Talk:Counties of North Carolina

Is this an article?
Is this an article? Is this a good idea? This article does not really comply with our regional template. While lists may be a good idea in some other wikis they do not seem to be so good for Wikivoyage. Also, lists of places are sorted alphabetically, not geographically. Two places next to each other on this list may be at opposite ends of the state, or the earth. -- (WT-en) Huttite 08:16, 28 Jun 2005 (EDT)


 * I think this is a bad idea. We've used counties to break up American states before, but I'd suggest grouping these under larger geographical regions. --(WT-en) Evan 11:01, 29 Jun 2005 (EDT)

Counties of North Carolina

 * Delete. A Wikipedia-style list of counties in the state.  The list itself assumes that every county is a (future) article, which is not necessarily the case.  Counties are often very artificial and arbitrary blocks on a map and don't always make good regions.  (They're fine where they make sense, but we aren't in any way bound by the lines bureacrats make.)  And the article simply doesn't fit into our geographical hierarchy; if these county articles are ever created, they should be listed as subregions in their respective regions-of-North-Carolina articles. - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 17:17, 27 July 2006 (EDT)
 * Don't delete. Redirect to North Carolina -- (WT-en) Huttite 22:04, 27 July 2006 (EDT)
 * Why? - (WT-en) Todd VerBeek 21:17, 6 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect to North Carolina (preferably) or else move to "North Carolina/Counties of North Carolina". The article itself isn't very useful, but the information it contains might be helpful in the future, and a redirect has the additional advantage of preventing someone from recreating the article in the future. -- (WT-en) Ryan 23:44, 11 August 2006 (EDT)
 * With the exception of the Los Angeles area, I don't think many travellers ever think about counties. They only exist to define the boundaries of local government and hence have no bearing on passers-through. I say delete the crap out of it. Any useful information there is best relegated to the nearest city-- not even Rand-McNally shows travellers where counties are. (WT-en) Texugo 23:53, 11 August 2006 (EDT)
 * For what it's worth, there has been an ongoing discussion about counties in (among other places) Project:Geographical hierarchy, and there are useful county articles for California and Ohio. Locals tend to create county articles because that's the regional breakdown they're familiar with, and travelers tend to not ever know what county they're in.  Given that county articles will probably always be created, my opinion is that we need to figure out what region to redirect them to, or (if appropriate) how to incorporate them into the existing Wikivoyage regional hierarchy. -- (WT-en) Ryan 23:59, 11 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Keep, at least until a more comprehensive policy is worked out. Ryan's point about the locals is well taken.  A good way of transferring knowledge needs to be found, and we should retain this article until there's a solution. -- (WT-en) Bill-on-the-Hill 12:30, 12 August 2006 (EDT)
 * Redirect to North Carolina#Regions as Huttite suggests. This keeps the data but puts it out of the way. (WT-en) Pashley 20:26, 13 August 2006 (EDT)