Talk:Guernsey (island)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because it is the result of an ongoing split of Guernsey, which is currently undergoing restructuring. To reflect the creation of this article. Rob984 (talk) 11:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rob is broadly correct with regard to deleting this article: articles about Guernsey need to be re-organised into at least three articles, this one, another about the Bailiwick and yet a third about the Jurisdiction of Guernsey. (No "splits" need to be created, merely a clarification of article titles and contents.) There certainly is no need for speed whatsoever! Wait until the discussion has run its course and a clearer consensus emerged. BushelCandle (talk) 02:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

I strongly disagree that it is necessary for an article on Guernsey the Island as well as Guernsey the jurisdiction.

looking at this article I would point out the following is wrong or worthless -

(1) Introduction - The Island is NOT divided into 10 parishes, it is the Jurisdiction of Guernsey that is divided into 10, the islands of Lihou, Herm and Brechou are included in parishes.
(2) History - There is nothing new in the section that is not also in the Jurisdiction and also applies to the Bailiwick, in fact some of the section is about the Bailiwick, not the Island.
(3) Politics - WRONG - The Island has no politics itself, it is the jurisdiction that has politics, as people on Herm, Jethou and Lihou have a vote.
(4) Geography - OK, but nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(5) Parishes - WRONG - As explained above it is the jurisdiction that is split into parishes
(6) Tourism - OK, but nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(7) Transport - Refers to Bailiwick transport both in paragraph and in the (see also) and nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(8) Demographics - These are for the jurisdiction as no adjustment has been done to remove the island of Herm, Brechou or Lihou populations, again nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(9) Emergency services - OK again nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(10) Education - The section includes all schools in the Bailiwick, not just the island again nothing new that is not in the jurisdiction.
(11) Culture and Sport, apply to the jurisdiction not the island and refers to the bailiwick.

It would look really odd to readers to have two articles to read. It would be like having an article on Rome that excluded the Vatican.

So just one article, covering the jurisdiction please, as we had before. Ânes-pur-sàng - À la perchoine 10:14, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Although from a purely Euler diagram perspective, 3 articles would be ideal, upon lengthier reflection I fear that stance may be creating a rod for our own backs as far as maintenance and IP editors are concerned. Instead, I am now tending towards keeping the original article and, when the text makes clearer the distinction between Bailiwick and Jurisdiction content, this article can then be deleted. Still no need for haste and impatient reversions right, left and center... BushelCandle (talk) 10:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but this was never intended as a third article. If you ask me, all new articles should be redirected back to Guernsey and discussion should commence as to how that article is split. The numerous discussions going on across these articles is far from ideal. Rob984 (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also Ânes-pur-sàng is not suggesting we cover the jurisdiction and Bailiwick at one article. He is suggesting we cover the island and jurisdiction and one article, separate from the Bailiwick at another article. This was the consensus before you intervened. That doesn't matter now, as we now need to establish a new consensus. However I definitely agree with Ânes-pur-sàng on having the jurisdiction and island covered at one article.

Can we centralise this discussion somewhere?

Rob984 (talk) 12:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The information in this article has now been relocated back within the Guernsey article. Ânes-pur-sàng - À la perchoine 12:51, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your great work. The consensus at Talk:Guernsey was that this article is now turned into a re-direct to Guernsey, so that is what I will now do since there are no opposing voices. BushelCandle (talk) 13:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]