Talk:Anston

Proposed merge with Suth anston

Does not need own article, North Anston is already a section. Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 12:34, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I can't understand why this (Suth anston ?) was pulled away from the Anston article which rightly contained both North and South Anston as geographically conjoined parts of Anston, and as the civil parish of North and South Anston. The best approach I think would be to revert the changes in Anston (which would add back South Anston), and send the Suth anston article for deletion. Acabashi (talk) 12:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I would agree with Acabashi, the page creator asked for my assistance on my talk page. The pages were separated by this user due to the post office seeing both as different entities. This itself would not justify the creation of separate pages. Epparadox (talk) 14:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

• Support merge: no need to separate the two parts of the civil parish (infoboxes are misleadingly incorrect about civil parish: see this list). Rotherham council treats Anston as one place: see here. Provide redirects from North Anston and South Anston, and revert to having one single article. PamD 18:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

You fail to acknowledge that residents of the Anstons feel there is a strong cultural split between the two villages and the merger of the pages would remove the distinction. GavinMansfield (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:42, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

• Comment Why would the merged article be at Anston? The civil parish is called North and South Anston. Are the two villages usually referred to collectively as "Anston" or as "North and South Anston" or as "the Anstons"?--Mhockey (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2014 (UTC)