Talk:Barking

Requested move 18 July 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the pages as requested at this time, per the discussion below. Please consider a new move request if you would like to institute a primary topic redirect. Dekimasuよ! 16:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Barking (disambiguation) → Barking
Barking → Barking, London

– WP:ASTONISH There was some discussion at Talk:Bark (botany)#Requested move 27 November 2017 where was pointed about this page. It would probably be more appropriate to have no primary topic, Bark (sound) is not here, probably because of NC, not that readers wouldn't look for that topic with "Barking". Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

STRONGLY Support per nom - no clear primary topic (WP:NOPRIMARY), and currently quite a surprising page to end up on (WP:ASTONISH). Paintspot Infez (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support move of Barking, but oppose move of dab page. Bark (sound) is the clear primary topic and should probably end up at the base name barking, but until then it's a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT situation. Red Slash 16:40, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with that, but not now, for the same reason as at Talk:Cheddar, Somerset#Requested move, we will need to fix a lot of links to this page first. Crouch, Swale (talk) 05:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nominator's rationale, and comments above. ╠╣uw [talk] 08:42, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The candidates for primary topic would be the town and the sound, and I'm not convinced about either. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:26, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Clearly not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over the sound, which is familiar to virtually everyone in the world.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Compostion of Barking

Reference 1, which appears as a footnote but doesn't seem to be in the body of the text, says:

"Barking is made up of 5 wards in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: Abbey, Eastbury, Gascoigne, Longbridge, and Thames". The link provided does not support this claim and this is unsurprising as it is plainly wrong.

The only political entity called Barking is the parliamentary constituency and this as your own separate article rightly claims and evidence (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/250941/7032_iii.pdf) comprises:

"The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham wards of Abbey, Alibon, Becontree, Eastbury, Gascoigne, Goresbrook, Longbridge, Mayesbrook, Parsloes, Thames, and Valence."

Maybe this is an attempt to define the pre 1965 borough in terms of wards, but the ward boundaries have changed and few if any follow the former borough/parish boundary.

The Post Office has its own definition of Barking, coterminous with the IG11 postcode, but this does not follow ward boundaries or even lie wholly within The London Borough of Barking and Dagenham — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.93.63 (talk) 14:01, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]