Talk:List of demolished buildings and structures in Melbourne

Suggestion
I'm wondering if this article should be re-titled and converted into a list along the lines of List of demolished buildings and structures in New York City, List of demolished buildings and structures in London etc. Per WP:LOWERCASE, sentence case should be used for titles. "Melbourne's Lost Victorian Landmarks" doesn't have the most encyclopedic ring to it. Also the Victorian era is a rather arbitrary limitation. Other than that, the work put into this is admirable. - HappyWaldo (talk) 11:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I worked on this article as part of the the Copy Editors drive, but expanded it as well as cleaning it up. I found more buildings to add without even trying. I agree that the title sounds weird. However, I would not use "List of" for this article as it is already more than a list. Maybe "Demolished buildings and structures in Melbourne". That would be consistent with the other articles you have found. I can always post this question to the WP Architecture group if you want. Rublamb (talk) 13:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that would be appreciated. I think a list would be best as the page already pretty much functions as one. The history section itself reads, "The following is a list ..." If we were to officially convert it into one, the history section could be merged into the lead. - HappyWaldo (talk) 01:14, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have posted to the WP Architecture group. Sometimes they are slow to respond. Another thought I had was to make this page a list in the usual architecture list format, but to also move the longer sections to a stand alone article on the lost building (if the section has sources). That is a bigger project that would take me about a week to get to, but makes sense in many ways. I will let you know what the WP Architecture response is. Thanks again for this suggestion. Rublamb (talk) 13:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to follow on from this, I think this title should be changed. So if there's no objections I will move it to "Demolished buildings and structures in Melbourne", and change the "Buildings" subheading to "Victorian buildings". It can be changed into a list article eventually but given that requires more substantive change, probably good to make this step change first. Gracchus250 (talk) 06:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * That is fine. I never got a response from the architecture WP. Rublamb (talk) 17:53, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I created the article and I should have ticked the alert button but I didn’t think anyone would change it so much ! I made it a list of Victorian landmarks specifically because they constitute a large group that was built all at once, and demolished mostly at the sanmr time. I accept a list article is more encyclopaedic, bit in this case just ‘demolished buildings’ requires an awful lot more buildings to be added - eg the Cromwell building was a relatively minor loss, there were plenty of others of a similar size and age. Perhaps it should be List of Landmark Demolished Buildings ? Also I can’t think of anything that was a structure, not a building - unless we go way back for instance and include the first Princes Bridge, demolished in 1885. At the very least let’s make subsections to the list by period of construction Eg Victorian, Edwardian, Interwar and Modern. Then each section could have a short description of the growth of the city at that time. But again, if it’s a list, there’s literally dozens of Victorian mansions that have been lost, should they go in too ? And lots of important terrace houses, and whole blocks of the inner city that made way for the housing commission towers. I worked at the national trust for years, so I’ve got very long lists of lost places in my head. Rohanstorey (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)