Talk:Headley Down

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hampshire Low‑importance

	Hampshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hampshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hampshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HampshireWikipedia:WikiProject HampshireTemplate:WikiProject HampshireHampshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Village?

I believe Headley Down should be called a village (forgive me if I'm being pedantic) as it is considerably more than a few houses and has several shops, a church (not a parish church) and various small businesses. Tony Holkham (talk) 23:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Village or a locality, it looks like the page should be merged with Headley SovalValtos (talk) 21:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd strongly oppose a merge. Headley Down is a separate entity which developed independently from the parish/village (Headley) that it happens to be part of. They are separate geographically, historically and culturally. Tony Holkham (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No axe to grind myself. I had come across this, Guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements state that ideally the civil parish should be the catch-all article, avoiding single line articles on every village and landmark within the parish. SovalValtos (talk) 06:03, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning! No axe to grind here, either, just a different viewpoint. The guideline Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements says "If there is no likelihood that an article could ever expand beyond a stub, the place should be dealt with in the article of the smallest notable area in which it lies". In the case of Headley Down, it is already beyond a stub.

The guidelines are very helpful, but common sense trumps guidelines, otherwise they would be "Rules". For me, it's more productive (and more in Wikipedia's raison d'être, in my opinion) to seek out stubs and expand them, rather than merge them simply to become a footnote in another article where they will probably never receive much attention. I'm trying to do that with villages I'm familiar with in England and Wales. Tony Holkham (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Headley Down. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090917192641/http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-global/w-localtoyou/w-thames_solent/w-thames_solent-countryside/w-south_east-places-west_weald-ludshott.htm to http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-global/w-localtoyou/w-thames_solent/w-thames_solent-countryside/w-south_east-places-west_weald-ludshott.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New sources

project seeks memories of wartime Canadian Army camp&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2018 might be useful as a lead to new sources.SovalValtos (talk) 12:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good spot. I've bookmarked it for looking at later. Tony Holkham (Talk) 13:39, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Garage

To editor Simmonsm: - I'm not sure the garage has closed permanently as planning permission was granted in May 2018 see here, page 2 and here (June) to demolish and rebuild it. Do you have any local (eg newspaper) evidence? Cheers, Tony Holkham (Talk) 11:07, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The simmonsm edit does not say permanently, just closed. The name of the applicant in the June document, J P & S Services Ltd, may indicate a change of name in the offing, but that would be WP:ORSovalValtos (talk) 11:58, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]