This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Worcestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Worcestershire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WorcestershireWikipedia:WikiProject WorcestershireTemplate:WikiProject WorcestershireWorcestershire articles
If the castle is on public land, it is difficult to see how to access it. At least from the West, it is surrounded by a fence with 'Private no right of way' signs. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
80.229.247.11 (
talk)
17:02, 3 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Requested move 23 March 2019
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
– While the villages do get more views the villages are named after the castles. The same with the bridges. I'm not so sure if these moves are a good idea, in particular with Barnard Castle, but I'm listing it here anyway to given that option though. Crouch, Swale (
talk) 19:39, 23 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting.Iffy★
Chat --
12:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment I see that we already have
Corfe Castle (disambiguation),
Corfe Castle (village) and
Corfe Castle (for the castle) but how many other articles would need rechecking, and does it always make sense to apply the same naming rule in every situation? What about towns named after other things, for example
Windermere (the lake) and
Windermere, Cumbria (town)? It sounds like a lot of work to find all the relevant articles and apply a consistent naming convention even if it seemed like a good idea. Notable beaches might be another one. --
Northernhenge (
talk)
21:31, 23 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose The bridges and castles may have been there first but if there are primary topics here, they are the places named after them. Unless there are other topics, disambiguation pages are not necessary.
Peter James (
talk)
17:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. "Being the original source of the name is also not determinative", per
WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY. If there's any other merit to these it would be better to nominate them individually with a proper rationale.
PC78 (
talk)
00:54, 5 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Although that point mainly refers to substantially different topics (such as Boston, Massachusetts/Boston, Lincolnshire) when both meanings are closely relates its even more usual to put the original use at the base name. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
19:38, 5 April 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - All of these have long term significance, so the primary consideration is views over time. It's too much of a mess to go through all of these and oppose/support each pair in the same discussion. Renominate individually any pairs where the non-primary title is clearly dominant (it gets more than two-thirds of the total views for all same-name articles). Pairs where no single article gets more than 2/3rds of the total views for all same-name articles should be individually nominated to get specific names and a DAB page placed at the base name.
Safrolic (
talk)
03:17, 11 April 2019 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this
talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.