Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
// request.cf · coarse context
A page that knows where it met you.
Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the River Bulbourne article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hertfordshire, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.HertfordshireWikipedia:WikiProject HertfordshireTemplate:WikiProject HertfordshireHertfordshire
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver
"I lived at top lock 45 G U canal as a boy ,our only fresh water supply came from the RIVER BULBOURNE from a well in the garden.This location is at the canal junction with the WENDOVER arm. The river some 20 yards down the well is the Herts Bucks border.I used to stand on the well legs astride ,like you do,one half of me in Herts other in Bucks.That was 35 years ago .I would like to know if it is still flowing after all it was a natural flow in those days.Who supplied the above info.I think the facts are wrong."
by User:86.138.240.191. Rich Farmbrough 16:04 11 May2006 (UTC).
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
(woe water def ..the noise made when stepping into a puddle:)) no seriously recording a verified local tradition is one thing, but its not factual and giving random instances (not sure when started, may have been even by me, without thinking it might be read to be factual claims) is both subjective and not encyclopedic. ~ BOD ~ TALK10:03, 13 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
