Talk:Skaneateles, New York
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editThe photo of the lake was taken in the Town of Spafford, not Skaneateles. Another will be substituted.
Done--prev. pic also appeared on Skan. Lake page, so redundant. This view IS in the Town of Skaneateles.
I set up the stub Willow Glen, California article.. fixed some links that went to Willow Glen and made Willow Glen a redirect. Does Willow Glen, New York merit an article? There is a link under Mottville, New York that may need attention. I went and changed that to link to Willow Glen, New York. 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 20:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Requested move
edit- 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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: No move. There's no agreement that the village is the primary topic. Cúchullain t/c 18:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
- Skaneateles, New York → Skaneateles (town), New York
- Skaneateles (village), New York → Skaneateles, New York
– I believe the village is the primary topic. There is very little of note in the township surrounding the village; virtually everything is within the village limits. When people say "Skaneateles", they are referring to the quaint lakeside community, not the administrative division of Onondaga County. Powers T 00:55, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a case where there is nothing to base a move on. If its not broken, don't fix it. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- What do you mean it's not broken? It's not broken that when someone wants "Skaneateles, New York", they're taken to a largely empty article on a meaningless administrative division, rather than to the article on the community in which they're most likely actually interested? And with no hatnote, to boot? That's horribly broken. Powers T 19:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose. The issue of New York towns which contain villages of the same name was addressed at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/New York villages within towns. Prior to that discussion, using Adams as an example:
- Adams, New York was a disambiguation page linking to two articles below
- Adams (town), New York was an article for the town
- Adams (village), New York was an article for the village within the town
- After the above mentioned discussion, the consensus was:
- Adams, New York is the article for the town
- Adams (town), New York is a redirect to town article
- Adams (village), New York is the article for the village within the town
- I do agree that the town articles should have hatnotes to the village articles, such as the one found at the top of the Adams, New York article.
- -- Zyxw (talk) 14:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- That consensus is wholly inappropriate to this article, at a minimum. One size does not fit all, and here it produces an absurd result. Powers T 02:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose a move, support a hatnote (even though the village is mentioned in the lede paragraph of every one of these articles). bd2412 T 03:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
- 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.