Talk:Thames Gateway

POV

I have quite extensively rewritten this site as it seemed to be quite POV against the project so I trimmed much of the arguments down to "Environmental Concerns".

I have moved the information and history of the North Kent Marshes to their own page as it was not strictly relevent to the page, (except of course to mention they are threatened) but it seemed a shame to lose such good info. I don't know much about it, so did little editing. on it.

I have also added brief information as to what the future and current aspects of the project are. MrWeeble 02:58, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I removed some more text which was blatant POV. The article needs more work to make it balanced. MRSC 08:58, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

I've toned down some of the more loaded phrases in the Scope section (some were phrases from a Prescott speech) and added ref to Barker report. The first part of the article is still very 'Government Press Release' style: that's POV too! Will try to do more on this article. JackyR 01:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Backed up various POV comments on the Howbury project with actual policy issues, but note the project was approved and now appears to be in the hands of a company called Roxhill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.18.36 (talk) 02:06, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Local Authorities

The article says the region involves fifteen local authority areas, and then lists sixteen. Sadly I don't know which is right, so cannot correct it. Magnate 17:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Kent International Gateway and the Swale crossing project

A couple of thoughts:-

• In "criticism" is there scope for the current furore about the Kent International Gateway, a logistics depot planned on green-belt land in mid-Kent (see this for evidence of public objections) and backed by the Thames Gateway initiative.
• Also I understood the second Swale crossing (Sittingbourne to Sheppey) was also part of the proposed infrastructure but could see no mention...

Cheers Dick G (talk) 07:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Citations needed!

This has the potential to be a Good Article, but is currently let down by unsourced statements and weasel wording. The citations should be very easy to find, so I've tagged the article with "citation needed" for the most obvious places where they are needed soonest. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

2010 update

The article needs to be updated to reflect the effects of the credit crunch and subsequent recession. Also the new coalition government has different housing policy which will have an impact, although this may not be reflected in published sources yet. MRSC (talk) 09:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Abolition of the RDAs is likely to have some effect, but it may just mean that there is less published. In the meantime I'm going to rename and perhaps break up the Criticism section, as these are deprecated in the encyclopedia. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Future investments

The article needs to be brought up to date.

• Howbury sustainable multi-modal freight rail in Slade Green was approved in 2007 and plans were still being revised in 2015
• Lower Thames Crossing
• London Paramount in North Kent

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thames Gateway. 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 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20090324050149/http%3A//www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid%3D19576 to http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=19576

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) 03:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Article rename?

According to this the article should be renamed - see [1] etc. for further details. Jackiespeel (talk) 19:29, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Dates

In addition to my comment above 'The area was designated during the early years of the Blair ministry...' - when? Jackiespeel (talk) 19:57, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Another link

Where would [2] fit in? Jackiespeel (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2022 (UTC)