Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for you're work on Great Amwell and Little Amwell, as you can see I noted there should probably be a split but the only difference it that Amwell, Hertfordshire now goes to Amwell#England rather than Great Amwell due to the fact that there is also a hamlet in St Albans district. I have fixed most links to point to one of the specific places but there are 4 links that I can't determine, I have also nominated Category:People from Amwell, Hertfordshire for deletion. Also since you have been working on other Hertfordshire parishes do you have any knowledge about Brickendon Liberty? That title redirects to Brickendon but perhaps should have a separate article however the name may indicate its an alternative name for the village meaning no separate article may be needed. Consider for example Little Amwell was also a liberty. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting out those Amwell links - I managed to find some extra sources for the last four and have disambiguated them too. On Brickendon, I think that plain "Brickendon" is the common name of the village itself, and used to be the name of the parish / parish liberty too - looks like the "Liberty" was only added to the name of the parish in 1929. I'm undecided on how this parish's pages / redirects should be structured so as to be consistent. Stortford (talk) 22:11, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It looks perhaps like there was a Rural and Urban parish[1] split from the original "Brickendon" parish in 1894. No information is give on the Urban one but there is on the Rural one namely that it was created from part of Brickendon in 1894 and then was abolished in 1929 to create the current Liberty parish. Its not clear if it needs a separate article but the only other missing current parish in Hertfordshire is Nettleden with Potten End. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:06, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Brickendon was split in December 1894 - Brickendon Urban was like many such "urban" parishes created that year - it was the bit of the former Brickendon parish which overlapped the borough of Hertford, so it was always governed by the borough corporation rather than having its own parish council. The urban parishes within Hertford borough were all merged in September 1900 to become a single parish called Hertford which was coterminous with the borough, so Brickendon Urban only existed for less than six years and was never self-governing. In 1929 Brickendon Liberty was created as a merger of Brickendon Rural with St John Rural (itself created in 1894 as the bit of the old parish of Hertford St John outside the borough). My feeling is that with some extra sources this is probably all best explained on the Brickendon page as the common name for the village and leave the Brickendon Liberty page as a redirect to it. This would be analogous to Letchworth, where the page title uses the name which is both the common name and historic name rather than the full formal modern name of Letchworth Garden City, which is a redirect. I'll try and put some words together over the next few days. Nettleden with Potten End probably would benefit from a short page about the parish, although linked to the two main settlements the parish is named after - again, I'll see what I can put together. Stortford (talk) 20:35, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see it is covered here regarding Brickendon Urban etc. It was pointed out to me on Commons years ago that most "X Village" and "X Town" parishes should normally redirect to "X" such as Aintree Village>Aintree so that may well also apply to "X Urban" parishes but not "X Rural" parishes for example Ellesmere Urban>Ellesmere, Shropshire but Ellesmere Rural is separate. That suggests Brickendon Urban should probably not be separate however it seems like Brickendon Rural also covered the village perhaps partly due to the boundary changes in 1900? However "Brickendon Liberty" is just a re-merge of the Rural and Urban parishes plus a bit of land rather than something new so yes it may well not need a separate article and as noted the Rural one probably doesn't either.

Regarding Letchworth, it seems like both "Letchworth" and "Letchworth Garden City" are used for the settlement, the former CP was "Letchworth Garden City" and current unparished area is "Letchworth" so those meanings are definitely synonymous, see the discussions at Talk:Letchworth. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've added content at Brickendon#Civil parish for the parishes. I've also created drafts at Draft:Hoddesdon Rural and Draft:Great Berkhampstead Rural for what look to be now the only 1974 former parishes that are missing. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that - I've made a few tweaks to Brickendon to add a bit more narrative and sourcing. I've also replaced the redirect page at Nettleden with Potten End with a short page about the civil parish, although left most information about the area on the separate Nettleden and Potten End pages about the villages - I see you've already tidied a few points there, thanks. Only point I'd make on your Hoddesdon Rural draft is that it was split from Hoddesdon on 4 December 1894, not 1 April - this was one of those changes which occurred on "the appointed day" for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1894, which was defined differently for different purposes. Splitting of parishes took effect on 4 December 1894, which was the day mandated for the first parish meetings. Stortford (talk) 07:16, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake about December rather than April but VOA says 31 not 4 December. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:21, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - Vision of Britain does say 31 December. The transition under the Local Government Act 1894 was not particularly neat - the Act itself only referred to "the appointed day", and it was left to subsequent orders of the Local Government Board to specify what that day was. In the end orders were issued specifying different appointed days for different purposes - the splitting of parishes took effect on 4 December, which was the day for the first parish meetings, parish councils came into their powers on either 13 December if no election was needed or 31 December if an election was needed, rural sanitary districts became rural districts on 28 December, and urban sanitary districts became urban districts on 31 December. I believe Vision of Britain presents all these changes as having taken effect on the last of those dates for simplicity. However, if you'd rather not go into the complexity of all that (especially given the stance Vision of Britain has taken on the point), perhaps just put the date of change as December 1894. Stortford (talk) 19:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Letchworth you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SounderBruce -- SounderBruce (talk) 07:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Please can you take a look at Berkhamsted Civic Centre? I have included a couple of sources which say the site was previously occupied by William Nash & Son whereas the Berkhamsted article suggests the site was occupied by a former Wesleyan chapel. I am not sure which is right: it might be that both are correct but at different periods of site ownership. Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - looking into it, I've found a couple of newspaper articles concerning the auction on 26 August 1908 at which the council bought the site (then called 135 High Street). These make clear that the former chapel was behind the main house which faced High Street, but that it had ceased to be a chapel and was occupied along with the rest of the premises by "Nash and Son", builders. A couple of extracts below:

Sales by auction, Bucks Herald (Aylesbury), 22 August 1908, page 4

"On Wednesday next... The highly valuable freehold property, consisting of the commodious dwelling house, No. 135, High Street, with extensive premises and yard accommodation in the rear, having the great depth of about 545 feet, in the occupation of Messrs. Nash and Son, builders and contractors... for sale by auction..."

Berkhamsted: Urban Council's Enterprise - An important development, Watford Observer, 29 August 1908, page 7

"By purchasing for £2,300 the premises in the High Street, occupied for a good many years by Messrs. Nash and Son, builders... the Berkhamsted Urban Council have made a decided forward step... The premises, 135 High Street, have ample accommodation for all the necessities of the Urban Council's work, which can in future be concentrated instead of being spread about... They have stabling in Station Road, the fire steamer is housed at the "Goat," the manual is kept at the Town Hall, the Council and committee meetings are held at the Workhouse Boardroom, the surveyor's office is in the High Street, and their yard is in the Lower King's Road, while stores and other materials have to be deposited in various out-of-the-way parts of the district...

The premises have a frontage to the High Street, including the gateway, of about 32½ feet... they comprise an area of about three quarters of an acre. Being situated in the very centre of the business part of the town and possessing just such accommodation as the requirements of the Council demands, the premises are splendidly suitable. In addition to the ample accommodation in the house, there is, just at their rear, a large brick and tiled building recently used as a store or workshop, but which in former days was used as a Wesleyan chapel... It is proposed to convert this building into a Council Chamber, for which it is eminently fitted, and for which it will need but little adaptation.

Facing it on the other side of the yard is a range of two-storied buildings, upwards of 150 feet long and about 20 feet wide, used as store rooms &c. This building will be altered for use as cart sheds, as well as for a fire station...

Biddings commenced with £1,000... the price was carried to £2,300, at which figure it was knocked down to Mr. North on behalf of the Council."

Hope that helps. Stortford (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's brilliant. And many thanks for the improvements you have made to the Berkhamsted Civic Centre. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you intend to do anything with Draft:Great Berkhampstead Rural and Draft:Hoddesdon Rural? like the some of the other former parishes. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - thanks for putting those together. I've now had a look at them both and slightly expanded their history to explain why these areas were made parishes in the context of the creation of urban districts and these rural parishes being the bits left over. Otherwise both pages look good to go. Stortford (talk) 19:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stortford

Thank you for creating 2002 Reading Borough Council election.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|SunDawn)). Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:35, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:North Herts Council logo 2021.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stortford

Thank you for creating 2002 Slough Borough Council election.

User:MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

update the results in the infobox too

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|MPGuy2824)). Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:58, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to Talk:Slough#Recent split to Borough of Slough there are some districts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about districts/to do which maybe should be split or merged.

The 1st 2 list districts that have significantly different boundaries to their settlements and should probably be split. The 3rd, Blackpool has similar boundaries to the settlement and should probably be merged (an article on the council already exists).

The "Local authorities" section lists districts that are combined with their settlement but no district council article exists. In the 1st 6 cases the district contains a single unparished area so probably no separate article is needed for the district per WP:UKDISTRICTS but an article on the district councils such as Crawley Borough Council (like Eastbourne Borough Council) probably should exist. The 7th case is a bit less straight forward as although the boundaries of the district are similar to the settlement the district contains 2 parishes that were moved to the district in 1974. In this case we could create an article on the district at City of Worcester, England (or perhaps like City of Lancaster just City of Worcester if its the only 3rd order unit with this name) or like Gloucester/Gloucester City Council and Cheltenham/Cheltenham Borough Council create Worcester City Council and have no separate article for the district (like what you've suggested for Slough. Thoughts? Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My initial thoughts would be:

• York - I don't see the pressing need for separate York and City of York articles. The surrounding rural area is relatively modest in the context of the city as a whole, and the York article does note that the administrative area extends beyond the main built up area. It's certainly nothing like as clear-cut as districts like Bedford or Winchester where the rural area goes well beyond the immediate hinterland of the namesake settlement. I'd rather keep City of York Council where it is though to focus on that organisation, about which there's a reasonable amount of information.
• Redditch - modern borough covers same area as pre-1974 Redditch Urban District (or if there have been tweaks since 1974 they appear to have been very minor). I think having separate Redditch and Borough of Redditch pages would add more confusion and duplication, rather than creating more clarity.
• Blackpool - I agree with the proposal to merge Borough of Blackpool into Blackpool.
• Crawley / Gosport / Hastings / Tamworth / Woking - I agree that a separate page for the councils of these boroughs would be good.
• Lincoln - likewise, I agree that a page for the council would be good, although I don't know whether there's been a discussion elsewhere on the convention for calling the page "Lincoln City Council" or "City of Lincoln Council". From a quick straw poll, most such pages seem to follow the "Place City Council" format, but an exception seems to have been made for "City of York Council", perhaps because that's the word order used by the council itself in its corporate branding. Personally I think "Place City Council" is neater and has the advantage of consistency with all the "Place Borough Council" and "Place District Council" pages.
• Worcester - I see no need for separate Worcester, England and City of Worcester pages - whilst the modern district did gain two parishes outside the old county borough boundaries in 1974, those two parishes are now largely covered by the urban area. A Worcester City Council page would be the better way of dealing with Worcester in my view. Stortford (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Might it also make sense to merge many district councils where the district is already split from the settlement such as Bedford/Borough of Bedford/Bedford Borough Council and when the district name only exists as a district such as South Hams/South Hams District Council. What I'm saying is merge Bedford Borough Council>Borough of Bedford and South Hams District Council>South Hams per Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about districts#Local authorities while keeping councils for districts combined with a settlement such as Eastbourne/Eastbourne Borough Council and those combined with another entity such as Isles of Scilly/Council of the Isles of Scilly. For Redditch and York a possibility along those lines would be to create a district article and then merge the district council there.

Regarding Lincoln I wouldn't be too worried about what the best title for the council is, I was going by City of Lincoln Council elections and what the council calls its self which I why I changed the suggestion. The title can be changed perhaps at RM later if needed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, 2002 Slough Borough Council election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest in this one. If I can just explain what has happened here - the Slough Borough Council page had grown to become incredibly long and unwieldy, with lengthy descriptions of each election back to 1997. The page had been tagged by other users as being too long and excessively detailed. Given that there are well-established pages for each election to most UK local authorities, I thought it made sense to copy over the material relating to each election onto separate pages, following the format used for other local authorities, which I did in June 2022. This allowed me to then do a thorough tidy and re-write of the Slough Borough Council page without completely losing the material on the historical elections. The material on the Draft:2002 Slough Borough Council election page and the others like it is no less sourced than it was when it formed a small portion of the Slough Borough Council page. I'm reluctant to put the historic elections material back on the Slough Borough Council page, but I also think it would be a shame to lose the historic elections material altogether if I don't manage to find additional sources to salvage the page you've put into draft. Stortford (talk) 14:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2002 Slough Borough Council election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MaxnaCarta (talk) 13:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Crawley Borough Council, Gosport Borough Council, Hastings Borough Council, City of Lincoln Council, Tamworth Borough Council and Woking Borough Council articles now exist. You might want to check everything is OK with them, thanks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing those. I've now managed to go through them and have made a few tidying tweaks. Stortford (talk) 18:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edits to the Governance section of the Woking article. There are a couple of things which you've introduced into the text which are not supported by the current references. I have added ((citation needed)) templates to highlight them. The sentences are:

• The four civil parishes within Woking Urban District after 1933 were therefore Byfleet, Horsell, Pyrford, and Woking; these were "urban parishes" and so did not have parish councils of their own, with Woking Urban District Council being the lowest level representative body.
• The urban parishes within the borough were abolished at the same time [1974], making it an unparished area.

Would you be able to provide sources for these please? Also I would like to move the first point about the "urban parishes" to a footnote. Would you be happy for me to do this?
Best wishes, Mertbiol (talk) 12:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - thanks for the feedback. I've now added some extra sources and moved the urban parishes point to a footnote as suggested. The perception I was trying to avoid is that there was some extra layer of parish government below the urban district council. The distinction between rural parishes (which could have a parish council) and urban parishes (which couldn't) ceased in 1974 and so the fact of there having been different parishes within the urban district prior to 1974 may be misconstrued by modern readers. Stortford (talk) 15:13, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Letchworth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Letchworth for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SounderBruce -- SounderBruce (talk) 09:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for creating this, now all current districts in England named after other types of places either have a separate article or a district council article. I've started Wikipedia:Notability (councils) of which for England this means generally county councils have separate articles from their counties (all at Category:County councils of England exist), district councils generally don't have separate articles from the district unless like Worcester there is no separate article for the district from the settlement of the same name (most at Category:Non-metropolitan district councils of England aren't separate) and parish councils of parishes named after settlements (or other features) may have articles but generally this is only large and important ones and like districts those like Elstree and Borehamwood Town Council that aren't named after a settlement etc generally shouldn't exits (at Category:Parish councils of England only 30 exist/are separate). Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So yes I'd also say the merge of Newtown Town Council was appropriate as the community name only exists as a community. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I wasn't actively looking for parish / community councils that had their own pages, but stumbled across Newtown Town Council whilst tidying up the various Powys authorities. It seems to me that if we've merged most district / district council pages the same logic should also apply to the lower tier parishes / communities and their councils too. Stortford (talk) 17:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes for the likes of those like Hurstpierpoint and Sayers Common where the name only exists as a parish but for those like Crewe Town Council the same logic as Eastbourne/Eastbourne Borough Council might apply to have separate articles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, although I wouldn't want to try and create articles for every parish council where the parish shares a name with a settlement. For the vast majority of such parish councils I would say a line or two in the page about the settlement should be adequate coverage, and only where a council is particularly large or notable will it generate enough content to justify a page itself. Stortford (talk) 05:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, many probably would not pass the notability guidelines and would end up being merged with the settlement/parish article. In most cases adding the info to a "Parish Council", "Civil parish" or governance section would probably be better. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ringwood Town Council (pop 14,181) was closed as merge due to back of notability. Maybe as a general rule only those with 20,000+ should exist but per WP:BIG I wouldn't stick too much to that. At List of the most populous civil parishes in England a few exist. Looking at List of English districts by population, ignoring the Isles of Scilly, City of London, Rutland and Richmondshire the smallest district by population we have a council article for is Tamworth (76,696) and Gosport (84,838) which is smaller than a few parishes. In terms of AFD if Norwich City Council ended up at AFD it would probably be kept, if Rossendale Borough Council ended up at AFD I'd expect it would end up being merged even if notable due to overlap, if Buxted Parish Council ended up at AFD it would probably end up being merged due to lack of notability even without the overlap. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've produced a list of missing former civil parishes at User:Crouch, Swale/Hertfordshire and those that exist at User:Crouch, Swale/Hertfordshire/Exists (see all). Its divided into:

• 1, parishes that are OS settlements and standalone settlements
• 2, parishes that are OS settlements that aren't OS settlements
• 3, parishes that aren't OS settlements.
• Urban parishes, not the same as the pre-1974 definition at #Woking (which I hadn't heard of until that discussion) but only those that are named with the saint or similar in addition to the larger settlement they are part of. These are least priority to create but should probably exist.

What could be added in addition to the missing ones being created is the population at most recent census before abolition and when the parish was abolished. Most articles already have the latter and the former is less important for those like Baldock that still exist as unparished areas or otherwise have current settlement data. For larger places like Bushey it may make more sense to put the population data in the governance section, for smaller places like Wakeley, Hertfordshire it probably makes sense to put it in the lead. For some like Horstead[2] (in Norfolk but just an example) have no information in VOB so I'd consider not bothering to create them. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Thanks for preparing that list. Whilst I follow your way of defining "urban parishes", I think the key to understanding the significance of these former civil parishes does lie in the formal urban / rural parish distinction that was initially made in the Local Government Act 1894. Quite a lot of your category 3 parishes were actually urban parishes. (If you're working from Vision of Britain, look on the "relationships and changes" tab at what the upper tier district for each parish was - if it was an urban district or borough, then the parish was an urban parish.) Many of these former urban parishes are prone to mislead by their names - for instance "Brickendon Urban" was part of the borough of Hertford, Sandridge Urban was part of the borough of St Albans, and "South Mimms Urban" was part of the urban district of Barnet. In many cases (Sandridge Urban being typical), they were a corner of an ancient parish (Sandridge) where the urban area of a neighbouring town (St Albans) had spilled over the parish boundary and had been incorporated into the urban sanitary district of that town prior to the 1894 act coming into force. The parish of Sandridge Urban was tiny, only comprising four or five streets on the (then) edge of St Albans.

The 1894 Act was effectively a cookie-cutter, turning each segment of the Venn diagram of overlapping parishes and sanitary districts into separate parishes. Many oddities of tiny urban parishes resulted across the country, and for the next few years there was a lot of consolidation and tidying, usually by uniting all the urban parishes within a borough or urban district into a single parish. For example, the urban parishes within St Albans borough, including Sandridge Urban, were consolidated into a single St Albans parish in 1898. The urban parishes never had their own parish councils, because the 1894 Act said only rural parishes could have parish councils. There was therefore never a Sandridge Urban Parish Council - throughout the civil parish's short existence it was governed directly by St Albans Borough Council.

I would prefer to say that civil parishes which were only ever urban parishes are not sufficiently notable in their own right to get a separate Wikipedia page. They could be mentioned in passing as part of the administrative history of the town, as I've done with the urban parishes of Haverfordwest, but I think it overstates the importance the urban parishes actually had at the time to automatically give all of them their own pages. I would prefer to say that we focus on the tiers of the geographic hierarchy which actually had an administrative body governing them - so the rural parishes, urban and rural districts, and the various types of borough (and for urban districts and boroughs, I'd say the relevant town's page is where discussion of former urban districts / boroughs which governed the town should go, as I've done at Baldock). That type of structure more closely aligns with how contemporary sources such as Kelly's Directories tended to arrange their lists of settlements.

The fact that you've got an "Unnamed, Hertfordshire" on your category 3 list illustrates the point. Assuming you've got this from Vision of Britain here: Unnamed CP, this urban parish was a slither of the old Little Amwell parish which was within the Ware urban sanitary district and so automatically became a separate parish within Ware Urban District in 1894. So little importance attached to it as a parish that it was never given a formal name, yet it existed for ten years until 1904 when someone secured an order merging it into the parish of Ware.

Thanks. Stortford (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]