Talk:City of London/Archive 1

message: More nitpicking: the link to the City of London is actually a link to The Corporation of The City of London, the public body which governs the City. (Sorry.) -- Robert Brook
Don't nitpick; Edit! :-) Thom2002 18:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: nitpicking

message: True or false: there is a difference between this article and London, England. 66.245.6.21 23:58, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: True. London, England redirects to London, which is an article about the city of London as a whole (see that article for details of what that means. This article is about a small area within London, confusingly known as the City (of London) for historical reasons. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 00:06, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

text: Pcb21 is right - it's true, very true, and an important, though initially confusing distinction. All the London articles do try to make this clear. For example if you look at the populations given in the first paragraphs of the two articles you are comparing, you get 7,000 vs. 7,000,000! :) If you are here, and you say The City, you mean the little bit in the middle. Nevilley 07:30, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

text: And you have been led to believe wrongly. John Biggs is the GLA memebr for City & East with covers the City of London. On matters of strategic importance (including for, example, large and tall buildings) the Mayor of London (ie head of the GLA, not the Lord Mayor) has the final say. Icundell 23:16, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  True or false?? 

message: Why is it marked sui generis? josh (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: because the City of London cannot be classified. It is unlike any other UK district. MRSC 06:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: But its classified as a city and cerimonial county the same as Bristol. josh (talk) 17:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It has that status and more. See: Corporation of London. MRSC 17:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you had to give it a name, 'mostly unreformed prescriptive borough' might be it (but don't add that without finding a source, as I just made it up).  Morwen - Talk 21:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status 

message: *As London has more professional football teams than any other city in the world, why are only the sides in "The we're alright jack league" listed? Lion King 05:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sport in London

message: reqmapin|England
Added because a request for a more detailed map has been up at Requested_and_orphan_maps for some time.  I did a quick search but didn't find anything that wouldn't be a copy vio.
::It could always use the map used in the new  template.  DJR (T) (WC) 17:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: One thing not addressed in this article is what it is like to be in the City of London or to live in it. Unfortunately I don't have time to write such a section at the moment, but here are some thoughts:
It is incredibly quiet at weekends. Eerily so, some might say. I'm pretty sure that the video to The Specials' song Ghost Town was shot in the City early on a Sunday morning (the actual song was in all likelihood about life in Coventry).
There was a very interesting documentary on BBC Radio 4 a few years ago about life in the Barbican complex, a high-rise housing estate built and (largely) owned by the Corporation. While many of the people who live there are wealthy financial folk, not all of them are. Some residents receive housing benefit (a means-tested rent subsidy) from the Corporation as they would from any other UK local authority. The Barbican is probably the only place in central London where you stand a chance of living a quiet life. Many of the Barbican apartments were sold off as an unforseen consequence of Maggie Thatcher's forced sale of council housing.
The Barbican Centre is a world class arts venue, but it is also a place where the City provides some services to its residents, such as a public library. - Ireneshusband 20:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LIfe in the City of London 

message: Could someone make an article explaining the business vote in City of London? I don't really understand what this involves. Kernow 19:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Buisiness vote

message: Its staed here  that the queen would have had to ask persmission to enter the city, and body know how that would have happened?
:I don't have any external sources, but my understanding, backed up to by WP's Temple Bar, London and Lord Mayor of London articles, is that that is a misunderstanding of the true nature of the situation.  The Monarch (way back when) would stop at Temple Bar, but was not actually asking permission to enter.  Still, historically the Lord Mayor was exceedingly powerful. --SiobhanHansa 01:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal Access 

message: The current article is very much about the history, demographics, government, etc but very little about what the City is about today.  The bullet points give a quick insight.  It balances out the article.  Of course it could also be written as a continuous text.  I though some bullet points showing some numbers are more pleasant to read and avoid the risk of original research.JGG 10:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that such lists are not in keeping with proper style (though it's nice information). They should be redistributed into appropriate encyclopedic paragraphs. --Eyrian 11:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well there are a lot of lists like that on Wikipedia.  At least no risk to fall into the original researchtrap.  Right now the article is too much about history, government and demographics.  But I agree if someone wrote some text about the "city today", this list of numbers may become redundant.  Of course, this is just one opinion.  Any other opinions?  86.129.77.234 12:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The City in numbers 

message: How long shall Bart's be about to in an encyclopedia ? One has to find a formulation thats lasts - or to come back in less than one or two years. Thanks. -- DLL   .. T 21:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barts', the hospital is situated at Smithfield, London, and is about to undergo  

message: What was/ is the Secondary of the City of London?Cutler 12:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondary of the City of London 

message: City is often referred to as a district in some senses so shouldn't this be mentioned? Simply south 11:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  District 

message: It is a city and Ceremonial county now what is Sui generis about that ?  --Barryob  (Contribs) (Talk) 01:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a unique entity in English and British geography and politics. The last remaining place governed by a medieval Corporation (it has never been replaced, unlike every other borough and city in the country) where the governance, elections, etc are completely different to the rest of the country. It does not fit in with the system of local authorities established in England - it isn't even a London borough. The only other sui generis place in England is the Isles of Scilly - a special district set up in the 1880s (IIRC) and which does not fit in either with the standard pattern of (non-)metropolitan districts and counties/London boroughs. The City is unique in so many ways. It certainly deserves the sui generis tag. David (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd have to agree. -- Jza84 · (talk) 15:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Sui generis]] 

message: :Image:StPaulsCathedral.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.
— Κaiba 22:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:StPaulsCathedral.jpg

message: Dear Sir/Madam:
How does a ship of a navigator know how to calculate a time change in a aparticular country?
Regards,
Rosemarie  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.58.93.45 (talk) 19:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How does a ship know when the time in a particular country changes? 

message: proposes adding the following to the article:
While it is worth mentioning in the article that Londonderry was named after London, but this is far too much weight, deviating from the subject of the article. For instance, the info about the walls is completely irrelevant to this article. I suggest something more along the lines of:
 Nev1 (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: One sentence works. One section does not. O Fenian (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

text: After giving this some more thought, why should we even single out one place when there are plenty of places called London. O Fenian (talk) 10:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A good question, although Derry is the most significant place on that list to be named after London it might be easier and fairer to just say in the article that there are lots of places called London (I hesitate to say name after without a reliable source, but the members of the list were all founded by colonial Britain, so it's common sense to draw the conclusion they were named after London, England, although I'm not sure about London, Kiribati). Nev1 (talk) 15:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Derry

message: I was always under the impression that the 'dragons' were, in fact, griffins.   They are always facing out of the city and they are supposed to defend the City against corruption.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MalcolmSm1th (talk • contribs) 06:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragons 

message: It says in the article that businesses located in the City of London have the right to vote in elections and it explains it well, but it gives no information about the people that live there. Do residents have a vote? If so, how many residents? I would guess that it would be all of them, but given the City's unique structure, that may not be accurate.
169.231.32.17 (talk) 07:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resident voters 

message: The article says: "The City of London is today a major business and commercial centre, ranking just below New York City as the leading centre of global finance.[1]"
However, the document [1] cited by the article shows that London ranks just above New York, though not in a statistically significant way. Another concern is that the document cited was published by the Corporation of London, which raises a question of bias.
Unless there is a range of supporting material I would recommend the article instead says that London is one of the most important global financial centres.
Flux 21:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leading Centre of Global Finance 

message: That it is is a VERY common misconception bound up with many, many people understandably not realising that 'The City' is just the Square mile. By putting a one sentence explanation at the end of the opening section I believe this misconception can be reduced. I am sorry not to have given this explanation before and hope it is now acceptable or a comment is made explaining why it is not acceptable. I appreciate that there are many, many things that NOT connected with 'The City' and they cannot all be given a reference, however as the Prime Meridian is researched world wide I hope an exception can be allowed. See Link to one of many WikiAnswers that is an example of this problem. The WikiAnswers link may not yet have been updated to show the latest Article here.Stranger on the shore (talk) 14:28, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh come on, this is stupid - it's got nothing to do with the City of London and it isn't a common misconception. I'm removing it again. Put it in the main London article, although I think it's explained perfectly well already there where Greenwich is. Look, in the end, we could put in all sorts of articles "btw - the Greenwich Meridian doesn't go through here". Further, we could put all sorts of information in the opening section to this article, disclaiming all sorts of supposed misconceptions, but it would end up getting silly. Sorry, it's not staying. David (talk) 15:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

text: Thinking about it, surely the best place to put the "it doesn't go through the City of London" information (not that it really is necessary - all the clueless have to do is look at a bloody map) is actually on the Prime Meridian page itself. David (talk) 15:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prime Meridian NOT within City of London. 

message: ... is here  if anyone wishes to update it (or develop the red links). I am the only person on the wiki at the moment so others are welcome. Jackiespeel (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: The London wiki article

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Cityoflondonatnight10.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: In the elections section, there is the following sentence: 
"In fact it effectively leads to the death of opposition politics and reinforces a political elite captured by the finance industry."
The phrase 'death of opposition politics' strikes me as un-wikipedia like and the whole sentence (though it may be true) lacks citation .  Is there perhaps a better way to word this?  --CGPGrey (talk) 14:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, totally biased and opinionated statement. Should be seriously changed or deleted entirely. BritishWatcher (talk) 15:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dramatic Sentence 

message: Under the 'economy' section, there is a sentence referring to Foreign Exchange that occurs in the City:
"Of the $3.98 trillion daily global turnover, as measured in 2009, trading in London accounted for around $1.85 trillion, or 36.7% of the total.[7]"
If you do the sum (1.85 / 3.98) you will find that the percentage is 46.5%. 
The citation for [7] is: 
: "Research and statistics FAQ". The City of London. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
This links to: http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Business/Business_support_and_advice/Economic_information_and_analysis/Research+and+statistics+FAQ.htm but the link is currently broken.
Can we find a current source to find the real statistic, or remove this statistic from the article?
T3Roar (talk) 11:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign exchange: 36.7% 

message: So, the City of London is 1.12 square miles. I'm with that up to now.
But, a population of 208,000 in 1700 ?
That made it approximately four times as populated as Macau, which is listed as the most densely populated country in the world.
The mind boggles!
92.239.71.235 (talk) 22:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says the population is about 7,900, but I'm not quite sure why the article says 208,000 in 1700; it may be referring to London proper rather than the City of London, but it could do with more explanation. Nev1 (talk) 22:38, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The City of London was incredibly densely populated until around the middle of the 19th century. David (talk) 11:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

text: This article said that the City's population was 20,000,000 for about 8 hours today due to an editor not appreciating the difference between London and the City of London. It now correctly states that the population is about 7000. The 20m figure refers to London as a whole and has little relevance to this article about the City. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Population

message: NebY, sorry, I don't want to give the impression I'm edit warring. The information is already contained within the blue bar at the top of the infobox below the name of the city. Rob (talk | contribs) 20:09, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Rob, I saw you'd changed the blue bar. That doesn't justify removing the information from the body of the infobox. As readers, we want the infobox to give us an at-a-glance summary and as editors we should not assume that the glance extends above the various graphics - a map, a flag, an coat of arms, a photograph - and effortlessly integrates the information held in the subhead with that listed in the body of the infobox. The body of the infobox should be functional by itself. Let's not remove this indication of the CoL's great peculiarity from it. NebY (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like unnecessary duplication to me. I would prefer the information in the blue bar to be adjacent to a 'Status' field in the body of the infobox, however the blue bar has become a convention unfortunately. How about having 'City and ceremonial county' in the blue bar, and 'Sui generis' solely adjacent to the status field? Would make sense since 'sui generis' is a description of its status, while 'city' and 'ceremonial county' are what it is legally established as. Rob (talk | contribs) 20:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's just keep the full information in the body of the infobox and deal with the blue bar separately. There's nothing wrong with duplicating information in the blue bar and the infobox body; on the contrary, it's often done - see City of Westminster, Manchester, Cardiff and more arguably Edinburgh. On the other hand, it's not convention to have a blue bar at all (see London, Ontario, East London, Eastern Cape, Derry, Glasgow, Paris, Vienna, Madrid) nor is there consistency in the content of a blue bar (Berlin, Athens, Rome). Do with it what you will! NebY (talk) 21:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Joining in here, I have to say that simple clarity should take precedence over emphasing uniqueness … I don't think there's any danger of the reader not realising that CoL is unique, anomalous - even odd, and we should be trying to de-mystify it as far as possible. Therefore I tend to agree with Rob984 that City & Cer. Co is ENOUGH for the blue bar. Most readers (including myself, and I'm from the UK) probably have no idea what a Ceremonial County IS, that's even before you hit them with sui generis (which many will also not understand).Pincrete (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine! If there's to be a blue bar at all, then let's keep it brief. I'd even go further than you and drop "ceremonial county". Of course, that would just leave "City" immediately below "City of London" and we just might all agree that that was superfluous.... NebY (talk) 22:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to both of you, I misunderstood who was proposing what … the only point I stick by is that clarity (and as far as possible de-mystifying), should be our aim.Pincrete (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status 

message: It may be that this is a current policy.  But based on the census equivalent (which in this case is just slightly bigger to almost all sides) it had a population of 319, 4.3% of the city, whereas covered 7.9% of its area.  I think this could be a mistake.  At first glance it seems Farringdon Without has a better claim to be residential.  But that may be because the ONS bizarrely and no doubt wrongly combines it with most of Castle Baynard and they both are about the same as Queensgate in terms of proportion of residential or lower % as are 2 of the 3 the biggest wards.- Adam37 Talk 14:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a notable residential district in Queenhithe (not Queensgate!) - also, the "area" you describe I suspect includes the River Thames (the wards along the Thames include that part of the Thames up to the City boundary at the river's centre)... remove the river element and you end up with quite a small ward (in purely "land area"). Argovian (talk) 21:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

text: In any case, the four wards that are "residential" are the four officially described as such when ward boundaries/members are dealt with. Farringdon Without no doubt has a sizeable residential population but it is also a huge ward and has the maximum number of members allowed for any one ward, so they don't makes things even more complicated by adding it to the "residential wards" list. Argovian (talk) 21:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Queensgate ward described as one of 4 most residential

message: Perhaps someone who knows the City better than I should check, but several of the historic buildings mentioned, (specifically Staple Inn in Holborn, in Camden) are actually OUTSIDE the City, I'm unsure about some of the others mentioned and the links don't specify the borough.Pincrete (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Staple Inn was Camden until 1 April 1994 when it became part of the City. Argovian (talk) 15:45, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Argovian, thankyou for the correction .... I liked the pics anyhow but thought we should be accurate.Pincrete (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buildings outside the City 

message: You have the City of London's sovereign state as the UK. But it's its own sovereign. In the same way that Vatican City is.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.224.85 (talk) 22:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Noo, its just tradition. The City of London's "sovereignty" isn't mentioned in any international treaties for example. Its even sub-ordinate to the Greater London Authority on relevant policy matters. It has no law-making powers, although it does apparently have the ability to "opt-out" of certain laws. But this is still up to parliament, not the city itself. Its definitely unique, but not a city-state. Rob984 (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sovereignty 

message: The current (new?) infobox image actually seems to show more of the London Borough of Southwark than of the City of London. The Shard, for example, is not in the City of London. I'm not sure where it has gone, but a few weeks ago there was an excellent image of the skyline taken from the west in December 2013 which encapsulated almost the entire City of London. The current image needs replacing. --TBM10 (talk) 09:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on City of London. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121017001559/http://www.unilever.com/resource/unilever-registered-offices.aspx to http://www.unilever.com/resource/unilever-registered-offices.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Research and statistics FAQ". The City of London. Retrieved 23 February 2012.
see:
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Business/Business_support_and_advice/Economic_information_and_analysis/Research+and+statistics+FAQ.htm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.231.37 (talk) 18:53, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  References Link broken 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on City of London. 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.agi.org.uk/SITE/UPLOAD/DOCUMENT/Events/AGI2009/papers/MartinLaker.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620210431/http://www.opsi.gov.uk:80/SI/si1993/Uksi_19931445_en_1.htm to http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1993/Uksi_19931445_en_1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927154602/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65DC8039-12C4-4AC4-8DAD-16F1608E99B7/0/cityarms.PDF to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/65DC8039-12C4-4AC4-8DAD-16F1608E99B7/0/cityarms.PDF
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060905022232/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/our_services/Education/schools/schools.htm#muscat_highlighter_first_match to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/our_services/Education/schools/schools.htm#muscat_highlighter_first_match
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) 11:44, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on City of London. 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/20100527210846/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/annual_wardmotes.htm to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/annual_wardmotes.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612211932/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/ward_boundaries.htm to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/ward_boundaries.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070823044832/http://www.bridgewardclub.org.uk/ward%20of%20bridge.html to http://www.bridgewardclub.org.uk/ward%20of%20bridge.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100114041508/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/ward_boundary_review.htm to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/LGNL_Services/Council_and_democracy/Councillors_democracy_and_elections/ward_boundary_review.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120930021928/http://www.middletemple.org.uk/the_inn/middle-temple-as-a-local-authority.html to http://www.middletemple.org.uk/the_inn/middle-temple-as-a-local-authority.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123111156/http://britishflags.net/cityoflondon.html to http://www.britishflags.net/cityoflondon.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1993/Uksi_19931445_en_1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629215430/http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/stationdata/cambridgedata.txt to http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/stationdata/cambridgedata.txt
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111023000216/http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/media_centre/keyfacts.htm to http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/Corporation/media_centre/keyfacts.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110902142354/http://www.londoncyclenetwork.org.uk/uploaded_files/library/documents/A0_City_v7.pdf to http://www.londoncyclenetwork.org.uk/uploaded_files/library/documents/A0_City_v7.pdf
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) 23:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on City of London. 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/20140109223713/http://baytrust.org.uk/about/the-history-of-the-bay-trust/ to http://baytrust.org.uk/about/the-history-of-the-bay-trust/
*Added  tag to https://web.barclayscyclehire.tfl.gov.uk/maps
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) 07:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: According to the UK census in 1931, population of the City of London was 19,657 in 1911, 13,709 in 1921, or 10,999 in 1931, respectively.  I suspect that the edit by 72.79.27.143 on 13 August 2017‎ must be wrong.Orichalcum (talk) 18:17, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something is wrong with the histroical population table of the City of London. 

message: Article says: Q: 
:Bede records that in 604 AD St Augustine consecrated Mellitus as the first bishop to the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of the East Saxons and their king, Sæberht. /Q
Does this mean "Augustine consecrated Mellitus as bishop and Sæberht as King"? If you use "as" for the bishop then use "as" for the king. If king Sæberht is the direct object of consecrated, it is far removed and makes that unclear. As written it suggests: that there was a kingdom of the East Saxons and their king. How can there be a "kingdom of their king"? The sentence also rouses the curiosity as to how Augustine got into the businees of consecrating kings in England??? (PeacePeace (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Punctuate an obtuse sentence 

message: Having read the Shaxon article and a few other online sources on the matter, I still don't understand which aspects of the city's special administrative status have these economic consequences. Many sources agree on this "tax haven" status and its connection to the city's sui generis form of government, but nobody (except for some conspiracy theorists) seems to be able to say in what this connection really consists. The business dominance over the city authorities, after all, should be a merely local matter. Is the city really - as German Wikipedia states - exempt from UK taxation? Or from some aspects of it? Which? I imagine that it's a really complicated matter, but maybe somebody can throw some light on it.--Oudeístalk  10:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The tax rules & rates are no different than anywhere else in England. It's a nonsense. If the German Wikipedia, or any other, is stating rubbish as "the City is a tax haven" or anything similar, that needs to be sorted out pronto. 213.253.7.254 (talk) 12:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Oh deary me... I've just seen the Criticism section in this (English) article... please can someone be "bold" and remove this utter nonsense?! Perhaps if no one can show it to be true on this talk page within 3 months? 213.253.7.254 (talk) 12:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Right. I've added a "Dubious" tag to this article, linking to this section of the talk page. 213.253.7.254 (talk) 12:14, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The sources provided in the criticism section are not reliable and are not based on fact but wistful, or just downright lazy or even duplicitous, conjecture. Sumorsǣte (talk) 08:32, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tax haven 

message: The Governance section of this page says, "Each ward elects an Alderman to the Court of Aldermen, and Commoners (the City equivalent of a Councillor) to the Court of Common Council of the Corporation. Only electors who are Freemen of the City of London are eligible to stand." However, the phrase "Freemen of the City of London" is linked to a section of the page Freedom of the City which implies that Freedom of the City is now for the most part ornamental and carries no substantive rights. So which is it? Either:
* It is incorrect that one must be a "Freeman of the City of London" in order to be elected to the city government, or
* The phrase is linked incorrectly, and "Freeman of the City of London" is different from "Freedom of the City of London", or
* The entry on the page "Freedom of the City of London" should be revised to add that Freedom of the City of London carries the very substantive right of being able to stand for election
Bayle Shanks (talk) 20:01, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It isn't really any of those. Freedom of the City is conferred on anyone standing for election who doesn't already have it, so having the freedom already doesn't confer any substantive right in that regard. Mauls (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necessity of Freedom of the City to stand for election? 

message: Why is this not mentioned in the article? It was actually the first “great fire of London.” Its affects can still be seen if you dig deep enough into the grounds of the City.2600:1700:EDC0:3E80:14DB:8E4C:942C:20E (talk) 00:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boudicca’s revolt 

message: This is clearly deeply misleading "This wider usage of London is documented as far back as 1888, when the County of London was created.[5]" The wider usage of London dates back long long before 1888. john k (talk) 20:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wider usage of London 

message: Yes, and it is in here: Flag of the City of London TwentytwoAug (talk) 06:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does London have a flag?