Talk:W. H. Burford & Sons

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the W. H. Burford & Sons article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Australia: Adelaide / South Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal W. H. Burford & Sons is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Adelaide (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject South Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of South Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Health and fitness Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles 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.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why should this article be split?

Imagine News Corp. article is having whole biography of Rupert Murdoch. Awkward. JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 17:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been suggested that this article be split into multiple articles accessible from a disambiguation page.

It has been suggested by whom?
Where is this suggestion?
What are the reasons for this suggestion?
What are the reasons for the split?
What would the disambiguation page be called?
What are the pages it would be split into, and what would be their names?

Please explain. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Today, I suggest this article be split into W. H. Burford & Son (the company), W. H. Burford (the person) and William Burford (his son) because I believe the current situation of this article is against Wikipedia's policy. Enough? JSH-alive/^{talk/cont/mail} 14:07, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What would the disambiguation page be called?

I believe the current situation of this article is against Wikipedia's policy. - Which policy or policies?

Pdfpdf (talk) 16:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What would be gained by splitting? Not readability. It's not (and never will be) a huge article. Doug butler (talk) 15:05, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion about history

I don't have time to investigate now, but the histories seem to be confused as per this WP article (which needs better citing), the info in this one and the info attached to this photo. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:37, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]