Talk:Waldorf Playing Fields

I'm guessing this article is deemed unworthy due to the lack of notability. It is actually very difficult to find any reliable sources of information about these fields other than in the Land Registry, which it is not easy to link to. In fact, very few people actually know about these fields and their status. There is a web page about the campaign to save the fields, but I didn't want the wiki entry to be partisan - just to state the facts.

I will try and find more references to Newton Mill Ltd which could be added.

Any more advice would be appreciated.

Banksm (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Would it be better to put this article under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matley ?

Banksm (talk) 19:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Notability and verifiability are two different things. I'm not doubting the accuracy of these fields; I'm doubting the importance of it for having an article on Wikipedia. Saying that very few people know about these fields also continues to show me that this isn't very notable. In order for this to be an article, you need to show why these fields are important. --Seascic ^T/_C 19:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

OK I guess its a matter of opinion. They are noteworthy simply because they belong to the community, and there is so little information available /other/ than the campaign site.

I suppose we could get into a discussion about the relative noteworthyness of some of the other articles on wiki, but its not my site so you must do as you see fit.

If you don't think its worth moving it under the Matley article, then please feel free to delete it.

Banksm (talk) 22:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Merge Article?

Would it be better to merge this article with that of Hyde, Greater Manchester? This article is an orphan right now and quite a stub
Pediconem (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)