Talk:Shepherd's Bush stations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Why two different articles?

Do we really need two articles, one for each Shepherd's Bush station? Wouldn't it be less confusing if they could be different sections of the same article? After all, someone who doesn't know London very well isn't going to know in advance which article to they need to read to find out which station they need to know about. (If you see what I mean.) Having all the information in one place would make everything a lot simpler for them. P Ingerson 02:28, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Potentially it might be less confusing. But historically, they are two separate stations, physically, they are two separate stations, and geographically, they are separate (by several hundred metres), even if they're close together. The logic for two articles is the same logic that means there should be two articles for Venice, Italy and Venice, Florida. They might be named the same, but they are totally different places. Plus, I did provide a disambiguation page, and the two articles are crosslinked... 82.69.90.223 20:38, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Maybe it's just a difference in style. Personally, I'd rather have just one big article on everything in the Shepherd's Bush area (including the tube stations) divided into sections and subsections. I don't normally like stuff split up into different articles when it could be merged together. IMHO it's already bad enough that the tube stations aren't together with the rest of Shepherd's Bush; but we could at least put them together with each other. (And the Venice example doesn't count, because Italy and Florida aren't part of the same area.) P Ingerson 11:16, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Disambig

Does this article count as a disambiguation page? It names 2-3 stations but has additional info so unsure. Simply south 21:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)