Wikipedia talk:Notability (populated places) (failed) 3

There have been two different proposals for a guideline Wikipedia:Notability (populated places). Neither of them gained consensus. They are archived at the following locations:

Wikipedia:Notability_(populated_places)_(failed)

Wikipedia:Notability_(populated_places)_(failed)_2

Latest version

As it stands, the whole proposal is far to vague/broad. In the UK, a postal code designates a handful of houses (typically 1 to 10). They're based purely on grouping houses together into similar-size numbers, and have nothing to do with current or historical settlement boundaries. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 22:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As for the "informally titled areas" section, that is similarly ill-defined and foolish. Just because something has a name does not mean that it is notable. Subject-specific guidelines should be aimed at clarifying what does and does not meet the GNG, not opening flood gates to anything people want. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 22:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Before you jump to try to kill a proposal, just be aware that I am in the process of working on a new one. It may take a few days. I am looking into all the issues before the final draft is out there. If you have a concern about the postal code issue, a discussion is a good place to bring it up. Sebwite (talk) 04:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is such a discussion is it not? OrangeDog (τ • ε) 11:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]