Talk:Abandoned village

Urban studies and planning Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning 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.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Useful? Merge?[edit]

I don't know how useful this article is, perhaps it should be merged with Ghost town. A mcmurray 20:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The term "abandoned village" is more commonly used in a European context in particular for the Middle Ages. "Ghost town" is an American term mostly associated with the phenomenon of towns in the West. I see the articles trying to encompass each other which is probably original research, I'm not sure the sources would support it except by loose analogy, they emphasis different things. -- Stbalbach 02:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose. I guess that both articles will grow and that in the future we would have to create separate artices again. I might change my oppinion if somebody explains structure of the merged article. JanSuchy 09:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conceptually the ideas are similar, but the terms are used in very different context's, by very different groups of people, on purpose. They emphasis different things and deal with different historic periods - these terms are different for a reason. It's no different than the term black earth which has multiple articles of various names depending on who uses it (british, brazilian or russian archaeologists). -- Stbalbach 14:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose. However similar the concepts are, there's definitely a different context for each, and both articles seem reasonably long enough to keep. Mr. Absurd (talk) 06:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Isn't there a difference between a village and a town?--Ted-m (talk) 03:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Abandoned village" vs. "Lost village"[edit]

I'm far more familiar with the usage "lost village" for this subject than its current name. For example, the title of Maurice Beresford's book, The Lost Villages of England (Sutton, 1954) ISBN 0-86299-108-0 Why was this name selected over "lost village"? -- llywrch 19:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because "lost" is a broader term. For example, if a village is really small, people may stop being able to find it. You can imagine how annoying that must be—but you know it must happen. Everything else does. – AndyFielding (talk) 12:20, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A different merger idea[edit]

I agree that Ghost town is a separate concept and should be a separate article. I don't see such a reason for separating Abandoned village and Abandoned medieval village, though. Perhaps those two should be merged. JamesMLane t c 23:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then please explain the difference. If the only difference is time and place, then they probably should be the same article. If there is some other difference, I'd like to know. Also, the article itself needs to explain the difference, if there is one. My vote is that this should redirect to ghost town. 97.113.105.224 (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Deserted medieval village[edit]

As suggested in the section immediately above, I think there's enough crossover between this article and Deserted medieval village to warrant a merge. A DMV is just a specific type of abandoned village, and could easily be discussed in the United Kingdom section of this page. DoctorKubla (talk) 07:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose. The term 'deserted medieval village' is widely used in European (especially British) history to identify villages that were deserted due to the Black Death and subsequently the Inclosure laws. 'Abandoned villages' is not used with the same meaning is history texts and is far too loose a term. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I understand that the two terms aren't interchangeable; as I said, a DMV is a specific type of abandoned village, and that distinction wouldn't be lost if the articles were merged. In fact, since this article currently gives the impression that all abandoned villages in the UK are DMVs, adding a "Deserted medieval villages" sub-section would actually help to clarify the point. DoctorKubla (talk) 17:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers[edit]

Hello. About deserted medieval villages, number of occupied houses: there's a definition for over three and for under three but not for exactly three. Ideas anyone? Regards, Sander1453 (talk) 13:04, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I've found a source that defines a DMV as three houses or fewer, and altered the article accordingly. Thanks. DoctorKubla (talk) 21:39, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong link[edit]

The Hungarian language link sends you to the Hungarian "Farm" site.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Okos Tóbiás (talk • contribs) 19:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good spot, I have removed the link from Wikidata. DuncanHill (talk) 04:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]