Talk:Hastings Old Town

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proposed merger

The article on Hastings has some information about Hastings Old Town already, but I think that merging the information in this article into it would expand and improve it. Any comments or objections? --Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 12:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this article sucks. It's just a photo album. The Old Town is picturesque, but there's loads of history that could make a great article. I don't know enough about it to do a proper article, unless anyone else feels like it, it should be merged. --Grahamhopgood 12:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a really rubbish article, it should be merged without doubt, agreed the old town is historic and deserves writing up but it is still in Hastings. 172.189.206.111 07:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a good reason for Hastings Old Town to have a separate page, especially not when it looks like this. Merging the two articles would probably be a good idea. Terraxos 04:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason for having a separate page from the 'Hastings' one is that Hastings Old Town is totally different from Hastings as a whole. The demographics are different, the activities and all events are different and the whole history and character of the place is different. For the vast majority of local people like myself the town of Hastings has nothing to do with Hastings Old Town. I personally would only live in the Old Town due to its characteristic people, its fishers, its architecture and the general spirit. The Old Town of Hastings needs to be differentiated from the town of Hastings as a whole - and accordingly, deserves a separate page for the Hastings one. Magiko 4th November 2007

Magico's (who he?) comments are typical of the article itself: "totally different" "demographics are different" (but aren't those for each area in Hastings different from one another?) "all events are different" (all events??? what are they?) "whole history" - but the history of this part is tied up completely with the other parts of the town as it evolved, surely? - "characteristic people" (what singles them out?) "its fishers" (a very small proportion surely?) "its architecture" (because of its age perhaps?) "general spirit" (overegging the whole thing surely!). This article is, I completely agree, rubbish. It doesn't delineate the Old Town, nor describe its layout/geography etc. The main article has a lot of the things in it which might at a pinch make this a better article, but I doubt it - it has itself much to be condemned! Merge, please! Peter Shearan (talk) 19:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Style needs attention

There's some good stuff here, but it severely needs attention from the point of view of Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words and Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. I may get round to doing some of this... --rossb —Preceding comment was added at 23:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)