Talk:Municipal Borough of Slough

Slough UD

This article is about Slough UD and is consistent in style with the other series of articles about UDs. Why has it been renamed as the Municible Borough of Slough and the Slough UD made a redirect without any discussion here first? Removing the Urban District Category classification is also incorrect as the content does not relate to this successor body. There is already an article called Slough Borough Council which deals with the Borough and would be the most correct place to put the Borough Category and add the early history of the Borough. I will revert the change and seek some discussion here first.Tmol42 (talk) 12:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

As more content has been added I will not revert as a curtesy but we still need to address this issue so meantime will just add back in the UD CategoryTmol42 (talk) 12:25, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't see this. I've added the category to the redirect Slough Urban District. MRSC (talk) 12:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Please take a look at Slough Borough Council. This I would suggest is the best place to do the renaming and adding in of early history of the MB and leave the integrity of this UD article as it was, with an appropriate note about the successor authority and link to the Municible Borough article. This makes the UD article consistent in style with other similar articles on UDs. Tmol42 (talk) 12:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid it doesn't. The approach that has been taken in all other similar articles where the district changed status, e.g. from urban district to municipal borough or county borough has been to deal with the unit in one article:

• Municipal Borough of Dagenham
• County Borough of East Ham
• Municipal Borough of Leigh
• Municipal Borough of Swinton and Pendlebury
• Municipal Borough of Walthamstow

All dealt with in the same way. MRSC (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

What is the point of this page anyway? Almost all the information is a duplicate of that contained within Slough, and the minute amount that isn't could quite easily be merged. This appears to be creating a page just for the sake of it, which is deprecated in the Wikipedia guidelines. MRSC's argument above is correct, but equally applies to the change from the Municipal Borough to the modern Borough, where the boundary changes were no more significant than the change from Urban District to Municipal Borough. Skinsmoke (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I've had a look at the Slough article and it is in serious need of improvement, in terms of factual accuracy, succinct prose and structure. If it were improved (in particular the 1863 to 1974 district information reduced to a succinct summary) this article would be much more viable. MRSC (talk) 10:58, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Municipal Borough of Slough. 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/20110628222805/http://users.ox.ac.uk/~peter/workhouse/Eton/Eton.shtml to http://users.ox.ac.uk/~peter/workhouse/Eton/Eton.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:18, 8 February 2018 (UTC)