does this garbage mean?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.192.91 (talk) 18:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economy 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Borough of Milton Keynes. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060525140007/http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_economy/RegionalGVA.pdf to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_economy/RegionalGVA.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060107125653/http://www.mkweb.co.uk:80/mkcouncil/ to http://www.mkweb.co.uk/mkcouncil/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120916212133/http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/parishes/documents/Borough%5FWide%5FMap%5FRevised%5FParishes%5FFeb%5F2011%2Epdf to http://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/parishes/documents/Borough_Wide_Map_Revised_Parishes_Feb_2011.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:34, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Borough of Milton Keynes. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.mkiobservatory.org.uk/Download/Public/1026/DOCUMENT/7338/StatsupdatedFebruary-2010.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160204091118/http://www.mkiobservatory.org.uk/page.aspx?id=1914&siteID=1026 to http://www.mkiobservatory.org.uk/page.aspx?id=1914&siteID=1026
*Added  tag to http://www.mkiobservatory.org.uk/document.aspx?id=10293&siteID=1026
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As of 1 April, Buckinghamshire County Council ceases to exist, being replaced by Buckinghamshire Council, a Unitary Authority. The ceremonial county of Buckinghamshire will thus have two UAs and no CC. The infobox for the ceremonial county (at present combined with the BCC information and minimal BoMK information) will cease to be valid. I tried to fix it but the effect was for a load of valid information about the BC area to disappear. So would editors contribute to Template talk:Infobox English county#Only one admin_hq allowed?, please? (The "Only one admin_hq allowed?" issue turns out to be just the tip of the iceberg). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  template:Infobox English county about to run into the sand at Buckinghamshire 

message: Per WP:BRD, I reverted an edit by  which removed cited content. The citation says clearly " A new county shall be constituted comprising the area of Milton Keynes and shall be named the county of Milton Keynes." If that did not actually happen, then a strong citation saying so (and why) is essential in support. Editor analysis is not a substitute. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  County? 

message: The ONS has released preliminary "rounded" figures for the Borough (only): see Population and household estimates, England and Wales: Census 2021. The 'estimated population" section of the infobox will soon be updated automatically. In the meantime, the figures are these: all: 287,000; females: 145,500; males: 141,600, which means an overall increase of about 38,000 in ten years. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:04, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 census: preliminary data release from ONS 

message: I assume that the Council will formally change its name from Borough of Milton Keynes to City of Milton Keynes "in due course". So we had best wait for that to happen and not pre-empt it. In the meantime, would everyone resist the temptation to make make City of Milton Keynes a redirect because doing so will make a simple article move into a complicated one. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: A recent tweet from MK Council states that Today we collected HM The Queen's Letters Patent that officially makes us the City of Milton Keynes. We'll be formally marking our city status later this year.  A little confusing because the first part of the statement makes it sound like that the name change has officially happened, but on the other hand, it says that they'll be "marking" the city status later this year. Any thoughts on how this should be interpreted? Anonymous MK2006 (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the Crown Office statement says merely  so it is for the Council (councillors, not officers) to resolve how the UA should be named (within the law: a district can't just declare itself a borough, a borough can't just declare itself a city). So I assume we have to wait until the full Council reconvenes. Of course I don't actually know this, just that "it stands to reason" [famous last words number three]. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

text: Update: it looks as though the Council has finally renamed itself , so shall we should proceed to the next steps? Anonymous MK2006 (talk) 14:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd have preferred to see an explicit resolution of the Council but I don't see it as essential. So, as you spotted it first, you get the honours of moving this article to City of Milton Keynes and the Council article to Milton Keynes City Council. With acclamation. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

text: JMF, I'm as befuddled as you are. The articles for Southend-on-Sea and City of Canterbury state that, as well as cities, they are also boroughs. On the contrary, the City of Carlisle article simply states that it is a city and non-metropolitan district. I guess more research is needed, but regardless, the govt have put is an awkward situation in that we're dealing with a city called "Milton Keynes" which administratively includes a rural area significantly larger that the core urban area. So whether we should call the UA a city or a borough, depends on conclusions we can make from research. Anonymous MK2006 (talk) 11:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , any advice? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  All districts with city status hold borough status but not all cities are districts with borough status such as with Wells and Chichester the civil parish holding the status and with Bath its the charter trustees for the former borough with city status. Crouch, Swale (talk)  16:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So in the case of MK (the U), it was and still is a Borough so we can continue use "Borough" rather than the awkward "Unitary Authority area". Phew! --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It should state that the district has unitary status still though. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "City of Milton Keynes" 

message: I see the infobox has City and Borough. Is this accurate? I have no idea what the law is but it seems strange? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: JMF, I'm as befuddled as you are. The articles for Southend-on-Sea and City of Canterbury state that, as well as cities, they are also boroughs. On the contrary, the City of Carlisle article simply states that it is a city and non-metropolitan district. I guess more research is needed, but regardless, the govt have put is an awkward situation in that we're dealing with a city called "Milton Keynes" which administratively includes a rural area significantly larger that the core urban area. So whether we should call the UA a city or a borough, depends on conclusions we can make from research. Anonymous MK2006 (talk) 11:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: , any advice? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:52, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  All districts with city status hold borough status but not all cities are districts with borough status such as with Wells and Chichester the civil parish holding the status and with Bath its the charter trustees for the former borough with city status. Crouch, Swale (talk)  16:02, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So in the case of MK (the U), it was and still is a Borough so we can continue use "Borough" rather than the awkward "Unitary Authority area". Phew! --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It should state that the district has unitary status still though. Crouch, Swale (talk)  17:05, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Still a borough too?

message: I notice that Grade II* listed buildings in the Borough of Milton Keynes has quite a few entries with no illustrations. So let's get out there and get snapping, to see if we can fill in some of the gaps. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photography project for the year, everyone