Talk:Timeline of the Toledo Strip

Untitled
Should this article be merged with Toledo War?--Inonit 20:29, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't agree they should be merged in entirety, though there is some overlap and this article would probably be better named as "Timeline of the Toledo War" or something similar. I think it is valuable to have the detailed timeline as well as a general article about the dispute. I could see renaming this article and then making Toledo Strip redirect to Toledo War (or swap the positions, either way). older&ne;wiser 02:25, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * If we view 32k as a guideline for maximum article size, we could fit 'em both in one article (even without removing duplication). The timeline is I think invaluable ... what do you think of having the summary article be followed by the timeline, i.e., write a shorter article and then have a section entitled "Chronology" or something like that?  I haven't tried to do any writing yet, so I haven't checked how much duplication there is, whether Toledo War could be expanded usefully with information from the chronology (I suspect it could), etc.  I'm skeptical about having a separate article for the chronology, as "chronology of the Toledo War" isn't really a meaningful subject ("Toledo War" is the subject).  Not sure how clear I'm being, but doing my best.  Anyway, the chronology is so good that its cursory mention on Toledo War doesn't seem to do it justice, and readers might miss it.--Inonit 02:48, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * When I first came across these, my first inclination was to merge them. There's a lot I like about both articles. It's not so much the actual size in KB that I'm concerned about, it's more the sheer length of the chronology -- there's a lot of scrolling involved to get through the whole thing. It's been quite a while since I've looked closely at either though--there's probably room for improvement. I'm leery of of a straight up merge though. older&ne;wiser 03:16, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Summary style has a structure that seems to make sense -- structure the main article like Toledo War and have the "For more details, see ..." template at the top of a Chronology section. Then we do a brief chronology (maybe in paragraph rather than list form) and send people to the other page for more detail.  What do you think of that idea?--Inonit 13:09, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I like this as a separate page versus merging it with the Toledo War article.::::: --EMU CPA 19:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * As the article currently stands, wouldn't the timeline be more suited to a subarticle of the "Toledo War" such as "Chronology of the Toledo War"? The article "Toledo Strip" should describe the actual strip, and currently, I think it's only clearly defined in the first sentence. My proposal would be to take the timeline here, and use it as a subarticle "Chronology", summarizing the information contained in it in both the "Toledo Strip" and "Toledo War" articles. Hotstreets 02:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Proposal for Move/Redirect
(replacing my earlier comment) How about have the majority of the "Toledo Strip" (the timeline specifically) article be moved to a separate "Timeline of the Toledo War" article and then have Toledo Strip redirect to Toledo War. The information that doesn't fit the timeline can be merged into the Toledo War article. In my opinion, the Toledo Strip and Toledo War are one and the same. The "creation" of the strip is already mentioned and described in the Toledo War article, and most of the information in this article outside of the timeline is already in the Toledo War article as well. If nobody objects, I think I'll do this... Hotstreets 16:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)