Talk:Royal Borough of Greenwich

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

qualitative information[edit]

There is a need for qualitative information about the local authority and its administration. League Tables, Schools, Housing, administration, known corruption. etc. from local expert. Monophysite 16:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This article[edit]

I agree with the comment above. I have begun to tackle some of the ideas above with other SE London Boroughs with that in mind.

Before I do, I wonder if editors ever wonder why they need to list electoral wards the way they do? I am talking specifically about Coldharbour and New Eltham; all those Elthams; Glyndon; Kidbrooke with Hornfair; Thamesmead Moorings; and Woolwich Riverside. They cannot seem to realise the difference between New Eltham on its own - a suburban location with boundaries, however difficult to see on the ground - and Coldharbour and New Eltham, which is an electoral ward, having a definite set boundary (because then its electors are roughly equivalant to all the other wards in the Borough) of its own. Peter Shearan (talk) 10:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Wards are very transient things. Their boundaries tend to be redrawn every four-eight years due to population movements - to keep the electorate roughly equal - as you say. There's also a certain 'fuzziness' about settlements - since they began as centres that grew to meet each other - and a certain fluidity of definition because the stations were not always in the original centres. It's a problem that's common all over London. You just have to do your best to capture the complexity.
I think there's been some really good work done on this article, but a quick look shows some very long lists that don't conform with How to write about settlements; some of these would be better spun out into separate articles - see for instance Politics of Hackney, Hackney Council election, 2006, Politics of Croydon Council and Croydon local elections, for examples. I note that none of these are consistently named, or organised - and that's probably a discussion that should be initiated at WP:London. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 11:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Thankyou for you comments. I notice that the use of those long lists is pretty rampant as far as London boroughs are concerned, and I am glad to see that something has been done about it in at least a few cases. I also understand your comment about the 'fuzziness' of settlements, although this article shows that there are the original older settlements which can be used as a geographical basis for the article, and each one has its satellites in the suburban growth around them. A much better framework for the article, and more in line with the Wiki idea of writing about settlements: less use of lists, more of prose.
How do we get this discussed at the WP:London level?
In passing, I see that, in addition to my comments above, that the Woolwich Common and Shooters Hill article are more concerned with the geographical than the political. Editors don't check to see if what they are cross-referencing actually has a bearing on what is being talked about!! Peter Shearan (talk) 13:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and some authors confidently add long lists, etc in the particular area that they have knowledge in. Many will be confident that someone, somewhere will eventually tidy up the article! Generally, when people talk to each other, we do achieve some level of consistency - 8^). There's a talk page for the London project - just add the topic there. I haven't been particularly active recently, so, perhaps best if you run with it.
I agree about 'original settlements' however, because of the fuzziness of the real geography, they sometimes don't relate to the 'modern interpretation' of location. There's a considerable body of opinion that verges to the later, and care should be taken to accommodate them, else they have a nasty habit of removing the historical interpretation.
An example of a settlement that crossed a river, and migrated over half a mile up hill is Stratford, London. Thanks Kbthompson (talk) 15:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Royal borough[edit]

Apparently the status will be awarded on 3 February. There will be a new coat of arms: [1] if someone wants to have a go at drawing it!

I presume we will move this article move to Royal Borough of Greenwich- currently a redirect (to match Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames when the change kicks in?Lozleader (talk) 00:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)