Talk:Waterton Glacier International Peace Park
Add topicWhat to do about this article?
[edit]What should we do with this article? It's between a rock and hard place - Can't redirect to Glacier National Park or Waterton Lakes National Park. Disamb maybe? (WT-en) Sapphire 23:16, 3 April 2006 (EDT)
- How about a one liner explaining that the park is a combination of two parks (plus some whys and wherefores) and adding two links to seperate article for those parks? (WT-en) WindHorse 4 April 06
- The External links section on this page is probably not a good idea as we really don't want sections named "External Links" on any pages if at all possible. Ideally it might just be better to make this a disambiguation page (similar to North (India)) to avoid ending up with a lot of information duplicated between this article and the Glacier & Waterton articles. That's just my opinion, however, and it may be possible to make this into a very useful article that doesn't duplicate the child articles. -- (WT-en) Ryan 00:16, 4 April 2006 (EDT)
- Sorry, I didn't explain well. I was not suggesting adding the name of the two parks as external links, but establishing links to the parks within the introductory info. i.e 'The Waterton Glacier International Peace Park is a park in XX State ...... and is comprised of [A Park] and [B Park]. (WT-en) WindHorse 4 April 06
- I thought that was what you were going for, but changed my mind while doing what you had suggested. After viewing the article I decided I still liked your idea. (WT-en) Sapphire 02:04, 4 April 2006 (EDT)
- Sorry, I didn't explain well. I was not suggesting adding the name of the two parks as external links, but establishing links to the parks within the introductory info. i.e 'The Waterton Glacier International Peace Park is a park in XX State ...... and is comprised of [A Park] and [B Park]. (WT-en) WindHorse 4 April 06
- The way you have set up the page is very clear and seems fine to me. (WT-en) WindHorse 4 April 06