This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Back garden redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 30 March 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
An editor whose name I don't seem to be able to access says: NO notability and makes other insults.
This is exactly the sort of article an encyclopedia should have. Because of the extraordinarly narrow defintion of what constitutes an enc. entry, EDITOR deems it unsuitable.
Firstly, there is the number of gardens. Unless EDITOR lives in a flat, it is almost certain s/he has a back garden. There are over 10m in the UK, and if there is the same ratio worldwide, some 500 million.
When I read the generally trivial and un-noteworthy entries on ancient battles, minor celebrities and the charcacters in yet another trivial version of dungeons and dragons, my blood begins to boil.
The information is not speculative. It defines the sorts of things that are in a back garden, how it is a social and practical space set apart from a house or dwelling.
I partly put it there because there is no decent entry in encycs. on a back garden. It written, of course, as yet too much from my own narrow perspective of gardens in the UK, but I know no other. But I can generalise from what I know.
It is a new article, and needs to be developed. How on earth do we expand the wiki; it would be like arguing that we could have an article on a 18 spot ladybird because we have one on a 17 spot, but not on an ladybird 1000 times the size, because no-one has ever written an article on one 1000 times the size, and therefore EDITOR thinks it non encyclopedic.
Go back to the original definition of ENCYCLOPEDIA by Chambers. It is to create a knowledge of the whole world in a structured way starting from no particular pre-existing sub-division of the world.
I had expected EDITOR to have had a deeper and more profound understanding of what an encyclopedia is, and s/he at the moment does not understand the encyclopedia-ising process.
If in the end it's wiped I'll move my attention other areas of work, and I do an awful lot of properly unsung amendments to help make what is currently a sow's ear of a production into a purse.
I expect, for exaple, a US editor will want to point out that socialising does happen in back gardens, with people sitting out on the stoop, etc.
There are 215 references to the phrase back garden in Wikipedia. And EDITOR has the gall to say that the phrase is so unnotable, it should not be defined!
Back gardens should stay!!! Chasnor15 (talk) 20:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and please stop saying I've been making 'insults' - I've done no such thing ! My views have been expressed about the article and ONLY the article. These views may differ from other peoples - but that doesn't make them insults. CultureDrone (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
The major reason why this can't be included in garden, is that garden is already quite long. Secondly, there are, I believe, separate entries for entities such as 'rose garden'. While rose, flower, spring, summer and autumn gardens are ways of classifying gardens, and valid ones, so are rock, alpine, and so on, and so are 'front' and 'back'. They describe ways in which gardens are used.
One critic holds that he can barbecue in a back garden or a front, and so what. But does he put his compost heap on his front lawn, have his post delivered to his front door by the back garden, or welcome his guests to the house there. If he usually does, we should know. At which door are legal processes properly delivered? We should know. And where do carol-singers gather on winter night to sing of the arrival of (possibly) his saviour. 80.189.139.20 (talk) 17:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I should like to acknowledge and thank all those people who have had a input into the keeping of this particular article, dear as it is to my heart. Chasnor15 (talk) 08:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
A suggestion: I think that the phrase "back yard" should logically also exist, and should point to the "back garden" page. But I don't know how to do this. :) Does anyone who knows how, agree?
ChickenWings (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Backyard should not redirect here considering the backyard does not have to be a garden. Gune (talk) 06:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. A yard in English is a general name for an enclosure attached to a building such as Scotland Yard, dockyard, &c. As it is not necessarily a garden, I shall redirect as suggested. Warden (talk) 08:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
I've marked this article as having a limited worldwide scope. Other than a brief mention of the US and Canada, the article seems to restrict itself to back yards in the UK. Perhaps this should be noted somewhere in the text. For that matter, how relevant is the term "back garden" to an Australian audience where the common term is "backyard"? LordVetinari (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The redirection of back yard may resolve this issue. The article has a focus on the back garden as an English institution. If other cultures share or imitate this then we may include them provided that we have sources. Warden (talk) 09:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Home garden. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. : Bhunacat10 (talk), 09:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)