Talk:Lansdowne Park

Origin of the names

How about someone doing a little research and finding out the origins of the names 'Lansdowne', 'Aberdeen', 'Frank Clair', etc., and incorporate them into this article. 69.165.147.53 (talk) 20:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

According to the Honorific eponyms section of the article on Henry Petty-Fitzmaurice, 5th Marquess of Lansdowne, Lansdowne Park was named after him. Verification by a reference in a library shouldn't be difficult. Regards, PeterEasthope (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Shall we move the section

Wow was very disappointed to come to this article and see that Redevelopment is 3/4 of the article. Should we not move this to its own article. As of now the articles reads like a report.Moxy (talk) 18:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Not necessary yet. The article is 42 KB in size. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I not concern with the size but the Undue weight of the section to the article its self. I think its best we move the section to its own article and have a brief section here that links to the new article. Wikipedia:Undue weight is clear in that it says "An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject." I would say that its clear that this article has been overwhelmed with the redevelopment portion. I am not saying the redevelopment section its bad (as its well sourced), but its just to much. We have an article that spans over 150 year yet 3/4 of it only covers one specify sub topic and only from 2007 till now. If we were to move it you could expand it indefinitely. I will work on this by making a nice intro to the new article that will be at -->Lansdowne Park redevelopment.Moxy (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that this section is given undue weight, and a content fork could be justified because it takes over the article, but a better solution would be to cut down the Redevelopment section. The section currently gives a play-by-play of every single council vote, design update, etc, which isn't really material one would expect in an encyclopedia. The Other Proposals section is also bloated with information that, while well-cited, isn't notable to Lansdowne Park as a whole. -M.Nelson (talk) 21:12, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Again I must point out, it's only 42 KB. What really is missing is the history before the redevelopment. It's basically a stub without the redevelopment section. If we take out the redevelopment to 'balance' the amount, that would leave little for the redevelopment. And it was a city-wide issue and will redevelop the park for the long-term. Objectively, it is pretty important and historic. The other proposals are to give balance to the article and issues. So, I would propose to make the Lansdowne Park article a summary article for a series on Lansdowne Park, including the Aberdeen Pavilion, Frank Clair Stadium, Central Canada Ex and Redevelopment articles. Possibly, and hopefully, a History of article, too. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 22:16, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and done the fork. I've used a summary here, added a series template. The summary is the lead for the redevelopment article and I'll add cites to it. But I'm done for the day. The article is only 10KB now. Which is not too bad for a summary article. Probably the next thing to do is work on a 'History of' article. I've wanted to do one for a while, but it's a case of finding good sources. I'm not in Ottawa. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Like i said on your talk page alaney2k, great job and wow was done fast! We should move back a few refs for the intro to the new article. Just dont want someone unfamiliar with what has taken place to tag a statement in the new section intro with {{fact}}. I would do because i like to help, but it looks like your the expert in this subject (plus you know the refs already).Moxy (talk) 02:14, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lansdowne Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100212194111/http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/lansdowne_partnership/index_en.html to http://www.ottawa.ca/residents/public_consult/lansdowne_partnership/index_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 15 December 2017 (UTC)