Q1: What is the background surrounding the use of British (in practice, mostly English) counties on Wikipedia?

A1: In the early years of Wikipedia, circa 2003-2005, a schism appeared between editors regarding the use of the counties of England. Because of alternate perpectives on the successive reformation of counties, one body of editors wrote out the locations of places using ' modern' units (e.g. Finsbury is an area of the London Borough of Islington), whereas another body preferred to use ' historical' units (e.g. Finsbury is an area of Middlesex). Both groups citied resources and examples—some better than others—that supported a variety of preferences, resulting in an unfortunate period of confusion, inconsistency, and later rivalry and bitter dispute. Articles suffered greatly from low quality and poor maintainance because of persistent and unproductive edit warring over this issue of counties—particularly on articles relating to England's major metropolitan regions.

After a long investigation into all the merits of both perspectives, and a deeply acrimonious discussion between those involved, an official content guideline entitled Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK counties) (WP:UCC) was produced to summarise the debate and outline the acceptable way forwards for editing on Wikipedia. ^[1] This policy reflected the consensus of those involved, and, in a nutshell, specified that "we should use the current, administrative, county" on Wikipedia for a plethora of reasons.

Q2: Why is one perspective favoured over another?

A2: WP:UCC is balanced judgement—a broad consensus informed heavily by reliable sources. The approach of using modern counties (i.e. those now used for local government and statistical purposes) is consistent with most local and national government literature, some private sector literature, will be familiar to most readers and writers, and indeed the approach will apply even if boundaries change again. It is also easy for people to find out where a particular village is, as maps with administrative boundaries are freely available online. While historic county maps do exist, it is hard to find one with maps of modern urban areas and city and borough boundaries transposed against historic counties. It is also consistent with other encyclopedias such as the 1911 Encyclopedia, which specifically calls Cromarty a 'former county'.

Q3: Doesn't this mean that Wikipedia is biased and 'hiding' historical counties?

A3: No. WP:UCC permits the use of several county-type divisions of England in articles. For instance, the phrase " Chadderton is a town within the Metropolitan Borough of Oldham, in Greater Manchester, England, historically a part of Lancashire." is a perfectly acceptable format on Wikipedia. Simillarly, although Harrow is in Greater London, the phrase " David Jones was born in Harrow, Middlesex on 3 July 1964" is good practice because Greater London was established 1 April 1965—a year after David Jones was born. See also, WP:UKGUIDE.

Q4: But the areas created in 1974 were not "true counties"—weren't they 'just' areas for local government?

A4: Since antiquity, counties have always been land areas for local government within a country. The ancient counties of England are historic subdivisions of England ^{[2] [3]} established for administration by the Normans and in most cases based on earlier Anglo-Saxon kingdoms and shires. ^{[4] [5]} They were used for various functions for several hundred years, ^[6] initially for the administration of justice, collection of taxes and organisation of the military, and later for local government and electing parliamentary representation. ^[7] The Local Government Act 1972 reformed local government in England by creating a system of two-tier metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties and districts throughout England. Putting aside the vast list of resources that describe these areas as 'counties', the Local Government Act 1972 itself states:

For the administration of local government on and after 1st April 1974 England (exclusive of Greater London and the Isles of Scilly) shall be divided into local government areas to be known as counties and in those counties there shall be local government areas to be known as districts.

—  LGA1972

Q5: But the modern counties are just used for local government—they have no role or value in our lives or culture.

A5: Modern counties fulfil several functions and have many roles. The Local Government Act 1972 states:

For the purposes of commissions of the peace and the law relating to justices of the peace, magistrates’ courts, the custos rotulorum, lieutenants, sheriffs and matters connected with any of those matters, new counties shall, without prejudice... be substituted for counties of any other description.

—  LGA1972

As an example, Greater Manchester is used for local government, ^[8] emergency services, ^[9] public transport, ^{[10] [11]} for demography and statistics, ^{[12] [13]} for parliamentary representation, ^[14] as a Lieutenancy area (as one of the ceremonial counties of England), ^[15] for Shevralty, ^{[16] [17]}, Lord Lieutenancy, ^[18] for regulating and promoting tourism, ^[19] sport ^[20] (e.g. as a football association region ^[21]), is used in national media, ^[22] and in local media, ^[23] by English Heritage, ^[24] by the Land Registry, ^[25] and numbers other reasons—the point being that modern units go far beyond 'just' local government. Wikipedia is not a space for speculation and opinion about their value.

Q6: What about the "traditional counties"? They were never abolished were they?

A6: A review of the literature only finds "traditional" as a neologism of the pressure group Association of British Counties (ABC) (and their subsiduries/associates/followers such as the Friends of Real Lancashire and the Historic Counties Trust). Reviewing the academic literature around counties finds the terms "ancient county" and "historic county"; sources at the time of the 1965/1974 changes show that "traditional county" was not in evidence, although it is now taken to mean any county that was established in antiquity, including those that have been abolished and those that still exist with adapted boundaries. The Association of British Counties, headed by "Britain's favourite astrologer" and "psychic" Russell Grant, ^[26] espouse an alternative paradigm that appears to originate in the 1980s/1990s, where at some point (possibly 12th century) "traditional counties" were formed. At some later stage (possibly 1889) new administrative areas "wrongly" called counties are formed, later adjusted (1965/1974) and at other times. However the 12th century "traditional counties" have continued to exist unchanged. The ABC have lobbied various organisations and used publicity to broadcast this view. This is the origin of the term and its meaning—"traditional counties" is a fringe theory that originates from ABC.

Q7: I have proof that the "traditional"/historic counties were not abolished! There are numerous official statements from the government that they still exist!

A7: Putting aside the fact that this would not change the policy WP:UCC, there are two quotes of dubious origin routinely asserted as the 'official' and legal basis of the continued existence of ancient English counties. They are typically cited by advocates of "traditional counties" without proper investigation, sourcing or understanding—they routinely appear on blogs, and websites such as Facebook (e.g. here), but they ultimately derive, complete with misattribution, from the Association of British Counties.

The first quote is often cited as a government policy statement published in The Times and reads:

However, this quote is not a government policy statement, it was the commentary of an anonymous official—no author is provided. The UK government does not publish its law or policy in a newspaper, but in acts of parliament. Facebook and ABC are not reliable sources.

The second quote touted as the law/official policy on counties is dated September 1991 and supposed to come from the Department of the Environment. It reads:

This quote not from the Department of the Environment, but is a selective portion of a debate in the House of Commons from a junior parliamentary Under-Secretary. That is to say, it was the opinion of the Member of Parliament, and is not part of English law.