Talk:Wellington Botanic Garden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Looks like a dupe

Oops -- it looks as if this page is a dupe of the Wellington Botanical Gardens page, so they should be merged. My fault, unfortunately, since I hadn't noticed that the other page already existed when I created this one. The other page has the more complete name, so I'd like to propose merging this page's content into the other one and redirecting this page over there. Any objections/approvals/comments? Izogi 22:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi again. I didn't get any response to the above comment (from either article's discussion page), so I've just taken the initiative and merged them together. I hope nobody minds. I changed my mind and decided to keep the Wellington Botanic Gardens page, because that's what the Wellington City Council's web page appears to refer to it as. Izogi 03:09, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] There's only one garden

Despite this article reflecting common usage, the official term is 'Wellington Botanic Garden' (without the 's'). Even the web page used as a definitive source above uses this term…

Any objections to changing it?

Barefootguru 19:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I guess you're right (if a little ... pedantic). Should we reflect official usage, or common usage? I don't have any major objections to changing it I guess. Ppe42 23:39, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

No objection from me, especially if it's the official name. Looking through those listed in [[Category:Botanical gardens]], there doesn't seem to be any established convention about whether to pluralise them or not. Izogi 06:03, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, will give people a few more days to respond and then rename the article, links to it, and any usage in the article and others I can find.

And yes, I know I'm a pedant ;-) I figure it helps Wikipedia achieve that encyclopaedic quality. Barefootguru 18:54, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Magic Tree

Climbing the tree is not recommended, not because it is dangerous, but because it is killing the tree. According to the gardeners, if it continues to be damaged at the rate it is currently suffering, it will have to be removed in 5 years.