Talk:Ashdown Forest Llama Park

Why separate?

This is an example of the dozens of unnecessary stubs: there is a perfectly good article on Ashdown Forest itself, and this should be included in it. See this set of instructions about writing about geographical settlements Peter Shearan (talk) 11:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The Llama Park only relation to the Ashdown Forest is the location - it is a tourist centre, museum and location in its own right. Bit like including London Zoo in the article for London! MilborneOne (talk) 11:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge. This seems to be no more than an advert for a non-notable minor tourist attraction. There are no secondary sources that I can find. I propose merging it with Ashdown Forest.--Charles (talk) 07:30, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I support Merge. It is a minor tourist attraction (which was recently put up for sale, so there's also a question mark about its future). Only minor changes - if indeed any - would require to be made to the existing text about it in the Ashdown Forest article to cover it adequately. Dartford Warbler (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)