Talk:Edmonton, London

message: I plan to add some images to this reference. Is there anything in particular people not local to this place think would be usefull to see?
Yes,Maybe photos of the semi rural areas of Edmonton such as the River Lee and the William Girling reservoir.Northmetpit 15:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Local Photographer. Suggestions for images of interest in Edmonton? 

message: "Often refered to as the town of Edmonton"
I'm taking this out - I've been living in Edmonton since 1988 and I've never heard anybody say any such thing! BTLizard
:As stated in the article, until 1965 Edmonton had a town hall, and there are various references to the "town of Edmonton" up to that time. As an example, in 1621, The Witch of Edmonton (published in 1658) by Thomas Dekker, John Ford, William Rowley, et al. is set in "The town and neighbourhood of Edmonton". Coyets (talk) 08:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I grew up in the area in the 1970's, and it was still commonly referred to as "Edmonton Town" then, just as there was also "Enfield Town."  84.93.165.235 (talk) 14:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Town of Edmonton? 

message: Hi folks, I would not quarrel with the latest edit by user IMC in removing "historical" from the first sentence where it formerly said 
"The man-made River Lee Diversion .. forms the .. historical boundary between Middlesex and Essex." because as IMC says, the original boundary was the original river Lea, not the man-made diversion. But..
The lead sentence now says "The man-made River Lee Diversion .. forms the .. boundary between Middlesex and Essex.", which ceased to be true in 1965 with implementation of the London Government Act 1963. Can anyone suggest a better wording for this? Pterre (talk) 13:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundary 

message: I've taken that section out. As you say the diversion of the river was never the boundary, and as such a boundary no longer exists, it should be dealt with (if at all) in the 'history' section, not the introductory paragraph.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.182.112 (talk) 00:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Such a boundary no longer exists?  Yes it does!  There is still an Essex/Middlesex boundary.  The fact that bureaucrats redefined administrative boundaries hasn't changed that.  Even the government itself has acknowledged that the various local govt. changes (1974 etc.) were NOT decreeing changes in actual county boundaries or attempting to abolish counties as such.   87.115.56.207 (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  And still those who I must assume have some sort of agenda keep trying to insist that Middlesex no longer exists, despite the fact that they cannot cite anything which officially abolished it as a county.  The abolition of any particular government administrative body bearing the county name is NOT the same thing!    87.115.163.24 (talk) 12:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only agenda is Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about counties. Please read this. If you have a problem with the policy might I suggest you raise this in the appropriate forum. The fact that Edmonton (along with numerous other places which do not suffer repeated vandalism) was part of Middlesex prior to the creation of Greater London is referred to later in the article. Please also note that if you wish to show that Edmonton is still in Middlesex the onus lies on you to provide reliable references, not on anyone to disprove it. Pterre (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You talk as if these Wikipedia guidelines are somehow more important than facts.  That Edmonton had been within Middlesex for centuries does not seem to be disputed by anyone.  So where is the legislation which decreed that Middlesex, as a county, was no longer to exist?  Can you cite it?  Of course not, because no such legislation was ever passed.   Middlesex County Council, the local government body, was abolished, certainly.  But that's not the same thing as a decree that the county itself is no longer to be considered to be in existence.  87.112.142.201 (talk) 18:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Take your arguments to UKGEO.  Mr Stephen (talk) 18:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Where your claim, backed up by official documentation and statements will be completely dismissed because "established Wikipedia policy," despite having nothing to back it up, will be deemed to take precedence.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.48.115 (talk) 16:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  At UKGEO you can make your argument that the encyclopedia would be improved by changing the naming guideline.  Mr Stephen (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

text:  By the way (User talk:87.112.142.201) or (User talk:46.208.48.115) or whatever IP address you appear as next. I support  Mr Steven's repeated suggestions about raising your issue at the UKGeo Talk pages. I would also advise apart from your constant habit of ignoring advice the other reasons why your posts lack credibility is that you keep on appearing using a new IP address every day or so which becomes tedious for other editors wo have to establish if you are a new editor contributing or not. This may not be done on purpose but does not help your cause. Maybe you are just failing to log in but I assume its because you have not registered with an account. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? I encourage you to open an account as by doing this as you will achieve more. As will acting in a polite and respectful way towards other editors. Unfortunately you do not have a good track record to date when you repeatedly accuse them of being bureaucrats with an agenda and trying to further their own interests etc. Please see Wikipedia:Assume good faith and see here which deals with civility and avoiding the making of personal attacks on oher editors. I hope you are of the mind to take this advice on board.Tmol42 (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middlesex/Essex boundary 

message: Non-notable primary school Tacyarg (talk) 22:49, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Houndsfield Primary School]]