This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-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.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol articles
I propose that Upper Knowle be merged into Knowle, Bristol. I think that the content in the Upper Knowle article can easily be explained in the context of Knowle, Bristol, and the Knowle, Bristol article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Upper Knowle will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. — Rodtalk 20:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Given the size of the Upper Knowle article, clearly something ought to be done!
I'm not sure this is the best direction though. The Knowle article is all about Upper Knowle: the Wells Road and Totterdown border area. There's nothing in there about Lower Knowle - even Redcatch Road is described from the upper end alone. Why not merge the content in the other direction instead, and move it to Upper Knowle?
We ought to have an article on Lower Knowle and the side of the hill down to St John's Lane and Victoria Park. Knowle, Bristol should be an overview of all three, and should cover Knowle West too. There is some argument that Knowle West simply didn't exist at one time, when the rest of Knowle already did and was created out of nothing later on - but that's not the clearest viewpoint for today's readers. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:20, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as Knowle West is already a full article I wouldn't touch that one but happy for the merge to be in any direction. I just came across Upper Knowle & thought as a tiny one line stub it could be merged in some way.— Rodtalk 08:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to see four articles here, as there really are three separate parts to Knowle which barely communicate (there's a hill in the way) and have significantly different history and character. Otherwise two articles, with Upper and Lower as large sections within Knowle, those names as redirects, and Knowle West still as a large separate article. "Knowle" should give some overall summary though.
So which way to merge? Into two, or into four? Two might be easier to achieve quickly. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:29, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
