Category talk:South Gloucestershire District

UK geography Category‑class

	United Kingdom portal This category falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Gloucestershire Category‑class

	This category is within the scope of WikiProject Gloucestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gloucestershire 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.GloucestershireWikipedia:WikiProject GloucestershireTemplate:WikiProject GloucestershireWikiProject Gloucestershire articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Untitled[edit]

Articles in this section should also be in one of the subject area subcategories of Gloucestershire wherever appropriate as the subdivision of Wikipedia's English articles is based primarily on ceremonial counties. This practice is followed in the vast majority of unitary authority categories. Oliver Chettle 00:01, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Could somebody point me to this policy please? Note also the words "vast majority" <> "all". The thing is, as far as I am concerned, Bristol just isn't Gloucestershire (with the exception of the cricket team). It's culturally different, we have a different accent, and it's a city whereas Glos. is mostly rural. I'd propose to have all the S Glos articles in subcategories of this one, with this being a subcat of Category:Gloucestershire. That's just my opinion of how it should be so, again, please direct me towards the relevant policy or guideline :) --kingboyk 12:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm mistaken, Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(places)#Counties_of_Britain says we use the current administrative counties. Furthermore, the Gloucestershire article says "Historically, Gloucestershire has also included Bristol, but this has not been considered part of Gloucestershire since Bristol became a county corporate in 1373. Today the city is a county both ceremonially and administratively." --kingboyk 13:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Kingboyk's site for a reply from me. In addition most of South Glos is not the same as the City of Bristol so the argument above is bye the bye (or so the Duke of Beaufort claimed!). Bob aka Linuxlad

The following is pasted in from my Talk page, please make future replies here as I'll leave this page on my watchlist for a while.

I've also now created an extensive subcategory tree for South Gloucestershire, and have linked it into Category:Gloucestershire so that our friends and neighbours in the south don't get upset :-) I'm sure it's logically much better; we don't now have little Cotswold villages in the same categories as Bristol suburbs, we have more manageable stub and villages categories, and it's mostly very navigable. --kingboyk 18:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I may agree with you,in part, but you're on thin ice! 1) It's a policy so we should respect it (as everyone else has to date)2) It's too absolute - (eg I live in Thornbury, work in Gloucester, used to work in Berkeley - Tytherington (nearby) has a W-u-E postcode, just up the way in the GL13 (Berkeley) area) - I've known Stroud council officers who wanted to put the RFoD in with Wales. We all have different ideas of where our area and allegiances lie and someone else's more distanced view is probably the best compromise! Bob aka linuxlad —This unsigned comment was added by Linuxlad (talk • contribs) .

Well first you told me it was guidelines, which I checked - and they say admin counties have it. So why is my change against policy?! The fact is that it was not long ago the county of Avon, and now it (or most of it) is called South Gloucestershire. There's a clear, official border, and South Gloucetershire has been seperate by one name or another for decades. Bristol City hasn't been part of Gloucestershire for over 500 years! There's 104 articles in Glos villages and 87 in South Glos, so it's not even as if South Gloucestershire is too small to care about. Bottom line - we don't categorise by ceremonial county, and South Gloucestershire is functionally a county since it is a unitary authority. Granted, if the government changed their minds tommorow and we were merged into one it would have to change but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. There's recategorisation bots to take care of that kind of thing should it ever happen. --kingboyk 19:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--kingboyk 19:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another policy discussion, which concludes with saying that ceremonial and traditional counties are deserving of a mention for historical reasons, but that we mainly use the administrative counties and districts: Wikipedia_talk:UK_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Traditional_Counties. --kingboyk 19:39, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Category:Traditional county of Monmouthshire is interesting but probably overkill for our situation. --kingboyk 23:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My tuppance[edit]

South Gloucestershire clearly represents a separate entity from Gloucestershire as far as I'm concerned. There should definitely be a separate category for all things South Glos, as to have them under the incorrect heading of 'Gloucestershire' would be non-factual and misleading. At least I think so anyway.. ;_) Vanky 17:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]