Template talk:Districts of Bristol

Merge

Most of this duplicates the Areas of Bristol template and there is no distinction in the areas covered. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I support the merger. Districts of Bristol looks like it is used to distinguish formal council districts - so Avonmouth is listed but Shirehampton isn't, because the latter is part of the former district. Personally I think that the areas template is more useful because of its completeness and because council district names are less commonly used than the actual names of the areas they refer to. Ask someone from Shirehampton if you doubt that! --TimTay (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would support a merger and then a cleanup. No-one refers to Clifton East, not many to Ashley. Perhaps a link on the city council article to their ward-finder. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they need merging, there's no point in having two separate templates. I started doing this over a year ago, but got sidetracked and forgot about it. A possible combined version is in my sandbox. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 18:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the sandbox version. I'd be annoyed about losing the ward template as I spent a long time sorting every bristol image on commons by ward. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one! --TimTay (talk) 21:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that perhaps the best place for the new version is Template:Bristol, since the Wikiproject template has been moved from there to Template:Bristol WP. We would need to get a bot to change all current {{Bristol}} tags to {{Bristol WP}} first though. — Gasheadsteve ^{Talk to me} 12:31, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All transclusions have been updated. There's a few links I didn't modify though. §hep • ^Talk 21:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]