Talk:Wandle Park (version 2)

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Wandle Park was copied or moved into Wandle Park, Croydon with this edit on 11:32, 23 August 2016‎. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Wandle Park was copied or moved into Wandle Park, Merton with this edit on 11:44, 23 August 2016‎. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Propose to make this a disambiguation page[edit]

I created two individual articles (Croydon and Merton) a few months ago as this original article is realistically about two separate parks, so in my opinion should be across two separate articles.

I have not had the time to create original content for each park's article yet, so both stub articles are lacking.

The final plan is that this page, "Wandle Park", will be a disambiguation page the links to both the Croydon and Merton articles. Any help will be appreciated!

Seanallen (talk) 16:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I'm not in the least convinced that either of them actually warrants an article. Wikipedia isn't a general directory, and the fact that neither article includes a single reliable source (by Wikipedia's definition) suggests to me that the coverage doesn't exist. We have articles like Wimbledon Common and Richmond Park, but that's because the parks in question are the subject of significant coverage in independent sources, not just because the park can be demonstrated to exist. On a quick skim, almost everything in Category:Parks and open spaces in Croydon is totally non-compliant with Wikipedia's standards and wouldn't survive AFD. ‑ Iridescent 16:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Understood... yes I do see your point. I'm not sure the Merton one does deserve its own page but I think there could be enough potential in the Croydon one to warrant its own page... therefore I thought the Merton one would need a separate one by default. I'm going to work on the Croydon page and see how far I get, including sources etc - I love local history so I reckon I can make it work. If you're still not convinced then fair enough really - let's see how we get on. Also cf. the article on Nonsuch Park which I overhauled a few years ago (check history). Seanallen (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]