Talk:Grand Union Canal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is this canal really part of London's architecture? I suppose it depends on what you understand by architecture... Ian Cairns 23:47, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to merge Old Grand Union with this article

A proposal has been made (though with no justification cited) to merge Grand Union Canal (old) with this article. I note that no similar proposal has been made to merge Grand Junction Canal or Regent's Canal which would be necessary for consistency. (I declare an interest as the initial creator of the old Grand Union and Grand Junction pages.) Note also that the old Grand Union page is now rather longer than when the proposal was made – as no justification was given, it is not clear whether the initial brevity of the article contributed to the merger proposal.

The GUC article is currently extremely thin on history of the modern Grand Union prior to 1929 – there is a lot of history associated with the canals which went to make up the modern Grand Union, including the Grand Junction, (old) Grand Union, and the Warwick canals. While there is a case to be made for including all of this here, and sticking with the redirects that have been put in place, to me it seems more appropriate to have a page for each of the canals as they were authorised and constructed under their historic names, and their history to 1929, and have this main article as the history from 1929 (plus a little beforehand leading up to the formation of the modern GUC), together with a detailed route description as the line exists today. I believe this to be the better approach for readers, and avoids what would otherwise become a very long single article.

What do others think? StephenDawson 14:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with your logic. I can't guess at the rationale for the proposal to merge. However, looking again at the introductory paragraphs, I do think it could be tightened up to make the historical context clearer. How about this:

The Grand Union Canal is a canal in England and part of the British canal system. The waterway stretches for 217 km (135 miles) and has 160 locks. The (present) Grand Union Canal was formed in 1929 from the amalgamation of several different canals. The Grand Junction Canal, the Warwick and Napton Canal, the Warwick and Birmingham Canals and the Old Grand Union Canal came together to form today's main line.

It connects the two largest cities in England, London and Birmingham, with arms to places including Leicester, Slough, Aylesbury, Wendover and Northampton.

then move the remaining material into a short new section "History", beginning with four {{seemain|xxxxxxxx Canal}}'s and containing a very brief summary of their content. I'd seriously consider putting the history at the end of the article. --Concrete Cowboy 17:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Inspired by that (of course the old GU doesn't form part of the main line of the modern GU), I looked again at the intro and have re-phrased it slightly. I've also expanded the history and created a section for it. I think the history is better at the beginning than the end as it complements and adds understanding to the route description, branches etc. StephenDawson 09:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

That sounds quite logical. Although the old Grand union didn't form part of the main line which is the London, Birmingham stretch. I think the history would be OK near the beginning as long as it wasn't too long. G-Man 18:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree in principle, but in practice I think the GUC article would become too long if it included the histories of its 11 constituents too. I don't feel that simply because the Old Grand Union and the modern Grand Union share names their articles should be combined, unless the other constituents were merged too – surely to do otherwise would be inconsistent. StephenDawson 09:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)