Talk:A1079 road
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the UK Roads WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the UK's road network. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
A1079 road is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's assessment scale. See comments for details. |
|
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-Priority on the Project's priority scale. | |
[edit] Merger proposal
It makes sense: keeping the articles together. Thoughts? --TFoxton 18:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Absolutely agree. Two articles, one piece of tarmac seems a waste of time. Regan123 18:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Beverley Road is a more than just a part of the A1079 - it's a community and distinct part of Hull. Keep the pages seperate! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghr265 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Not beign a local its hard for me to eb sure, but this article seems to say the A1079 loses its primary status when it becomes Beverley Road. This suggests they are actually two pieces of tarmac that happen to connect to each other, rather than one being a subset of the other. I also can't see where Beverley Road could be included in this article - the focus of the article is not so much on the road itself (as this page is) but on the housing and shops that line it. On balance I'd argue they should remain separate though Beverley Road could do with better sourcing and a clearer claim to notability.
