Talk:Newport, Wales/Archive 1

message: __TOC__
:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was no consensus. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 00:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

message: Where possible, articles on places in the UK should go under placename. Where disambiguation is needed, they should go under placename, county.  Thus Skegness but Boston, Lincolnshire.  Where county definitions have changed, policy is under discussion, but Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)#Counties of Britain may be helpful.
Point of information the Disambiguation guidelines are for the avoidance of clashes of pages that would otherwise have identical names. It suggests that editors should apply common sense. Given that:
*there is no need or desire for Newport, Rhode Island or Newport, Isle of Wight (or any other page) to move to the primary topic,
*the current primary topic describes the biggest place, and
*there is no consensus for an appropriate disambiguation title
then this page move is redundant. Owain (talk) 15:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are more than THIRTY Newports which is why Newport should be the disambiguation page, just as Westport is a disambiguation page for the 20 or so Westports. This is an argument for simplicity in access to information on the Wikipedia. All the counterarguments are special pleadings from people who think the city in Monmouth is the most important Newport. Evertype 15:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You haven't addressed the fact that there is no consensus for a disambiguation title.  Newport, Wales won't work as there is more than one Newport in Wales.  Yorkshire Phoenix (talk • contribs) 15:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Firsty, this IS the most important Newport. We have linked the next 2 important Newports at the top of the page. All your arguements consist of hypocritical comments about there being many Newports, yet you don't say the same thing about London. More than 30 is nonsense. I don't care if there are 500 tiny villages called Newport, it still shouldn't be changed. Maybe you feel bitter that your home town was moved to a disambiguation page, so you want to spoil it for us as well. I find no other explanation of you trying to compare Newport (Wales) to Westport (Ireland), as there is no comparison in terms of population size, importance to the regional/local economy and how well-known they are. The largest Westport has less than 27,000 people and is not an original Westport, merely named after the place in Ireland. If we linked all 30 Newports at the top of the article you still wouldn't be happy. Marky-Son 16:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm quite happy about the Westport page. There are many Westports, and this page allows people to find them all easily. I think that the same sensible convention should be extended to other place-names, regardless of population. Your argument wavers between how "important" your Newport is and how "populous" it is. I'm not the one being chauvinistic. I think that Newport should be the disambiguation page for all the Newports, and that the article about yo8ur city should have another title. Newport, Gwent, Wales exists and is a candidate. Newport, Monmouthshire, Wales and Newport, Monmouthshire, England exist. So do Newport, Monmouthshire and Newport, Gwent. And Newport, South Wales. There is no dearth of suitable names that could be used for this city, while the Newport page can simply be a link to all Newports. I'm not being POV here. I have nothing against your city, or you. I have something against people interested in the 30 other Newports (regardless of size and regardless of relative unimportance to you) having to go to this article in order to get to a disambiguation page before getting where they want to go. Evertype 17:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still avoiding the London coparison I see. I disagree with your policy as I think it ruins wikipedia but I'm not being POV here. By the way, you cannot have Monmouthshire or Gwent as a name for this article because they are redundent. The Monmouthshire local authority is now a much smaller area to the east of Newport. Gwent is a made-up county that no longer exists in most cases. I know this because I live here. The 30 other Newports are important to a lesser number of people is a better way of putting it. Marky-Son 18:38, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: London is a city of millions. Your Newport is not in the same class, surely. Evertype 09:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The same "sensible convention" does not need to be applied to all places, haven't you figured that out yet? It does not and should not apply in all cases — that is ludicrous. The fact that you have highlighted six redirect pages shows that there is no universal suitable NPoV disambiguation, other than what we have already. Why are you not proposing this for Wells, Gloucester, Cambridge, Warwick, Worcester, Canterbury, Durham or even Rutland? It is insanity to apply a one-size-fits-all strategy and the policies do not mandate it; in fact they suggest that common sense should be applied. Please do so. Owain (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Evertype wants to make wikipedia harder to use for the majority of people to keep the minority happy, how very strange. Marky-Son 19:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well again your population arguments don't make a lot of sense. Your Newport is a city of only 130,000. A count of the denizens of the other Newports is 150,000. We do not have a situation where all of the citizens of 'any Newport are running every day to the Wikipedia to learn about where it is they live. I've proposed that a number of place-names should have nice, friendy portals to the many localities which bear their names, just as Westport does. Your chauvinism ("My city is the real Newport") leads you to special pleading, and it's been getting more and more ad hominem. I proposed this move. A lot of other people have supported it on its merits. As far as I can see, the Westport practice is the "common sense" one.  Evertype 09:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: United Kingdom

message: This page appear to violate copyright noted at http://www.ngw.nl/int/gbr/n/newport.htm in respect of the report about the Newport coat of arms.
::What copyright? If any organisation owns the copyright it is either The College of Arms or Newport City Council. As this article is about Newport this is surely "fair use". Owain 17:27, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Coat of arms?

message: Owain, are you sure Nash is in Liswerry ward? I have a copy of the 2001 census and there is a place called Nash down near Uskmouth, definately in the Llanwern ward. I know Nash College is in Liswerry by the way.
:Go to http://www.election-maps.co.uk/ then click "enter the site", type in "newport", select "local authority" then click "go". It will come up with one mach, so click the next "go" button. In the window that pops up select Electoral divisions and/or Parish and then click "refresh map". As you pan around the map you can quite clearly see that Nash is in the Liswerry ward. I think the Liswerry ward was extended to include the Nash parish since 2001. Owain (talk) 18:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nash Village 

message: Is it spelt with an e on the end? As seen here: []Marky-Son 09:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the official name of the parish was "Wentloog" without the 'e', as seen here: . My article on the Wentloog hundred spelled it without an 'e' too, but spellings vary so we should try and be consistent. Owain (talk) 09:16, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wentloog 

message: Where did this information come from? Neither http://www.ci.annapolis.md.us/ or http://www.newport.gov.uk/ have any mention of it. Owain (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annapolis 

message: On the mini-map city of Newport appears to be on the east part of the UK, whilst on 
Maps.Gogole.Com Newport/South Wales appears to be on the south-west part of the UK.....
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.69.225.141 (talk • contribs) 
:The mini-map shows the city as one of the Principal areas of Wales, not with repect to the entire UK. If you select the OS grid reference ST312882 in the infobox it will lead to a choice of maps, all of which shows Newport in the correct place with repect to the entire country! Owain (talk) 13:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  map 

message: left|thumb|With TOCLeft, the whitespace I'm concerned about
It seems we need to have some whitespace somewhere in the article. With Owain's version, it eliminates the whitespace to the right of the TOC. With my version, I'm targetting the whitespace below it (illustrated by the image provided) which separates a table from its explanatory paragraph, which is less disruptive to the reader than a gap between lead section and first heading, IMHO. --Sam Pointon 13:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah right - that's caused by the  tag immediately before that table. If you take it out it'll look much better. Owain (talk) 14:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Whitespace placment