Talk:Slade Green: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 86.173.103.127 - "→County: " |
|||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
@86.173.103.127. I have deleted your entire sub section about a so-called local dispute about addresses. It is a barely disguised personal agenda not based on good references. You do give two citations, one, Hansard, is obviously good, but it isn't about Slade Green or about London-Kent, not even indirectly. The other one is not a good source. I have kept the Hansard citation because it is good in the right place, so I have put it in the Pembrokeshire article. It would also fit well in the Royal Mail article. Please try to get familiar with some basic WP principles and rules before putting in such poorly referenced personal opinion. If this issue of 'counties' was as simple as your input makes out, there would not be such contradiction and confusion throughout society and in hundreds of WP articles. [[User:Roger 8 Roger|Roger 8 Roger]] ([[User talk:Roger 8 Roger|talk]]) 05:45, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
@86.173.103.127. I have deleted your entire sub section about a so-called local dispute about addresses. It is a barely disguised personal agenda not based on good references. You do give two citations, one, Hansard, is obviously good, but it isn't about Slade Green or about London-Kent, not even indirectly. The other one is not a good source. I have kept the Hansard citation because it is good in the right place, so I have put it in the Pembrokeshire article. It would also fit well in the Royal Mail article. Please try to get familiar with some basic WP principles and rules before putting in such poorly referenced personal opinion. If this issue of 'counties' was as simple as your input makes out, there would not be such contradiction and confusion throughout society and in hundreds of WP articles. [[User:Roger 8 Roger|Roger 8 Roger]] ([[User talk:Roger 8 Roger|talk]]) 05:45, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
||
@Roger 8 Rover. Confusions throughout society |
@Roger 8 Rover. Confusions throughout society are made worse by the precise action that you just demonstrated. Parliament is at the place for discussing UK-wide issues, and Pembrokeshire is the example that Parliament used on one occasion. The evidence that MPs debated is equally applicable to all UK regions affected by border changes. You can't say that a UK-wide decisions about criminal acts occurring in Pembrokeshire do not apply outside Pembrokeshire, so why make any equally absurd distinction about debates in Parliament? Constituency boundaries also change, and it is your own subjective selection criteria that is helping to compound the contradictions and confusions in society |
||
Revision as of 11:35, 5 February 2017
 | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Looking Good!
This is a great effort for a first article! Kukini 15:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
Four Pubs?
There's the sports pub on the A206, the Lord Raglan, and the Corner Pin. What's the fourth - is there another one along the A206 that i've forgotten?
Depends what you count as Slade Green I guess - maybe the original article was including the Railway Tavern which has now closed, and I haven't changed this as I've been counting the pub on Boundary Street, but maybe that's more Erith than Slade Green, although in North End ward. Sladegreenforum 13:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
2 pubs & 2 clubs
There are only 2 pubs now in Slade Green. The Lord Raglan & The Corner Pin. The football club & railway club also sell alcohol but these are members only clubs. The pubs that one were along Northend road have now gone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.253.230 (talk) 10:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
County
@86.173.103.127. I have deleted your entire sub section about a so-called local dispute about addresses. It is a barely disguised personal agenda not based on good references. You do give two citations, one, Hansard, is obviously good, but it isn't about Slade Green or about London-Kent, not even indirectly. The other one is not a good source. I have kept the Hansard citation because it is good in the right place, so I have put it in the Pembrokeshire article. It would also fit well in the Royal Mail article. Please try to get familiar with some basic WP principles and rules before putting in such poorly referenced personal opinion. If this issue of 'counties' was as simple as your input makes out, there would not be such contradiction and confusion throughout society and in hundreds of WP articles. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 05:45, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
@Roger 8 Rover. Confusions throughout society are made worse by the precise action that you just demonstrated. Parliament is at the place for discussing UK-wide issues, and Pembrokeshire is the example that Parliament used on one occasion. The evidence that MPs debated is equally applicable to all UK regions affected by border changes. You can't say that a UK-wide decisions about criminal acts occurring in Pembrokeshire do not apply outside Pembrokeshire, so why make any equally absurd distinction about debates in Parliament? Constituency boundaries also change, and it is your own subjective selection criteria that is helping to compound the contradictions and confusions in society