Talk:Sydenham, Leamington Spa

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Warwickshire, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Warwickshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.WarwickshireWikipedia:WikiProject WarwickshireTemplate:WikiProject WarwickshireWikiProject Warwickshire articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Delete

Don't delete it, a lot of people live there and it does exist. AJUK ^Talk!! 10:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC) [reply]

I know Sydenham. If you wish this article to stay, please help establish some notability. references, and change tone to encyclopaedic. Currently, a merge with Leamington is a minimum. Widefox (talk) 08:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you help establish notability - you can follow the links to help establish this. Widefox (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the notability notice without establishing notability. Widefox (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Being an sizable region within the town it is significant. Snowman (talk) 12:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

Approve; there is no guideline for neighborhoods, but my reading of the proposed guideline clearly states the article should be merged with Leamington - see Wikipedia:Notability_(Places_and_transportation) "A neighborhood or sub-section of a city/town/village should be incorporated in the article about the town or city it is located in, unless it has exceptional notability of its own." Widefox (talk) 09:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Populated, legally-recognized places are, by a very large consensus, considered notable, even if the population is very low." See Wikipedia:Notability (geography). Snowman (talk) 16:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approve; I used to live on Gainsborough Drive in Sydenham and have affection towards it. However whereas Lillington and Cubbington were formerly villages and therefore have enough history to fill a page, I believe Sydenham was build recently on green fields. The current article is very brief, and includes little to distinguish it from any other residential area in Britain, yet I can't think of anything else of note that could be added. --Ukslim (talk) 14:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Notability (geography). Snowman (talk) 16:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; I think Sydenham is notable and should have its own article. There are several districts in Leamington and so the main page would become imbalanced if one district was mentioned more than the others. Snowman (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that Lillington is clearly notable (see refs on the article). Can you provide any references for the notability of Sydenham? Maybe there's something in the industrial estate of notability, but I don't know of any. Widefox (talk) 10:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added references and I am sure many more are available. It is significant to the area and it contains a large social housing estate. I am sure it would be possible to write a sizable article on the subject. Snowman (talk) 14:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the need to quote the notability guidelines:

A neighborhood within a major city that has a substantially noticeable difference to the surroundings.

A neighborhood or sub-section of a city/town/village should be incorporated in the article about the town or city it is located in, unless it has exceptional notability of its own.

However, any area that has something exceptional about it merits its own article, and ideally the area should be discussed in reliable sources. The notable feature could be for instance (but not limited to) a business or tourist district, a place with a noticeable economic effect upon a region (jobs and/or raw materials usage/production), or a place where some historical event occurred.

Italics mine. --Ukslim (talk) 14:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no references I quote "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves." . The article has no references of opinions of reliable authors, only interpreted primary sources. WP:RS Widefox (talk) 20:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The size of the social housing in the estate would have a significant effect on the surroundings, and the housing in the estate is significantly different and has a density higher to most of the other housing in the locality. I think that by using these criteria it should have its own page. Snowman (talk) 15:15, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can tell you the most notable thing I've heard - Sydenham is the most multicultural area in Warwickshire. I have no reference for that, so it is just hearsay. Anyhow, the point is...the article still has no references for notability, let alone "exceptional notability". Should every school result in a notable area? No. Widefox (talk) 18:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On inspecting a map it is clear that the density of the streets in Sydenham is different to the surrounding areas. I have been there and I can confirm that as an area of Leamington is should have its own page. I think that the Leamington article needs more linked pages with text and not more text itself. Snowman (talk) 20:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is you original research WP:OR. So, there's no refs for this article then? and yes, I'm also fond of Sydenham and know it well. ;) Widefox (talk) 07:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A map can provide a lot of verifiable information. Snowman (talk) 11:00, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Purpose-built suburb of the town, no independent history, no exceptional notability of its own. Too many primary sources in this article as well. Brilliantine (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I summarise that consensus has been reached. Result: Merge. I will proceed with merge. Widefox (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose being familiar with the area, I know it and it is obviously a district area worth of its own article. AJUK ^Talk!! 12:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]