Talk:General Post Office/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about General Post Office. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Telecommunications info. needed
This article does not go into much detail about the telephone, and telecommunications services of the Post Office. It needs to be remembered that the Post Office built up the national telephone network, as well as the initial BBC and ITV television networks (part of the reason for building the Post Office Tower in London, was to cope with growth in these services).
I have created a stub for Post Office Telecommunications [i.e. after 1969], but would someone like to add some info. relating to the period before then?? Thanks a lot. (RM21 20:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC))
Fair use rationale for Image:GPO badge.png
Image:GPO badge.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 17:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Accuracy, title, spin-offs, detail, March 22
In a search for information in WK about the history of land transport in England, I found this General Post Office article, several articles to which it links directly and indirectly, and several to which it does not link that overlap these.
Land transport is a significant topic. Postal services comprise an important part of its early history and vice versa. In trying to puzzle out what might be done to incorporate the outside material that I found, the following questions arose about the WK articles. The totality is a bit overwhelming and I wonder if any consolidation or a directory might help.
1. The opening sentence of the lede of General Post Office does not quite convey the information cited for verifiability. The lede states "The General Post Office (GPO)[1] was officially established in England in 1660[2] by Charles II". The referent states "When Charles I opened up his ‘royal mail’ for use by the public in 1635, he laid the foundations for the Post Office as an institution. Oliver Cromwell established the General Post Office in 1657 and after the Restoration, Charles II authorised the General Post Office to operate the ‘royal mail’." Should the lede be revised?
2. The lede states "The postal service was known as the Royal Mail because it was built on the distribution system for royal and government documents." This may be correct. Alternatively, the service may have been called the Royal Mail because it was a creation of the crown. I would like to know which. Should a reference be provided or the statement deleted?
3. Besides carrying and delivering mail and operating the telephone service, the Post Office provided major financial services to the general public -- Post Office Savings Accounts and Postal Orders (to transfer money). There is a WK article on Postal order. Should this be linked, or absorbed?
4. Should information about the methods for carrying mail, from the post roads and post boys, through the sorting operations on the Flying Scotsman (train) be mentioned here and/or the Flying Scotsman article?
5. Should the park, near the PO HQ in London, with memorial to postmen who died in the course of duty be mentioned.
6. Should the linking, and lack of linking, from related terms, be improved? Postal history seems to deal entirely with philately. It links to Postal system which redirects to Mail which restricts developments in United Kingdom to Postal reforms that contains unreferenced value judgments and inaccuracies. Do these need action?
7. Should Mail#Postal reforms link to General Post Office?
8. The Royal Mail article does link to Mail coaches. Could that article be improved, e.g. by information in Her Majesty's mails: an historical and descriptive account of the British Post Office by William Lewins, published by Sampson, Low and Martin in 1864.
9. Does splitting off Post Office Telecommunications as a separate article help or hinder someone trying to trace what happened?
10. In Post Office Telecommunications, does the statement "the Conservatives, driven by an ideological preference ... justifying the policy ..." impute integrity of members of the Carter Committee (see George G. Macfarlane) who made the recommendation? If so, would rewording be warranted?
11. Should the title of the article Postal services in the United Kingdom be expanded to indicate the scope of its contents and that of the articles to which it links? Michael P. Barnett (talk) 15:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
P.S. Re item 11, maybe it is the lede that needs expansion. Michael P. Barnett (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Lombardy office
A source for expanding coverage of it or even splitting off a separate article. Another. — LlywelynII 13:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Image of a letter
- This a really interesting image- but how does it relate to the article? As we know Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. They are often an important illustrative aid to understanding. This image, unfortunately seems to do neither: at no other point in the article is 'QSL' mentioned, or 'GCW29', or 'Quaglieri', etc., etc. AS such, it has no context; the reader has no idea what it is there for or what it is illustrating. Cheers, Muffled Pocketed 08:55, 8 November 2016 (UTC)