Talk:Victoria Park, Finchley

On 20 February 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved from Victoria Park, Barnet to Victoria Park, Finchley. The result of the discussion was moved.

Title

The title Victoria Park, Finchley, would probably be sufficient. Imc 19:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently theres a Victoria Park, East London too so I created the end section RHB 20:59, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The east London park is large, and sits on the edge of traditional boundaries, so that it is not clear whether it is in Bow, Bethnal Green, or Hackney. Hence the common 'East London' tag. The Finchley park is in Finchley, and is unique in Finchley, so that name should be sufficient. Imc 08:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 February 2025

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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. DrKay (talk) 13:48, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Park, Barnet → Victoria Park, Finchley – The park is in Finchley. The current name is misleading and leads to confusion with Victoria Recreation Ground, New Barnet. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Zacwill (talk) 11:35, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Naming convention is to disambiguate by borough. However, can see this is a valid exception. MRSC (talk) 12:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support. However, the guidance about disambiguating by borough is in the geographic section and specifically concerns localities. Parks presumably come under the 'Buildings, structures, things...' section, which says nothing about disambiguating by borough. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It must need updating, because that has been what we have been doing for many years. MRSC (talk) 05:16, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a mistaken policy. The guidance says "Boroughs: Official full names should be used in all articles which refer to London boroughs e.g. London Borough of Croydon, List of people from the London Borough of Croydon, etc. Many boroughs are named for localities within the borough (eg. Lewisham, Bexley, Ealing) and this naming style avoids ambiguity." This is not guidance for parks, but the warning applies. When a borough is named after a locality, the borough name should never be used in a shortened form in an article title as it is ambiguous. Dudley Miles (talk) 13:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.