Wikipedia:Political subdivisions of New York

In the U.S. state of New York, every piece of land is part of an incorporated municipality below the county level. Most of the land is in a town - what is called a township in several other states. There are a large number of towns that contain incorporated villages or cities with the same exact name, and a number more with such unincorporated communities (some of the census-designated places). Talk:Administrative divisions of New York/Disambiguated divisions is currently a table of just those beginning with A (plus a relatively small number of completely different places in different counties that share a name).

Presently, most of the undisambiguated page titles are disambiguation pages (for instance Adams, New York). But some, like Athens, New York, redirect to the town, and others, like Binghamton, New York, redirect to the smaller (but often more important) place.

When linking to such a place, sometimes one wants the town: "Bar Creek runs through the rural areas of Foo Town". Sometimes one wants the smaller place: "Route 6 intersects Route 87 in downtown Foo". But often one either doesn't know: "Bar was born in Foo", or one wants to refer to both: "Foo is in the Bar Mountains". Thus, not all links can be disambiguated properly, and Foo, New York should not be a disambiguation page unless there is an unrelated place - in another county - with the same name.

I propose merging the two articles. This will not imply that the two municipalities are the same; a clear distinction will be made in the article. But this is really the only way to avoid links to disambiguation pages without arbitrarily redirecting to one or the other. --SPUI (T - C) 01:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

My opinion is that the undisambiguated title should refer to the town since that is the county subdivision in New York state. Most villages located in a town with the same name do serve as the town center or seat of town government. Some towns, however, have only hamlets as the town center. How about adding a "Town center" section in the town articles containing a brief description and a link to the appropriate village/hamlet article? Or we could also just merge the entire village/hamlet article into this section if the article is not well-developed. --Polaron | Talk 17:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, that can result in problems if we say "Bar happened in Foo" and it happened in the village. Or is the village actually considered part of the town? --SPUI (T - C) 18:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the village is considered part of the town, but there are villages that are located in two towns (e.g. Mamaroneck (village), New York). In these cases, only the portion of the village within a specified town is part of that town. I see your point though that there will be instances when the village is the one specifically being referred to. If a town contains only one village and it has the same name as the town, (and that village is wholly within the town), then merging is the way to go. I'm not sure what the best option is for other cases though. Polaron | Talk 20:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This makes some sense but can also be confusing since it puts the necessity for disambiguation on the text of the linking article. Eluchil404 12:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what's wrong with having a disambiguation page for every name that is the name of more than one political subdivision (and having links that can be to either of the two subdivisions (or that one is not sure which they should be to) link to the disambig page). Either this was insufficiently explained in the proposal above, or I'm slow. Can someone (SPUI?) explain, please?—msh210℠ 05:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links to disambiguation pages are typically very bad. --SPUI (T - C) 19:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...but not here.—msh210℠ 07:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree towns are above villages, as villages are part of towns. But, cities are independent of towns. They often have a rural town adjacent, but I would highly doubt someone referring to Binghamton actually referring to the town. The best solution, in my opinion is what the editors of Ithaca, New York did... Make a general article and then link the automated demographics data for the two entities. But, if it comes down to it... Disambiguate cities over towns, towns over villages. -newkai | talk | contribs 23:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ. Villages are not subordinate to towns although they overlap geographically. Villages operate independently of the towns. However, the town is responsible for providing services not provided by the villages. Villages and cities are similar in that both are incorporated places. I also disagree with merging village and town articles, since a village and a town are separate legal entities, Scarsdale and a few (all?) of the other four coextensive town/villages being the exception. --Nelson Ricardo 04:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]