Talk:Kent Ridge
Add topicLatest comment: 10 years ago by Lemongirl942 in topic Suggested merge
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Suggested merge
[edit]@Lemongirl942: Given how similar the contents of Kent Ridge Park is to this article, I suggest we do a merge. If not, the article regarding the park should be reformatted. Otherwise, a merge should be a viable option. -- MageLam (talk) 16:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @MageLam: This will be contentious for sure. The article was rated a good article and usually I do not mess about nor recommend messing around with them. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
@Lemongirl942: Given that it is delisted, I rather suggest reformatting as an alternative. Also, is it me or do you love to oppose my ideas? -- MageLam (talk) 16:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @MageLam: My own personal view as you already know is to usually have 2 separate articles if they are different entities. But if an article is a good article, I don't try to change it unless there are very strong reasons for it. I didn't see that it was delisted though, apologies for that.
- A lot of content on the park article actually belongs to the ridge so I don't mind transferring the relevant ones to the ridge article. But while reformatting, please be careful while doing it. You previous edit for example, resulted in some information loss. Also, do provide proper attribution per WP:CWW. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @MageLam: The article is still listed as a good article. There seems to be some problem here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
@Lemongirl942: Strange, I just reassessed it with a "C" (just changed it from the "start-class" rating). The GA icon still appears for some reason. -- MageLam (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
But what do you mean by, "still listed"? -- MageLam (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- @MageLam: Your reassessment is only for the Wikiproject Singapore scale. The GA review is a separate process. It is still listed as a good article --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2016 (UTC)