Talk:Farnley, West Yorkshire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Farnley, West Yorkshire is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's assessment scale. Please provide a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
|
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-Priority on the Project's priority scale. | |
[edit] Old Farnley to Farnley (Leeds) or Farnley, Leeds or Farnley (West Yorkshire) or Farnley, West Yorkshire
How about a change of title for our article? I consider Farnley to be the original correct name for our village, but we would need to add Leeds or West Yorkshire after it, because there is also a Farnley in North Yorkshire. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.30.250 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- I have moved the article to Farnley, West Yorkshire, as suggested. I have also merged the article for New Farnley into this one, since both were relatively small. I tried to avoid any implication that New Farnley is "officially" a part of Farnley, as I suspect that this is not the case. I merged merely because both articles are more pleasant to read and easier to maintain that way. I expect that if this article grows considerably, it will be split again. --Hans Adler (talk) 13:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Unsure about the join of what is essentially 2 different entities unto 1. I would have just kept the 2 articles and moved them to Old Farnley, West Yorkshire and New Farnley, West Yorkshire if a move was needed. I personally prefer small articles about a single entity rather than a larger article that covers several different locations or entities, which is confusing especially when you start adding the infoboxes. Keith D (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I understand your point. I am not going to do this everywhere now, but there were a couple of special circumstances here that I felt made this a sensible step:
- Proximity of the two settlements.
- Both are quite small.
- Together they coincide approximately with the settled area inside the triangular area defined by Ring Road / A58 / Back Lane / Tong Road.
- The schools for New Farnley seem to be in Farnley (according to my map).
- The articles referenced each other, e.g. the New Farnley article mentioned Farnley Hall in Farnley.
- The name of New Farnley indicates that originally it was seen as dependent on Farnley. The relation between the two names needs to be explained, including the Farnley = Old Farnley thing. This is best done in one place.
- Having three Farnley articles is potentially extremely confusing:
- Farnley = Old Farnley, West Yorkshire
- New Farnley, West Yorkshire
- Farnley, North Yorkshire near Otley, West Yorkshire
But the best argument is probably something I just found: Farnley + New Farnley are the only settlements in the area of the civil parish Farnley, which existed 1866-1904 [1], and presumably also in the corresponding ecclesiastical parish which existed much longer. Since New Farnley was apparently built in the area that belonged to the Farnley parish, and since it is still smaller than Farnley, it really seems to make sense to cover New Farnley in the Farnley article. If I managed to convince you not to split the article again, adding information about this historical parish seems to make sense as well. Concerning the infoboxes, Leeds has many areas and these don't seem to be among those of the highest priority. So it may well take a year or two before this becomes a problem, and in the meantime I think its better to have an attractive joint article that actually invites people to contribute. --Hans Adler (talk) 23:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
