Talk:Desborough

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Northamptonshire Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northamptonshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northamptonshire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorthamptonshireWikipedia:WikiProject NorthamptonshireTemplate:WikiProject NorthamptonshireNorthamptonshire articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is personal opinion allowed/desirable on Wikipedia pages?

This article about Desborough has an entry about new developments including a business park. The author suggests that this development would be a mistake but, but that is a matter of opinion not fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John F (talk • contribs) 23:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of citation and references.

I have added some citation templates due to the general lack of citations. XKronikz (talk) 00:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017 rewrite

I've done some rewriting and restructuring of this article to try and make it more encyclopaedic and more structured. I've removed duplication and added some new references. I've also removed a lot of content which gave a running commentary on various recent developments and the sagas of some non-developments, and didn't really belong in an encyclopaedia. More work needs doing, because the referencing and structure are still weak but hopefully this is a start, Neiltonks (talk) 13:09, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I like your version. Bmcln1 (talk) 13:34, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Desborough. 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/20130225191756/http://www.desboroughtowncouncil.gov.uk/Core/Desborough-Tc/Pages/Desborough_Town_Council_1.aspx to http://www.desboroughtowncouncil.gov.uk/Core/Desborough-Tc/Pages/Desborough_Town_Council_1.aspx

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) 00:19, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]