Talk:John Lewis Newcastle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject.
Stub rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
50px
This article is supported by WikiProject North East England, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to North East England on Wikipedia. For further information or to participate, you can visit the Project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale
Mid This article has been rated as mid-Importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Change of name to John Lewis

it's obvious Lawsonrob feels passionately about the name change, but they are just opinion - not facts.

to keep in line with wikipedia's neutral point of view and verifiability policies, the article as worded previously needed to be changed.

Lawsonrob might have doubts about the name change being prompted by the staff, but you need to find a verifiable source to back it up... the page includes a link to a quote from the staff member who suggested it.

The claim that their was much local opposition to the name change... again a source is needed for this.

Similarly, if you think the 'majority' of shoppers still refer to it as bainbrige - then provide a source to back it up.

DrFrench 22:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Merge with John Lewis (department store)

I'm recommending that this, and the other John Lewis articles for the individual stores in this chain be merged with the main article. I can't think of any reason to have separate articles for each store. --Bugwit grunt / scribbles 22:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

True, but many of the individual stores have a history as independent businesses under other names, which it is important to catalogue for posterity. If John Lewis is compacted into one entry, only the history of the core chain is likely to be preserved and this is by no means the full story - lawsonrob

  • So, having each store with its own section within one root article would not preserve these histories? Having individual articles just seems a little over-the-top to me. --Bugwit grunt / scribbles 23:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)