Talk:Fylde
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Categories edit
I am proposing to create [[Category:The Fylde]] and a subcategory [[Category:Fylde (borough)]]. This latter name would break the convention that borough categories do not include the word "borough" in their name, but I think this is necessary in this case to avoid confusion between the two categories. This is currently being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#Names of categories for local government districts. Please contribute there if you have an opinion. --Dr Greg 17:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Are several short entries better than a consolidated entry ? edit
I put this question in talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria may be it belongs here
Is the present separation of Carleton, Cleveleys, Thornton, many other villages and the Fylde advantageous? Moving the material for these villages into the Fylde page, comprising separate sections, with links to Blackpool and Fleetwood would make access to information about the overall area much faster, particularly with the intermediate level of Over Wyre for many of these. Going from page to page and back, up and down a tree of entries, is time consuming and frustrating. My concern with regard to this set of entries is paralleled by several others, and I wonder if this is an issue that has cropped up before and, if so, where it stands. Michael P. Barnett (talk) 02:42, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Please see discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria#Are several short entries better than a consolidated entry ? NtheP (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)