Talk:London Borough of Havering

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for London Borough of Havering:
  • more details of what is going on in the Havering section of London Riverside
  • redevelopment of the rest of the borough
  • more details about council
  • turn final lists into prose
  • turn attractions list into tourism section (get hold of local tourism strategy)
  • references


I was wondering if it would be useful to point out some confusion surrounding Havering, perhaps a small mention in the article would be appreciated. The confusion is about most of Havering having an Essex postal address but are a London Borough. The confusion is such that many inhabitants of Havering believe they are, in fact, a part of Essex. Some groups (such as the Third Way political party) wish Havering to withdraw from the Greater London Assembly and become part of Essex, leading to even further confusion. Even national television news could not make up their mind when there was a murder in Havering. They first reported the incident happening in Essex, then East London and then North East London. Perhaps this would be better as a discussion side-note but a mention in the article would be appreciated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 15:23, 26 June 2006.

Doesn't have an Essex postcode. It has a Romford post code, which is also in London.

The "E" Postcode is not just a London post code either, as it serves a part of 'official' Essex as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

A lower class of people[edit]

An editor has added a description of an area as "known for attracting a somewhat lower class of people due to the demographics of the surrounding area." It is hard to regard this as complying with Wikipedia's policy of "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias". It has been sourced to and specifically to an opinion piece there, but Wikipedia's policy on reliable sources specifically excludes "any website whose content is largely user-generated". I removed the statement when it was completely unsourced and will now restore the section to its original state; we now move into the "discuss" stage of the Bold, revert, discuss cycle. NebY (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)