Talk:Stockholm Municipality

I think we should merge the boroughs onto one page, perhaps this one. Although based on the traditional divisions, they are purely bureaucratic constructions and very likely to be short-lived in their present form. Uppland 13:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Boroughs/Districts terminology

According to the website of the city of Stockholm, the main subdivisions of Stockholms stad (such as the stadsdelar Östermalm, Bromma, etc) are called districts, not boroughs as this article indicates. But then it becomes unclear what the subdivisions of each stadsdel (such as in Östermalms case: Gärdet, Djurgården, etc) are supposed to be called. Could someone look into this further –– Vikingviolinist 15:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Nämnder

While it is perhaps correct that nämnd would be best translated as "board" or perhaps "committee", the name the that the stockholm stadsdelsnämnder use to refer to themselves in English is "District Council", as reflected on the City of Stockholm website. Likewise, the kommunstyrelsen refers to itself as the "City Council" not the "Municipal Council". I think that it is important to respect these official names, to avoid confusion based on multiple systems of terminology for the same thing. –– Vikingviolinist 20:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, perhaps. "Borough" was anyhow not a very good translation, as the district councils/boards/committes are no own local government entities. But how to translate kommunfullmäktige? I don't know if there is an official English version of the Swedish Local government act (Kommunallagen). But if there is, the term would be municipal council, regardless of the translation preferred by particular municipalities. --Muniswede 21:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term used for kommunfullmäktige in the English version of the Swedish Local government act is actually municipal assembly.--Muniswede 21:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms

The template has an entry for "coat of arms". Thus I replaced the logotype that's uploaded under fair use with the actual coat of arms, which is released under a free licence. /Grillo (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that the coat of arms is a poor graphic icon for this article, since the "Stockholms stad" logo is the graphic used by the municipality on their website, printed material, garbage cans, etc. And since its entirely fair use, may as well use that one. — VikingViolinist | Talk 17:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's still not the coat of arms, as the infobox says should be in that spot. Every Swedish municipality has a coat of arms, due to law. Although not every municipality uses that coat of arms, and instead uses a logotype. As the infobox clearly states a coat of arms should be included, there's no reason not to use the existing one, which can also be used under a free licence. Fair use can't be applied where free alternatives exist. /Grillo (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The logotype of municipality isn't the coat of arms, the logotype includes it and the words Stockholms stad. Coat of arms must follow only the official blazon: "I blått fält ett krönt S:t Erikshuvud av guld". I agree with Grillo: this free image should be used. <flrn> 17:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added a logo parameter to the infobox template. Happy now? --Kildor (talk) 22:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW: Take a look at the article on City of London. --Kildor (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Imo the image in City of London should be changed. 2 wrongs don't make 1 right. /Grillo (talk) 16:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True. But the fact that there is a copyrighted logo or coat of arms at the top on a huge number of articles about companies and municipalities/cities here at Wikipedia might be seen as an indication that a majority of Wikipedians think it is okay to do so. --Kildor (talk) 16:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stockholm Municipality. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 18:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stockholm Municipality. 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://archive.is/20090224073839/http://eng.gov.spb.ru/figures/ities to http://eng.gov.spb.ru/figures/ities

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) 07:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]