Talk:London boroughs

message: One of the sources referenced has been quite seriously mis-quoted, and I've had to amend it.  Previously, the article read:
"Major issues
Because of high housing costs in London and the impact of welfare reforms enacted by the Coalition Government, there are many challenges for local government in London. Local Government Guru, Richard Cressey, when addressing an audience of like-minded people in 2013, asserted that such issues could not be addressed "on a borough by borough basis". Instead, Cressey argued for it to be dealt with on a "pan-London basis". Everyone else agreed."
Quite simply, the quoted reference does not say that.
The source quoted does was a round table discussion, with multiple contributors from different backgrounds.    
* Firstly there is no reference, from any contributor, to "welfare reforms enacted by the Coalition Government".  This is because the piece is not a discussion about Welfare reform, which is mentioned nowhere in the article.  There is a discussion on long term HOUSING policy, with a perspective back to the 1960s and 1970s, but no discussion of current government welfare policy.
* Secondly, Richard Cressey's comment was not about Welfare reform, but about the boroughs ability to borrow money to fund infrastructure development - this is the quote in full:
"We're constrained in that we can only borrow against our own borough's size or scale," explained Cressey, who recommended that borrowing could be more efficient if authorities were allowed to borrow against other boroughs in accordance with their housing need. "The issue of housing is not on a borough-by-borough basis, it's on a pan-London basis," he added."
* Finally, the comment "Everyone else agreed"  'Everyone else agreed' to a subject that wasn't being discussed?  In fact, there is no reference in the article to 'Everyone else' coming to an agreement on any particular point at all - it was a round-table discussion.
This man's comments have been attributed to a completely different subject, one that wasn't even discussed in the article quoted.
This is very, VERY serious.  The article completely mis-quotes not only a source, but an individual.  I'm going to assume good faith, but we all have a responsibility to ensure that Wikipedia articles are backed up by references, and that those references are quoted correctly.  This was quite a lapse.
Indisciplined (talk) 00:17, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Misquoting a Reference

message: something needs to be done  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjbb66 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [edit] The percentage of ethinicity is utterly wrong for nearly all of the London boroughs and now some1 has changed it so you cannoy edit it 

message: Hi, the 'City of Westminster' has the status of London Borough - no more, no less. The same applies to the 'Royal Boroughs'. The 1965 Act makes no distinction, and the names were adopted by the new authorities from the warrants granted to prior authorities. The City of Westminster, derives its claim from privileges granted by Henry VIII; it was revived soon after it became a metropolitan borough around 1900. Most other UK cities were forced to reapply for their status in the local government reforms of 1975, but not in London - because the reorganisation had occurred ten years earlier. The City of London is the only authority with formal City status in London; and its also a ceremonial county and uniquely sui generis. ergo, the lead should read:
The administrative area of Greater London contains thirty-two London boroughs. Inner London comprises twelve of these boroughs plus the City of London. Outer London comprises the twenty remaining boroughs of Greater London.
If only because the sentence doesn't otherwise add up! (ie not 11 + 2 cities). Kbthompson (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  'City' of Westminster 

message: Both the City of Westminster and the City of London retain City status in the United Kingdom.108.196.40.52 (talk) 00:28, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: But the City of London isn't a "London Borough". (See the first sentence of the article.) -- Dr Greg  talk  18:32, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: "Possible Status" should read 2 cities not 1

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on London boroughs. 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/20111008081545/http://www.thesystemsthinkingreview.co.uk/index.php?pg=18&utwkstoryid=266 to http://www.thesystemsthinkingreview.co.uk/index.php?pg=18&utwkstoryid=266
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130421042212/http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2012/07/shared-illusions/ to http://opinion.publicfinance.co.uk/2012/07/shared-illusions/
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) 16:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Recently an editor, Ralbegen, created this great image :File:Citywide ward results of the 2018 London local elections.svg and used it on the last two local election articles (2018 and 2022). There isn't really an article for the borough council elections specifically, but I think this article would be a good space to add in a gallery of images similar to this. What are other's thoughts? --Jonjonjohny (talk) 04:27, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , I'm pleased you like the ward map! I'd be happy to make more for previous elections if I can find suitable shapefiles for them (or if other can provide shapefiles for them). I have an old enough version of Boundary-line that I could produce a results map for 2014 without too much trouble, but unless I can get shapefiles for the wards for 2010 and earlier then it would necessitate quite a lot more work. Ralbegen (talk) 16:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: (I had some time this evening and made a map for 2014, which I've put on the page for the 2014 elections). Ralbegen (talk) 19:32, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's excellent work thank you for making them, and I like the way they're incorporated into the election articles. It wasn't to put pressure on you to track the last 10 Local Elections, I just think it would be good to have a space on an article that displays them all together. --Jonjonjohny (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a gallery of ward maps on this page would be nice. I've completed the series back to 2002 now, which will be as far as I'll go for now. Please feel free to implement something here! Ralbegen (talk) 20:30, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. Jonjonjohny (talk) 11:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a gallery for ward results across Greater London 

message: The article says there are 32 boroughs but the list contains 33. Can someone knowledgeable fix that conflict and provide the correct number (or explain the reason for such a difference).
77.57.33.67 (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The first item in the list is "1. City of London (not a London Borough)". Does that not answer your question? -- Dr Greg  talk  16:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Typo?