![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am against the proposed merge of articles suggested it would cause a loss of information in many cases and an overloading of the main page. Notably a similar set of proposals was made by an anonymous user to disrupt the Portsmouth page and those of its schools information is here and also here -- Drappel 21:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone explain why the articles about the city suburbs have the suffix Hampshire rather than Southampton? e.g. Shirley, Hampshire rather than Shirley, Southampton (which is now a re-direct). As a Shirley resident, I don't consider that I live in Hampshire but rather in the City of Southampton, and I'm proud of it. On looking at the edit history, most of the articles were re-named in November 2006, with the edit summary "correct form of disambiguation". Where is this policy set out? Can you imagine renaming say, Edge Hill, Liverpool to Edge Hill, Lancashire simply because it falls within the boundaries of the old county of Lancashire? Daemonic Kangaroo 10:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The result of the move request was moved. No editors here seem to actually object to the move itself; the only objection made is that the current naming convention states differently. However, since the naming convention appears to be largely ignored, there is no real point in adhering blindly to it. Other places in Southampton can also be moved to the new style.-- Aervanath ( talk) 16:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Although this has already been discussed here and I believe that there is consensus for a move, User:waggers has taken exception on my talk page to my attempt to move Southampton districts, as he believes that WP:NC:CITY should override the normal usage of people in Southampton. I believe that we should employ WP:COMMON and WP:IAR and move Southampton districts from "district, Hampshire" to "district, Southampton" VJ ( talk) 12:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I've always felt that to disambiguate city areas by ceremonial county rather than city is ludicrous, but in previous discussions I and other users have been beaten into submission by the mantra "it's against the consensus" or "it must be a project-wide decision". Eventually, it's easier to go away and find something more useful to do with one's time. Following on from VJ's comment above, I've done a quick analysis of the categories contained within Category:Districts in England - the results are quite interesting:
Disambiguated by: Town/City County Districts of Bath 5 0 Areas of Bedford 4 0 Geography of Blackpool 7 1 Districts of Bristol 46 2 Districts of Cheltenham 3 3 Suburbs of Coventry 11 0 Districts of Derby 3 6 Districts of Gloucester 2 2 Districts of Leeds 25 8 Areas of Leicester 3 9 Districts of Liverpool 9 7 Districts of Northampton 0 6 Districts of Norwich 2 0 Districts of Nottingham 12 3 Districts of Oxford 6 7 Suburbs of Plymouth 11 2 Suburbs of Reading 1 8 Districts of Sheffield 2 10 Suburbs of Shrewsbury 4 4 Suburbs of Slough 3 2 Districts of Southampton 1 15 Towns in Southend-on-Sea 0 1 Metropolitan Borough of Walsall 3 7 TOTAL 163 103
As you can see, one thing there's not and that's a consensus to disambiguate by ceremonial county. If a consensus is created by usage, quite the reverse. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 19:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Personally I would very much support the change, I don't quite understand why the wikiproject's guidelines are as they are for cities, when suburbs like ours are locally considered part of the city first and foremost. I think an exception for cities makes a lot of sense, but it's a fairly inconsequential one so I've never gathered up the energy to argue for it ;) Playclever ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Following the successful RM, it's important that the national naming convention isn't left in the lurch. Input at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Disambiguation_for_English_city_suburbs would be most appreciated. waggers ( talk) 13:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Is Hollybrook officially in Shirley? If so, should the very weak Hollybrook page be included here instead of struggling on its own? Northernhenge ( talk) 13:23, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Shirley, Southampton. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am against the proposed merge of articles suggested it would cause a loss of information in many cases and an overloading of the main page. Notably a similar set of proposals was made by an anonymous user to disrupt the Portsmouth page and those of its schools information is here and also here -- Drappel 21:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Can someone explain why the articles about the city suburbs have the suffix Hampshire rather than Southampton? e.g. Shirley, Hampshire rather than Shirley, Southampton (which is now a re-direct). As a Shirley resident, I don't consider that I live in Hampshire but rather in the City of Southampton, and I'm proud of it. On looking at the edit history, most of the articles were re-named in November 2006, with the edit summary "correct form of disambiguation". Where is this policy set out? Can you imagine renaming say, Edge Hill, Liverpool to Edge Hill, Lancashire simply because it falls within the boundaries of the old county of Lancashire? Daemonic Kangaroo 10:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
The result of the move request was moved. No editors here seem to actually object to the move itself; the only objection made is that the current naming convention states differently. However, since the naming convention appears to be largely ignored, there is no real point in adhering blindly to it. Other places in Southampton can also be moved to the new style.-- Aervanath ( talk) 16:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Although this has already been discussed here and I believe that there is consensus for a move, User:waggers has taken exception on my talk page to my attempt to move Southampton districts, as he believes that WP:NC:CITY should override the normal usage of people in Southampton. I believe that we should employ WP:COMMON and WP:IAR and move Southampton districts from "district, Hampshire" to "district, Southampton" VJ ( talk) 12:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I've always felt that to disambiguate city areas by ceremonial county rather than city is ludicrous, but in previous discussions I and other users have been beaten into submission by the mantra "it's against the consensus" or "it must be a project-wide decision". Eventually, it's easier to go away and find something more useful to do with one's time. Following on from VJ's comment above, I've done a quick analysis of the categories contained within Category:Districts in England - the results are quite interesting:
Disambiguated by: Town/City County Districts of Bath 5 0 Areas of Bedford 4 0 Geography of Blackpool 7 1 Districts of Bristol 46 2 Districts of Cheltenham 3 3 Suburbs of Coventry 11 0 Districts of Derby 3 6 Districts of Gloucester 2 2 Districts of Leeds 25 8 Areas of Leicester 3 9 Districts of Liverpool 9 7 Districts of Northampton 0 6 Districts of Norwich 2 0 Districts of Nottingham 12 3 Districts of Oxford 6 7 Suburbs of Plymouth 11 2 Suburbs of Reading 1 8 Districts of Sheffield 2 10 Suburbs of Shrewsbury 4 4 Suburbs of Slough 3 2 Districts of Southampton 1 15 Towns in Southend-on-Sea 0 1 Metropolitan Borough of Walsall 3 7 TOTAL 163 103
As you can see, one thing there's not and that's a consensus to disambiguate by ceremonial county. If a consensus is created by usage, quite the reverse. -- Daemonic Kangaroo ( talk) 19:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Personally I would very much support the change, I don't quite understand why the wikiproject's guidelines are as they are for cities, when suburbs like ours are locally considered part of the city first and foremost. I think an exception for cities makes a lot of sense, but it's a fairly inconsequential one so I've never gathered up the energy to argue for it ;) Playclever ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Following the successful RM, it's important that the national naming convention isn't left in the lurch. Input at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Disambiguation_for_English_city_suburbs would be most appreciated. waggers ( talk) 13:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Is Hollybrook officially in Shirley? If so, should the very weak Hollybrook page be included here instead of struggling on its own? Northernhenge ( talk) 13:23, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Shirley, Southampton. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:02, 21 May 2017 (UTC)