Talk:List of heritage buildings in Victoria

Redirect
I understand why the redirect was done - that this is a subset of the items on the List of historic places (which is far more inclusive) -- a couple of things, though: Are there any opinions about that suggestion?--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:08, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't start the article - is it clear that there are no rows in these tables that arent' in the other article?
 * Rather than a redirect, I would recommend a merge so that verbiage about the buildings and images could be rolled into the other article.
 * It would also be good to capture the links to articles, where this is not done.
 * The other article is a list of all historic places in Victoria. If it doesn't include something, add it. The "list of historic places" articles are using a template format that doesn't easily allow a merge -- in any event, the verbiage here is merely a cut-and-paste from List of National Historic Sites of Canada in British Columbia, so nothing is lost.  Yes, the links are great, so move them on over.  But the links are hardly a good reason in and of themselves to maintain an incomplete, duplicate list. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not disagreeing and it's really about being able to easily identify buildings in the list and capture information that took time to gather - it's just a shame to lose the info.


 * So that would mean addition of 2 columns into the List of historic places in Victoria, British Columbia - 1) to identify the type of place, so people could easily sort to building (since it's such a long list and 2) add a description column. I'm happy to do that - and for now put up a merge notice on the article page here - so that it's clear that it will be merged (through a cut and paste method). When I'm done, I can put the redirect back in place. How does that sound?--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No time was wasted. This list is just a cut-and-paste of another list.  No information is lost. There is no reason to reverse a redirect since the information can continue to be moved over.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:27, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It would have been time wasted if I didn't catch it. And, yep, I agree it's easy enough to do.
 * Can we just leave it the way it is for right now so that I can work with it easier (i.e., not have to continually go to history, etc.)?
 * It seems like the standard approach if you're going to merge something is to make a merge recommendation first, but maybe that's just my mindset from things I've worked on with others.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I have no intention of redirecting again. Just seems like a waste time for a list that contains no original work and is incomplete, and keeping it does not help a whit with the objectives you've set for yourself.  And, there is nothing wrong with being WP:BOLD with article redirects, especially in a case like this where there is no value in keeping this one.  The problem is insisting on being BOLD if someone else objects.  Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I wasn't being clear.  I have no objections to your proposed solution.  It sounds fine to me.  I was saying that it seemed like overkill to restore this list to do any of that.  But I have no problems with the end result you've suggested.  --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:57, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Merge
I just cracked up List of historic places in Victoria, British Columbia and it doesn't use a table. It uses pre-defined templates for the header and rows, like: Template:HPC header.

So, I don't know how I'm going to be able to add the type of place or description.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering if the easiest thing to do is:
 * Put the links in the List of historic places in Victoria, British Columbia to articles.
 * Where there's not an article for one of the historic buildings, create a new article - I have a citation already. Then, add it's link to the List of historic places in Victoria, British Columbia.


 * That seems like the easiest way to go about this.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good plan. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Luckily I was able to create sections in articles that already had a bit of info, add the additional info and link to sections within those articles. Now I just need to write:
 * * Bay Street Armoury
 * * Esquimalt and Nanaimo Railway Roundhouse
 * * Old Victoria Customs House (covers two rows in the table)
 * * Rogers Building (Victoria, British Columbia)
 * * Victoria City Hall (covers two rows in the table)


 * I'll get them started as stubs so I can put back the redirect soon - maybe an hour or so.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)