![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why should this be separate from the South Downs main article? The SDNP comprises almost all of the South Downs and it is illogical to take the information here away from it IMO Peter Shearan ( talk) 05:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
02:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Cryotronic
The park has been approved but is not yet in place, or likely to be before 2011. Even the boundaries are not yet decided in certain areas. A park authority has to be appointed and to decide how planning powers are exercised.-- Charles ( talk) 09:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The National Park actually is coming into effect as of April 1st, although the full administration, planning powers are another year away. The Sussex Downs AONB and East Hampshire AONB cease to exist.
There is some work to be done in updating and inserting references to the National Park in articles describing places that are in the Park where appropriate.
I note the question above about two articles, South Downs and this National Park one. My suggestion would be that in due course, South Downs should contain details of the status and extent of the Park, in the same way as for most other National Parks such as Peak District etc. I then suggest that this article would be renamed Creation of the South Downs National Park which has a substantial 12-year-long history, some of which is currently found at Western Weald. Any comments welcomed. Sussexonian ( talk) 20:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
I'd agree with Pterre above that it would be desirable to keep two separate but closely-linked articles given that they are not one and the same thing geographically. For most NPs in the UK it makes pefect sense to have a single article for the geographical area and the designated landscape as they closely coincide bu there are exceptions. I've argued for two articles for the
Brecon Beacons (where there is currently just the one) and a similar brief discussion has been had at
Grand Canyon. There are good arguments for separate treatment of The
Cairngorms and the
Cairngorms National Park - which they currently have though the latter article is in need of improvement.
Does anyone know if any guidelines have been drawn up by Wikipedians who have considered these issues in more depth? A separate article could be written about the creation of the SDNP although for myself I think it would fit better as a major section within an expansion of the existing SDNP article given that it's an essential part of that topic.
Geopersona (
talk)
05:06, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
I've uploaded a location map of the South Downs to Commons (shown to right). I have not created an associated {{ location map}} template, but this can easily be done if desired.
If this is created, it allow enable creation a map of the South Downs similar to the one under construction at Talk:Dartmoor#Location map, and could be used in related articles (see this example). Hope people find it useful.-- Nilf anion ( talk) 22:05, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to fix that error? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I added ==See also== * [[Wiston House]] today. Wiston House is in the park, and has a link to the park. There could be a bit more detail about Wiston House added to this article.-- Dthomsen8 ( talk) 14:19, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
This article says that Arundel is inside the National Park, but the article on Aundel says it's outside!
Looking at the map on the National Park website, the boundary goes through Arundel. For example, the castle is inside.
So both articles are inaccurate! Mdrb55 ( talk) 12:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why should this be separate from the South Downs main article? The SDNP comprises almost all of the South Downs and it is illogical to take the information here away from it IMO Peter Shearan ( talk) 05:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
02:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC) Cryotronic
The park has been approved but is not yet in place, or likely to be before 2011. Even the boundaries are not yet decided in certain areas. A park authority has to be appointed and to decide how planning powers are exercised.-- Charles ( talk) 09:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The National Park actually is coming into effect as of April 1st, although the full administration, planning powers are another year away. The Sussex Downs AONB and East Hampshire AONB cease to exist.
There is some work to be done in updating and inserting references to the National Park in articles describing places that are in the Park where appropriate.
I note the question above about two articles, South Downs and this National Park one. My suggestion would be that in due course, South Downs should contain details of the status and extent of the Park, in the same way as for most other National Parks such as Peak District etc. I then suggest that this article would be renamed Creation of the South Downs National Park which has a substantial 12-year-long history, some of which is currently found at Western Weald. Any comments welcomed. Sussexonian ( talk) 20:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
I'd agree with Pterre above that it would be desirable to keep two separate but closely-linked articles given that they are not one and the same thing geographically. For most NPs in the UK it makes pefect sense to have a single article for the geographical area and the designated landscape as they closely coincide bu there are exceptions. I've argued for two articles for the
Brecon Beacons (where there is currently just the one) and a similar brief discussion has been had at
Grand Canyon. There are good arguments for separate treatment of The
Cairngorms and the
Cairngorms National Park - which they currently have though the latter article is in need of improvement.
Does anyone know if any guidelines have been drawn up by Wikipedians who have considered these issues in more depth? A separate article could be written about the creation of the SDNP although for myself I think it would fit better as a major section within an expansion of the existing SDNP article given that it's an essential part of that topic.
Geopersona (
talk)
05:06, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
I've uploaded a location map of the South Downs to Commons (shown to right). I have not created an associated {{ location map}} template, but this can easily be done if desired.
If this is created, it allow enable creation a map of the South Downs similar to the one under construction at Talk:Dartmoor#Location map, and could be used in related articles (see this example). Hope people find it useful.-- Nilf anion ( talk) 22:05, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to fix that error? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 16:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
I added ==See also== * [[Wiston House]] today. Wiston House is in the park, and has a link to the park. There could be a bit more detail about Wiston House added to this article.-- Dthomsen8 ( talk) 14:19, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
This article says that Arundel is inside the National Park, but the article on Aundel says it's outside!
Looking at the map on the National Park website, the boundary goes through Arundel. For example, the castle is inside.
So both articles are inaccurate! Mdrb55 ( talk) 12:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)