Talk:HM Treasury

Politics of the United Kingdom Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:HM Treasury/CommentsTalk:HM Treasury/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Where in the Wiki-universe can one consult articles about the treasury model ? (It is almost as though it were a state secret that) for decades now there's been a major department dedicated to projections based on econometric assumptions by which every major decision can be tried out for possible outcomes. It is time that some of these assumptions to be subjected to a fitness for purpose test themselves0poponax (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 09:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 16:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Here comes a grammar nazi!

Hi - sorry, but "her" ( or "his") in Her/His Majesty's is not a pronoun here, it's a (possessive) adjective (if it were a pronoun, it would be "Him Majesty's" when there's a king on the throne). Have done the change. Maelli (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updates requires

I think some of the ministers on this are no longer in the Treasury such as Felicity Buchan. RyanPLB (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

addition of unreferenced material

An anonymous editor recently added a substantial amount of prose and a large table to this article. Unfortunately, this material is almost completely unreferenced. The prose looks like original research and includes rhetorical questions. The table looks useful, but the reference used repeatedly throughout it (60 times!) is undefined so the material isn't particularly verifiable. How should these problems be addressed? -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potential addition of discord server

Is the official treasury discord server of enough note to add? Waity5 (talk) 19:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Waity5. Unless the Discord server is significantly covered by reliable sources, it probably wouldn't be appropriate to mention it here. An external link to the server (if HM Treasury has an official one) probably wouldn't be appropriate either as WP:ELNO says that we should generally avoid giving external links to social networking sites/chat rooms which include Discord. The Night Watch (talk) 19:57, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History section

This section is a garbled mess and urgently needs cleanup. There are large parts that are more relevant to the Bank of England than the Treasury. Sections which have no neutrality of tone, poor layout chronologically, vast sections of unsourced material, poor grammar and overlong sentences which sometimes make little sense. Ecrm87 (talk) 09:48, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to address this. However, I was only able to make it as far as the 18th century. Would somebody mind continuing from there?

I removed all the unsourced sections, as I believe they were written by an LLM. LunaExplorer (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ecrm87 ignore the above. I managed to get as far as the present day! LunaExplorer (talk) 16:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LunaExplorer Great work! It's a huge improvement. Ecrm87 (talk) 16:45, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James I in late 1500s?

"However by the late 1500s, under James I of England, debts mounted and the treasury reserves began to dwindle."

James VI of Scotland didn't become James I of England until 1603.

So it should either say that "by the late 1500s under Liz I", or "by the start of the C17th under Liz I and James I/VI" or "by the time James I became King of England in 1603" etc.

Wiki is meant to be factually accurate.

As I don't know whether it was by the late 1500s or by the start of James I's reign, I can't do the edit so could someone more knowledgeable than I please sort it out.

Ganpati23 (talk) 13:58, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]