Talk:Fylde

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Lancashire and Cumbria

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria 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.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria articles

Categories

I am proposing to create [[Category:The Fylde]] and a subcategory [[Category:Fylde (borough)]]. This latter name would break the convention that borough categories do not include the word "borough" in their name, but I think this is necessary in this case to avoid confusion between the two categories. This is currently being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#Names of categories for local government districts. Please contribute there if you have an opinion. --Dr Greg 17:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are several short entries better than a consolidated entry ?

I put this question in talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria may be it belongs here

Is the present separation of Carleton, Cleveleys, Thornton, many other villages and the Fylde advantageous? Moving the material for these villages into the Fylde page, comprising separate sections, with links to Blackpool and Fleetwood would make access to information about the overall area much faster, particularly with the intermediate level of Over Wyre for many of these. Going from page to page and back, up and down a tree of entries, is time consuming and frustrating. My concern with regard to this set of entries is paralleled by several others, and I wonder if this is an issue that has cropped up before and, if so, where it stands. Michael P. Barnett (talk) 02:42, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria#Are several short entries better than a consolidated entry ? NtheP (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]