62:, where we can decide a nationwide policy on disambiguation for unitary authorities. In this particular case though, I don't think there should be much opposition to using Southampton as the disambiguator (is that a real word? It is now!), since it was a county corporate for centuries, IIRC. Certainly, that's the way things are done in Bristol (though that's even more complicated, because of the Avon situation!).
158:
Park is essentially the posher end of
Millbrook, around the Regents Park Hotel. I don't think we have enough information about either locality to merit an article of their own - there are plenty of similar areas (such as Merry Oak and the Moorlands Farm estate in Bitterne) which don't have articles and, frankly, don't need them.
78:
I have no strong preference either way, although a short while ago an editor moved all the "XXX, Southampton" articles to "XXX, Hampshire" in an effort to ensure national consistency. Provided we're consistent, I'm happy. At a push, I'd say "Southampton" makes more sense - after all, if we go with
277:
to this template, and the Wards template now redirects here. My only qualm in doing this was the loss of a full alphabetic list. Still, I think there was too much duplication, and the value of including the hierarchy of areas is more significant than alphabetical order. I have retained the original
185:
I've had a bit of a change of mind over the weekend and think
Regents Park is suitably distinct from Millbrook to justify an article of its own. (I also think Harefield is notable enough on its own). I've started to expand Regents Park and have removed the PROD tag but feel free to go through AFD
171:
Thanks for the clarifications. I know of
Nicholstown but forgot its 'New Town' name, and it's also not where described on the page! (Nowhere near Polygon!) I'm going to clarify this and use the 'Nicholstown' name. Regents Park I'm still highly dubious of, the page has no content and as far as I can
157:
New Town is sometimes also known as
Nicholstown and it's a small area between Bevois Valley and St Mary's - essentially the area around St Mary's Road, including Clovelly Road etc. Arguably it's a subdistrict of St Mary's itself, although I have friends who would disagree with me on that. Regents
47:
We seem to use
Hampshire as the disambiguation area. Is this really sensible? I find it a bit offputting to say Hampshire. What's wrong with Southampton? It is, after all, a unitary authority outside of Hampshire County and so the only reason for using Hampshire is ceremonial reasons. Should the
172:
see is still pretty much
Millbrook. I'm going to propose deletion and see if anybody has any comments. As regards any new district articles, my general thought is, if somebody can write some decent content about it, it's probably worth it. For example,
245:
There have been a lot of changes to the title of this template since it was introduced. It's certainly correct that we don't use "district", since that has a more formal meaning in local government terms. However, all the areas listed are
250:
of
Southampton. (Incidentally, I don't agree with the definition of the term in that article - suburbs aren't necessarily on the outskirts of a settlement, as the article goes on to say in the Definitions section). They are not all
31:
Which bit don't you understand? Southampton is governed by a unitary authority; not all of the areas listed are governed by that authority (some are governed by
Eastleigh, Test Valley or New Forest district/borough councils).
145:. I have no idea where Regents Park is, and New Town is not a term I've ever heard used for the area in question. Do these really exist, and if so could the articles be expanded? If not, I'm minded to get rid of these two.
195:
No that's fine by me! So long as it has content to describe it and it adds something, which it does now, and it really is a distinct area, that's worthwhile as an article. I've reinstated it on the template.
278:
template name and navbox title, all previous suburbs/areas are still linked, and articles with the template will still be included in the
Districts of Southampton category.
230:. I'm working on a location map linking to all the geography articles in the area, but I've literally only started work on that today so there's a way to go yet.
105:
59:
205:
Cool. PS, you shouldn't really have removed the link from the template unless/until the article itself was deleted! Consider your wrist slapped. :)
176:
is not (as far as I know) large enough to justify having an article, but the article itself is good and encyclopedic so is actually worthwhile!
222:
Alan, on my talk page you mentioned maps. I'm now trying to get away from using the pink maps showing distinct areas (such as
274:
227:
223:
259:
article, that's superfluous. So I can't really see what objection there could be to "Suburbs of
Southampton".
142:
84:
138:
283:
173:
80:
22:
255:
the City of Southampton, as some are outside the city boundary. We don't really need a link to the
119:
112:
66:
287:
263:
234:
209:
200:
190:
180:
162:
151:
122:
91:
69:
52:
36:
25:
279:
197:
177:
148:
116:
109:
63:
49:
260:
231:
206:
187:
159:
88:
48:
disambiguation tag not simply be the next largest place in the location hierarchy?
33:
186:
if you still think it should be deleted. I won't be offended, I promise!
115:
22:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC) And then found you'd done the same. Doh!
247:
87:
and I can't see that happening without kicking up a great big fuss.
256:
273:
I have now carried across the changes that I introduced in the
58:You may wish to start a discussion about this at
17:Outside area administered my unitary authority
106:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject UK geography
60:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject UK geography
8:
269:Merge with Wards of Southampton Template
79:pre-1970s counties we'd have to move
7:
14:
228:Template:Location map Southampton
224:Image:Southampton City Centre.png
264:11:55, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
1:
275:Wards of Southampton template
104:I've started a discussion at
37:12:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
26:08:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
303:
210:15:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
201:14:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
191:08:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
235:20:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
181:22:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
163:20:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
152:18:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
123:23:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
92:22:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
70:22:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
53:17:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
288:12:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
137:I'm rather unsure about
143:Regents Park, Hampshire
85:Christchurch, Hampshire
139:New Town, Southampton
81:Christchurch, Dorset
226:) and instead use
133:Dubious Districts
294:
302:
301:
297:
296:
295:
293:
292:
291:
271:
243:
135:
45:
23:Flutefluteflute
19:
12:
11:
5:
300:
298:
270:
267:
242:
239:
238:
237:
220:
219:
218:
217:
216:
215:
214:
213:
212:
166:
165:
134:
131:
130:
129:
128:
127:
126:
125:
97:
96:
95:
94:
73:
72:
44:
43:Disambiguation
41:
40:
39:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
299:
290:
289:
285:
281:
276:
268:
266:
265:
262:
258:
254:
249:
240:
236:
233:
229:
225:
221:
211:
208:
204:
203:
202:
199:
194:
193:
192:
189:
184:
183:
182:
179:
175:
170:
169:
168:
167:
164:
161:
156:
155:
154:
153:
150:
146:
144:
140:
132:
124:
121:
118:
114:
111:
107:
103:
102:
101:
100:
99:
98:
93:
90:
86:
82:
77:
76:
75:
74:
71:
68:
65:
61:
57:
56:
55:
54:
51:
42:
38:
35:
30:
29:
28:
27:
24:
16:
272:
252:
244:
147:
136:
46:
20:
280:Playclever
174:Harefield
198:AlanFord
178:AlanFord
149:AlanFord
50:AlanFord
21:What? --
261:Waggers
248:suburbs
232:Waggers
207:Waggers
188:Waggers
160:Waggers
89:Waggers
34:Waggers
241:Title
117:Joe D
110:Joe D
64:Joe D
284:talk
257:City
141:and
120:(t)
113:(t)
108:.
83:to
67:(t)
286:)
253:in
282:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.