Talk:Bodyke

Split bodyke evictions into seperate article

The bodyke evictions pretty much take up the whole page, just give it its own article. MildLoser (talk) 09:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. Personally I wouldn't support a split. If the "evictions" text is too long (in absolute terms), then some of the quotes could be summarised a bit. If the "evictions" text is too long (in relative terms - compared to the rest of the article), then we should perhaps just expand the other sections a little. Otherwise, as it stands, the article as a whole is only about 700 words. And not WP:TOOBIG to be readable. (Is the article perhaps "slanted" somewhat towards the evictions? Sure. But that's mainly because that's what the subject is notable for. And most of the coverage is about. Hence our coverage, in the article, possibly doesn't give one element of the topic WP:UNDUE weight.) Splitting the content to a stand-along article would likely result in two (semi-)stubs. Both of which would probably duplicate/overlap with (and require context from) the other. I'm not sure that's an improvement. My 2x cents at any rate.... Guliolopez (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

• Bump. It's now been over a month since this split was first proposed. While WP:SPLITCLOSE (or WP:CON in general) doesn't set a deadline for these discussions, we're well over the "normally one week or more" mentioned in the procedure page. Unless there are specific objections or thoughts, I'm inclined to remove the tag (As it doesn't appear to be driving any additional discussion or other editors to the discussion). And to close the discussion - for now (As there doesn't appear to be consensus on whether/how to progress with the proposed action). Guliolopez (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2024 (UTC)