Talk:Subdivisions of Serbia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Subdivisions of Serbia is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
[edit] Proposed merge
This article, Regions of Serbia and Districts of Serbia share 90% of information. I fail to see why it needs to be repeated, and, apart from the list of "regions", districts and municipalities and maps (most shared), what else could possibly be written about the subdivision in general? I hate forks for no apparent reason. Duja 11:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
don't merge. For each country there is a (small or not) overview article. Then there are seperate articles for each type, e.g. districts, counties, municipalities. Maybe the overview article should be made smaller. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that Districts of Serbia should have a separate page, but I really fail to grasp the difference between this page, Subdivisions of Serbia, and Regions of Serbia. They seem to pretty much duplicate information, with different images. At least the districts article is talking about something entirely, and I don't believe I can say the same about these. Picaroon9288|ta co 22:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wrong merge
I reverted article to previous version because list of municipalities was removed from here and merged into article Districts of Serbia. If somebody search for the list of municipalities, Districts of Serbia article is not most logical place where he will look for it, but this one. PANONIAN (talk) 02:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge yet again...
Tobias, would you please explain why we need four articles (Subdivisions of Serbia, Districts of Serbia, Municipalities of Serbia and Regions of Serbia) when all the information which is now triplicated and quadruplicated was contained here? Do we need such elaborate taxonomy just for taxonomy's sake, and consistency for consistency's sake?
May I remind you that WP:POVFORK states that:
Sometimes, when an article gets long, a section of the article is made into its own article, and the handling of the subject in the main article is condensed to a brief summary.
Which of those articles is too long, and why redirects couldn't do their job as normal? At the moment, almost all the information is in Municipalities of Serbia and all of it was in here, (before you removed the short info about districts just for the sake of having a separate article about them). Duja 08:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
These all are different types. If one wants to read about the municipalities, he should only get these. Consistency is important in a WP, it makes surfing for the reader easier. It is done that way for all other countries, Serbia has absolutly the right that its articles are treated as good as those for other countries. Don't merge, but expand. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 10:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- A solution might be that implied by the page move I made on September 21; Subdivisions of Serbia as a master article linking to Administrative divisions of Serbia and other X divisions of Serbia or including those X-type divisions (electoral, planning, etc) as sections within:
|
|
