Talk:Slussenområdet

Proposed merge with Karl Johanslussen

I don't think a merge is a good idea. Karl Johanslussen is an extensive article about the lock itself. But Slussen is also, as this article says, a very well-known area in the centre of the city, and a metro station. This is what Stockholmers generally mean when they talk about Slussen. Combining the articles would give too much weight to the lock itself. I lean towards going in the opposite direction, breaking out the metro station article to Slussen (metro station) as soon as the Slussen article grows to contain more information about the general area and different proposals for redesigning the major road intersection and the bridges. This should also be considered for other Stockholm squares and suburbs sharing their names with metro stations. Alarm 09:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Taking a look at the length and scope of Karl Johanslussen I believe a merge would result in one big messy article with unclear focus (too much about the lock itself). Slussen is named after the lock but is much more than the lock itself. Jeltz talk 14:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep - completely agree. The current Slussen article should also be expanded as you mention, with details of the different proposals and possible ways forward etc....

Agree too, merge is a bad idea. I hope to return to expand the Slussen article (and exile the hilarious metro boxes on a page about the metro station in the process).

/ Mats Halldin (talk) 05:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

FYI: I removed the merge template and swapped replaced the images in the article. The scope of this article should be slightly more clearnow.

/ Mats Halldin (talk) 09:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

plz note - a redirection error made here

the English language article Karl Johanslussen redirects to the Swedish Slussen, Stockholm which... redirects here!

the Karl Johanslussen has virtually no right to exist as an own article as it practically portrays the Slussen content in parallel lines (The Lock of Karl Johan is only the name of the boat canal in a whole trafic system) and the two should hence be unified.

can you fix this?

Thanks!

/Orrling 89.1.46.96 (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

NPOV issues

I have added the NPOV template as well as the WEASEL templates as the last section of this article has been written with a strong anti-change bias. I suggest that the entire section be removed, as Wikipedia should not be used as a forum or channel for POV or opinions for or against anything, and will do so if no objections are being made. Please respect that. M.O (u) (t) 17:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Severe bias

The last section of this article is severely biased. I recommend it is removed completely, or at least heavily rewritten to represent a facts based view. /Gardebring (t) 18:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested after two weeks with no objections. Dekimasuよ! 22:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

---

Slussen → Slussenområdet – The article should be moved in accordance with recent clarifications on the Swedish wikipedia articles concerning the Slussen area. This article discusses the informal urban area (Slussenområdet), not specifically its modern traffic and communications structure called Slussen. --Relisted. Dekimasuよ! 21:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC) Urbourbo (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

• Support - seems correct. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:37, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.