Talk:Exposition Park (urban park)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2018 and 11 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Courtneyduhart.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Exposition Park (Los Angeles). 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/20130520210324/http://www.laparks.org:80/expo/index.htm to http://www.laparks.org/expo/index.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

This article reads like a list
This article is mainly a list of buildings on the Exposition Park. When did the name change from Agricultural Park, and why did the name change? That would improve this article a lot. --Prairieplant (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 16 February 2024

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) Killarnee (talk) 20:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Exposition Park (Los Angeles) → Exposition Park (urban park) – current title is pretty easily confusable with Exposition Park, Los Angeles 83.168.141.16 (talk) 01:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. SilverLocust 💬 05:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom. Completely ambiguous. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:45, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose These both follow the typical naming convention for places and neighborhoods. The hatnotes at the top of both pages are adequate. Elysian Park and Elysian Park, Los Angeles or Lincoln Park and Lincoln Park, Chicago are analogous where the title by itself may not be obvious which is which. If moved, Exposition Park (Los Angeles park) would be better. Reywas92Talk 16:13, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * But they're completely ambiguous! We're supposed to be assisting our users, not confusing them with dogma. I'd be happy with Exposition Park (Los Angeles park). -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That's what hatnotes are for. I've also found Bitter Lake (Seattle) and Bitter Lake, Seattle; Madison Park, Seattle and Madison Park (Seattle); Seward Park, Seattle and Seward Park (Seattle); Cathedral Park, Portland, Oregon and Cathedral Park (Portland, Oregon); Glenfair, Portland, Oregon and Glenfair Park (though these should be merged); Grant Park (Portland, Oregon) and Grant Park, Portland, Oregon; and Mill Park (Portland, Oregon) and Mill Park, Portland, Oregon (merge these too). I'm fine with as it is. Reywas92Talk 18:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You really think Exposition Park (Los Angeles) and Exposition Park, Los Angeles are completely sufficient disambiguation?! No, they're not, hatnotes or not. This is not how we do things, even though some other articles may have followed the pattern. We are supposed to be helping our users, not confusing them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support The use of a parenthesis versus a comma is not sufficient disambiguation. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support I previously thought there was no reason to create a new style for a neighborhood and a park within it which can be easily switch between using hatnote or first paragraph. All current disambiguation methods are sufficient. Don't over think this, readers are not that helpless or clueless. Cheers, 〜 Adflatuss  •  talk  20:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose. I see your point, but I feel like convention is prioritized here, and the hat notes will get the job done.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. This is a no-brainer. Article title policy is focused on readers, rather than silly conventions that some editors imagine exist. And To way readers can be expected to know the difference between Exposition Park, Los Angeles and Exposition Park (Los Angeles), and both should be properly disambiguated. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Support - Common sense should trump convention in situations where confusion may arise. I believe our readers can figure it out, but having two different styles of disambiguation does not help in any way. Per WP:AT, WP:PRECISE is one of the first items and is listed before disambiguation - I believe this is sufficient evidence that we should favor precision over convention, and "urban park" is more precise as it indicates what the topic is without a need to check hatnotes at all. As to the primary topic, the neighborhood wins in pageviews by a landslide. (edit: somehow my brain inserted a digit there when I read the pageviews. Can't rely on those if confusion might contribute to them. I'll say that I don't have an opinion on which is primary, but at least one of the pages should be moved.) ASUKITE 19:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)