This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sussex on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Writing about the very smallest settlements in the UK can be difficult due to the lack of source material. If there is no likelihood that an article could ever expand beyond a stub, the place should be dealt with in the article of the smallest notable area in which it lies, such as the council ward, civil parish, community (in Wales), or town, etc. In most cases a redirect should be left to help readers (see Crowden, Devon for an example).
On this basis, the article on Saddlescombe should be merged into the article about Newtimber, the civil parish in which it is located. Topo122 (talk) 17:51, 3 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
Support – neither place (nor either article) is substantial, and they can be more efficiently covered together. Jellyman (talk) 21:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
Oppose for now, the place is in the Domesday Book, I think that that generally qualifies as being notable since that's a kind of a census. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
