This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
– The
London WikiProject naming conventions suggest that lists of things in boroughs should be named with the short form of the borough names (per
WP:CONCISE), as in the current pages listed above. However, in the case of many boroughs (including Bexley, Lewisham, Greenwich, Ealing, Lambeth and others) this creates substantial ambiguity, as the boroughs have the same name as a locality within the borough. A
talk page discussion on the matter indicated a possible consensus for altering this naming convention and the article titles listed above. This follows
a recent CfD discussion which came to the same conclusion, and therefore moving these pages would be
consistent with the corresponding categories. It should be noted that not all of these article titles create ambiguity (as in Havering, Barking and Dagenham etc.) but they are listed on the basis of consistency. I am open to the current page titles being maintained on that basis, but I feel that this consistency would be preferable. Some of the above articles are at the current title following previous Requested Moves which made the opposite change (see
here for example), but the proposer of this requested move indicated in the above talk page discussion that they are in support of this action. I have listed here what I believe are all articles affected by this discussion, again for consistency, but I am open to omitting any exceptions, should they be identified.
Jdcooper (
talk)
11:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment: Despite having said
previously that I couldn't find any potential exceptions to the convention being proposed here, I've just spotted some. The lists of mayors should use the mayors' official titles – "Mayor of..." rather than "mayors of the London Borough of..." An added complication is that Lewisham and Tower Hamlets have separate lists for plain old "mayors" and for "directly elected mayors" – for the latter see
here and
here. I'm not sure what the convention should be for the directly elected mayors – their titles are "Mayor of Lewisham" and "Mayor of Tower Hamlets", the same style as for the others – or whether the separate lists should even exist. I suggest leaving the lists of mayors out of the nomination altogether and starting a new nomination which looks at the pages in
Category:Lists of mayors of places in England, its one subcategory
Category:Lists of mayors of London boroughs and
Category:Directly elected mayors of places in England. Apologies for not noticing this earlier.
Ham II (
talk)
06:51, 29 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Cool, I'm happy for those articles to be considered separately. What should I do, cross them out? Or is it enough for us to have mentioned this issue in the discussion?
Jdcooper (
talk)
08:47, 29 May 2017 (UTC)reply
I've struck through the items on the list and removed the four sets of |current= and |new= parameters from {{Requested move/dated}}. This means that the parameters now jump from 66 to 71 but I assume that won't be a problem when it comes to making the move. I will now remove
User:RMCD bot/subject notice from the articles, but keep the talk page notices as a record that they were part of the original nomination.
Ham II (
talk)
16:16, 30 May 2017 (UTC)reply
Support move. In many cases the Bourough shares a name with one of its suburbs.
JulianL (
talk) 10:15, 30 May 2017 (UTC) - Likewise, it clearly disambiguates the London boroughs from suburbs and cities around the Commonwealth, etc.
JulianL (
talk)
10:22, 30 May 2017 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.