Discussione:Isola Stewart
Making this a parco article instead of a regione nazionale article modifica
Sorry for the English. I really need to jump back onto Duolingo to practice my Italiano...
Anyway, right now, I noticed this article is categorised as a regione nazionale article. However, the island only has a population of 440, and most Stewart Islanders all live in one settlement: Oban. However, Oban is not a tourist attraction by itself and most visit Oban as a base for exploring Parco nazionale Rakiura, which is the prime tourist draw of Stewart Island. The island is simply not that large to be a region article (it's not even a district for that matter; it's under the Distretto di Southland), and in my opinion, I think it serves the traveller if all information was in one article instead of two. I propose we convert this article into a parco article along the lines of en:Stewart Island (which is a rural area article, but I'm not sure whether it.voy has a status of that type). What does everyone else think? --SHB2000 (discussioni) 11:01, 27 giu 2022 (CEST)
- Hello SHB2000, happy to discuss with you. To avoid confusion with our readers, we'd rather keep two separate articles for "Isola Stewart" and "Parco nazionale Rakiura" as WP does. That said, i'm awaiting extra opinions and/or advices (Andyrom75, 3Pappa3, Codas, Teseo, Air fans). Claudio (discussioni) 22:01, 27 giu 2022 (CEST)
- Hello SHB2000, for our Italian edition, I agree with Claude van der Grift for the two articles. --Teseo (✉) 22:46, 27 giu 2022 (CEST)
- @SHB2000 despite the island it's little we don't have a template for islands by dimentions. We just use a region template (regione nazionale). So it's all normal for our version. Codas (discussioni) 07:45, 28 giu 2022 (CEST)
- SHB2000, in the recent past we merged two article in the way that you described, but only because there were a full and complete overlapping. Here, as per my understanding, from the current article, the overlap is in the range of the 80% of the territory, hence I would tend to agree with the others on keeping separated those two articles. --Andyrom75 (discussioni) 19:00, 28 giu 2022 (CEST)
- Okay that makes sense then. I'm probably just influenced by en.voy policy to try and minimise the number of region articles, but there are lots of other benefits from keeping them as two articles. It's why you'll find lots of sub-national articles that are rural area or city articles like this one, en:Chatham Islands or even en:Montserrat. SHB2000 (discussioni) 01:32, 29 giu 2022 (CEST)
- SHB2000, in the recent past we merged two article in the way that you described, but only because there were a full and complete overlapping. Here, as per my understanding, from the current article, the overlap is in the range of the 80% of the territory, hence I would tend to agree with the others on keeping separated those two articles. --Andyrom75 (discussioni) 19:00, 28 giu 2022 (CEST)
- @SHB2000 despite the island it's little we don't have a template for islands by dimentions. We just use a region template (regione nazionale). So it's all normal for our version. Codas (discussioni) 07:45, 28 giu 2022 (CEST)
- Hello SHB2000, for our Italian edition, I agree with Claude van der Grift for the two articles. --Teseo (✉) 22:46, 27 giu 2022 (CEST)