Talk:Skaneateles, New York

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

New York (state) Mid‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

The photo of the lake was taken in the Town of Spafford, not Skaneateles. Another will be substituted.

Done--prev. pic also appeared on Skan. Lake page, so redundant. This view IS in the Town of Skaneateles.

Willow Glen[edit]

I set up the stub Willow Glen, California article.. fixed some links that went to Willow Glen and made Willow Glen a redirect. Does Willow Glen, New York merit an article? ~~There is a link under Mottville, New York that may need attention.~~ I went and changed that to link to Willow Glen, New York. 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 20:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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: No move. There's no agreement that the village is the primary topic. Cúchullain ^t/c 18:22, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– I believe the village is the primary topic. There is very little of note in the township surrounding the village; virtually everything is within the village limits. When people say "Skaneateles", they are referring to the quaint lakeside community, not the administrative division of Onondaga County. Powers ^T 00:55, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This is a case where there is nothing to base a move on. If its not broken, don't fix it. Vegaswikian (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean it's not broken? It's not broken that when someone wants "Skaneateles, New York", they're taken to a largely empty article on a meaningless administrative division, rather than to the article on the community in which they're most likely actually interested? And with no hatnote, to boot? That's horribly broken. Powers ^T 19:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The issue of New York towns which contain villages of the same name was addressed at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/New York villages within towns. Prior to that discussion, using Adams as an example:

Adams, New York was a disambiguation page linking to two articles below

Adams (town), New York was an article for the town

Adams (village), New York was an article for the village within the town

After the above mentioned discussion, the consensus was:

Adams, New York is the article for the town

Adams (town), New York is a redirect to town article

Adams (village), New York is the article for the village within the town

I do agree that the town articles should have hatnotes to the village articles, such as the one found at the top of the Adams, New York article.

-- Zyxw (talk) 14:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That consensus is wholly inappropriate to this article, at a minimum. One size does not fit all, and here it produces an absurd result. Powers ^T 02:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose a move, support a hatnote (even though the village is mentioned in the lede paragraph of every one of these articles). bd2412 T 03:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.