Talk:New Forest
Latest comment: 6 months ago by SHB2000 in topic Region articles
Sleep Listings
editAll of these deleted from the article. They belong in their respective town/city articles, not here.
- Halcyon New Forest Holiday Cottages, tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810 Lymington, Brockenhurst, Lyndhurst, Walkford and Everton, offer self catering new forest cottage accommodation from 6 guests to large groups of 30. Specializing in Weekend breaks. Midweeks also available for corporate stays etc.
- Renwick Lodge sleeps 2 - 30 people in Walkford tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- The Old Stables sleeps 18 - 30 people in interesting victorian stable block conversion, central Lyndhurst tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- Rhinefield Bothy sleeps 16 - 38 people in Rhinefield, Brockenhurst (adjacent to the Rhinefield House Hotel) tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- Vine Cottage sleeps 10 - 38 people in Rhinefield, Brockenhurst (adjacent to the Rhinefield House Hotel) tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- Latchmoor Corner sleeps 10 - 14 people in Brockenhurst tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- Wheathill sleeps 14 - 20 people in Lymington tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
- Uplay Cottage sleeps 2 - 8 people in Everton, Lymington tel: 07515 881329 (9am-9pm) +44 (0)1590 641810
For review by Thunderingtyphoons!:
Heathfield Estate, Lyndhurst Road, Bransgore, BH23 8LA ☏ +44 7740 983047, concierge@heathfieldestate.co.uk. This property has 2 properties available and both have Digital TVs with Netflix, Prime & Disney+, free Wi-Fi, and a hot tub is available to use. The Coach House has 4 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms to sleep 8 people (£499-749 per night) while the Cottage has 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms to sleep 4 people (£249-349 per night).
Region articles
editRegion articles should not have detailed listings for points of interest, restaurants, shops, or hotels. Wikivoyage:Region article template says:
- "Individual listings should be placed at the lowest available level of local page (a district of a huge city or the city page for a small town)."
- "points of interest (such as those mentioned in "See" sections) should not usually have markers in region articles but should be linked to the bottom-level article where they have full listings."
I have moved the detailed listings to the town and villages articles. Please don't add any more. Ground Zero (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- This is a park article, where listings are allowed. However, it is a longer term ambition of mine to split Hampshire into subregions, and this would hopefully be one.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- It may be a park article, but it sure isn't treated as one based on how the article looks as of typing this. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 23:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, the 10 town/village articles listed led me to believe it was a region article. This was leading to duplicate listings, which we try to avoid Ground Zero (talk) 02:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, national parks in the UK all have towns and villages with tens of thousands of people living inside them, so you can expect a British park article to be different to those in countries with vast wilderness where access to parks can be restricted and charged for. And I expect the New Forest is one of the more heavily-populated national parks.-- ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- What I find strange with UK national parks is that despite having villages in them, the villages aren't exclaves (something like this, this or this). A bit of a tangent, though. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- There are some exclaves inside parks - Blaenau Ffestiniog and Buxton off the top of my head. But the reason for what you said is national parks in the UK are not proper national parks by international standards. They don't protect pristine nature. Preserving and enhancing nature is part of their job, but they're also working human cultural landscapes, and have been for millennia. The villages are part of the fabric.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, right. So what you're saying is they wouldn't be categorised as an IUCN Cat. II park? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- There are some exclaves inside parks - Blaenau Ffestiniog and Buxton off the top of my head. But the reason for what you said is national parks in the UK are not proper national parks by international standards. They don't protect pristine nature. Preserving and enhancing nature is part of their job, but they're also working human cultural landscapes, and have been for millennia. The villages are part of the fabric.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- What I find strange with UK national parks is that despite having villages in them, the villages aren't exclaves (something like this, this or this). A bit of a tangent, though. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 09:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, national parks in the UK all have towns and villages with tens of thousands of people living inside them, so you can expect a British park article to be different to those in countries with vast wilderness where access to parks can be restricted and charged for. And I expect the New Forest is one of the more heavily-populated national parks.-- ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, the 10 town/village articles listed led me to believe it was a region article. This was leading to duplicate listings, which we try to avoid Ground Zero (talk) 02:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- It may be a park article, but it sure isn't treated as one based on how the article looks as of typing this. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta) 23:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)