This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of KentinSouth East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject River Thames, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.River ThamesWikipedia:WikiProject River ThamesTemplate:WikiProject River ThamesRiver Thames articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
Things have changed a lot since 2006- when most of the transport section text was added and we now understand the need for references. I have added a few tags to text that I probably wrote back then. In addition all the photos need to be reviewed- standards have changed. ClemRutter (talk) 10:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Not split.
I'm proposing to split this to Medway Towns for the conurbation while keeping "Medway" for the unitary district. The district (now called "Medway") has a population of 263,925 in 2011 and 192 kms[1] while the ONS BUA has 243,931 and 52 kms[2]. "Medway Towns" is often used to refer to the BUA only rather than the wider district and the A-Z Road Atlas has a town plan for "Medway Towns". Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:09, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what a separate article would add which isn't already adequately covered by the Medway article - it already notes that the area also known as the Medway Towns and Medway Towns is an existing redirect to here. If you want to add some clearer text on the differences in population between the urban area and the unitary authority, I'd say that's better done in this article than by the creation of a separate one, which would probably heavily overlap this one and could lead to confusion. Stortford (talk) 07:29, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On Wikipedia the tendency seems to be that if the urban area fills a local authority area then only a single article is necessary. E.g. see Reading, Berkshire which is an article for both the town and UA as opposed to say, Maidstone vs. Borough of Maidstone — which are of completely different scale. The similarity in population figures between the Medway UA and Medway Towns shows Medway UA does a good job of bounding the Medway Towns conurbation. Any slight difference can be described in this article. ChiZeroOne (talk) 18:17, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as I cannot see as to how this would improve the article. Perhaps further elaboration on the Medway towns in the article is necessary if such a split is already being considered, which would be unnecessary. Yasslaywikia (talk) 21:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A separate article for the conurbation is not needed. Having two different articles would create a lot of repetition and make navigation harder. There are separate articles for Medway towns (Chatham, Rochester) which link to information about the unitary authority on this article. Romogoth (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I assume Medway Council will keep applying for city status and they will eventually get it and then Medway towns status will be out-of-date ! And then re-naming will be more difficult. Also who else uses the Medway Towns naming system?? DavidAnstiss (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
