Talk:South Downs

message: Why have we got a South Downs article which begins with the North Downs, and no North Downs article but a redirect to South Downs? This is daft. Surely we either have two articles or one article entitled ... er North and South Downs, or Downs (hills) - I admit the title is tricky. Best have two articles. The human geography of the areas is entirely different.
Djnjwd 01:47, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved a lot of info around because there was a lot in the Chalk article that didn't belong there..  if you think the article is misnamed be bold in updating it! ;) --Steinsky 02:10, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I don't think the "The" should be in the article name (I think there's some guideline somewhere that says an initial "The" should generally not be used in article names.) If no one disagrees in the next few days, I'll go ahead and do the necessary.--A bit iffy 12:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree John 19:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename as simply "South Downs"

message: Two comments on first approaching the article:
* Why just geology? I've added geographers too!
* A glance at the Mendip Hills(MH) article will show that this a poor article! Long list of places in the opening paragraph are mostly places on the periphery - yet the Downs themselves are very sparsely populated. MH just mentions the largest villages and the fact that civil parishes occupy the land itelf. we should see a History section (effect on man; how its economy grew with sheep; ancient burials/Long Man); the geography: gaps (River Cuckmere et al); dry valleys, scarps and dip slopes; dewponds. We need a section on Ecology (the Downs are a haven for rare species of all sorts); the coastal area (not just the Seven Sisters). We should have Climate (Eastbourne is "suntrap"); and the Geology section should be far bigger than just the few introductory lines.Peter Shearan (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition I cannot really see why there is a separate article South Downs National Park (SDNP). Although not the complete South Downs, the SDNP will effect almost all the area, nor does the SDNP article add very much to the sum total of facts, and it will help to make the main article more complete. To hive it off is illogical Peter Shearan (talk) 05:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The article

message: I have now undertaken a complete rewrite of this article, basing it on the Mendip Hills one. There were many articles around in Wikipedia that I was able to incorporate; and, since I know the South Downs very well, I was able to bring in further facts. I shall be pleased to hear from any other editors about anything which will help to makew the article a better one than it was originally!  Peter Shearan (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have left the ecology and climate sections blank: I am sure much can be added for the former Peter Shearan (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite of the article

message: There seem to be at least 3 hills over 700 (210 m) feet that are missing from the table. These are:
* War Down ()
* Wether Down ()
* Pidham Hill ()
I'm happy to add them, but would need to check out where in the west-to-east sequence they fit in. --Bermicourt (talk) 15:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing 700 footers 

message: I would really like someone to do a comparison between the landscapes called 'downs', fells, moor, (I think there are a few more) that we read about in novels.  I really don't have any picture in my mind and the existing articles don't make the comparisons clear.  Anyone?207.102.255.230 (talk) 19:15, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: We would have to find existing published work on the subject as Wikipedia does not do or publish original research.--Charles (talk) 19:40, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The difference has more to do with etymology. Had the Vikings reached the south coast, this article would be called South Fells. My point is that the terms "downs", "fells" or "moors" do not officially describe the landscape. The North and South Downs have very different features, as do Dartmoor and Exmoor. A comparison between the terms is not really viable. However, we should take note that one of our readers is commenting that geographical articles do not describe the scenery enough! Periglio (talk) 23:09, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Landscape comparisons

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on South Downs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090605163213/http://www.inspiringholidays.com/details.enhanced.php?l=262 to http://www.inspiringholidays.com/details.enhanced.php?l=262
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120220801/http://www.ramblers.org.uk/INFO/paths/southdowns.html to http://www.ramblers.org.uk/info/paths/southdowns.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion