Hillhouse (ward): Sources do not establish notability, providing only that the ward existed and its results, which can be and have been collated in election results articles; each of the ~2000 such wards in Scotland of the era does not require its own article.  Discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Archive 15#Ward articles and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dundee City Council wards indicated a preference among interested editors for the hundreds of current Scottish council wards (multi member, 3 times larger than the earlier wards, easier to source) to be merged into some kind of overview article rather than separate listings.  As far as I'm aware, not much has been done in this direction and I don't see any urgent need to do so.  But the creator of this article is aware of that issue, because I told him about it .  He does a lot of hard work in this area but I think going down the road of creating these former wards is something that should be avoided, particularly in respect of creep into another region; Category:Wards of East Ayrshire is already a bit wild (there are 27 articles but only 9 current wards = 18 of these single-member wards, all created by same editor approximately a year ago).  Crowsus ( talk ) 07:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Scotland .  Crowsus ( talk ) 07:29, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NPLACE : Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low .  Notability is not temporary so the fact the ward was abolished is irrelevant.  I would search through the Hamilton Advertiser archives to further establish notability but unfortunately the British Newspaper Archive doesn't have them available online for the period the ward existed.  I don't doubt there will be articles in the paper at the time to help establish notability.  Btw, thanks for bringing this up and your kind comments.  I looked into this further after our discussion because I wanted to know what the policy was and how that affected things.  That's when I came across the geographic features notability policies and they support that political subdivisions are notable in their own right.  As I said in our discussion though, that doesn't mean that we can't have a situation where some of these for one council are listed in one article but others have wards with their own articles.  Multiple solutions to the same problem exist on Wikipedia and they can peacefully co-exist.  I understand what you're saying though, particularly with categorisation (maybe there should be current and former categories? A discussion for another day).  Stevie fae Scotland ( talk ) 11:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] My interpretation of that would be that the populated, legally recognised place is Hillhouse, Hamilton whereas this is a geopolitical unit based around that place, and so named after it.  As you know, some councils could barely be bothered to name them and just used numbers.  I'm struggling to imagine what even the Advertiser would have to say about the ward (as opposed to the neighbourhood) other than its councillor and the election results to elect said councillor.  I read the Rutherglen Reformer quite regularly between the 90s and 2000s but even with pages to be filled, I can't recall much mention of the local wards beyond the most basic listings.  Could be wrong....  Crowsus ( talk ) 14:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Don't get me wrong, the unnamed ones are a minefield and I think a catchall article rather than individual articles would be better for them.  I had thought there was something in the policy about places having a name but I couldn't see it when I checked today which is why I hadn't created any articles on unnamed wards.  If that is the intent of the policy though, it would definitely be worth rephrasing.  Every ward, current and former, in the UK is legally recognised, it's written down in statute, so if that shouldn't confer notability that should be cleared up.  Stevie fae Scotland ( talk ) 20:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/merge An electoral district is not what NPLACE covers, which is the municipality or similar.  The ward doesn't actually exist as anything except as a boundary from which representatives are elected.  I agree with the discussions elsewhere that for the local level, electoral districts should be consolidated in main articles rather than as dozens or scores of individual articles.  Reywas92 Talk 19:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  08:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:03, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to South Lanarkshire Council#Wards : Fails GNG, sources are mill election news, agree with nom and Reywas92 reasoning.  WP:NPLACE clearly was not and is not intended to mean every election district/precinct/ward is notable for its own article.  // Timothy :: talk 15:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 04:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus