Talk:Corfe Mullen

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Corfe Mullen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717022632/http://www.corfemullen-pc.gov.uk/Contents/Text/Index.asp?SiteId=50&SiteExtra=6670093&TopNavId=54&NavSideId=342 to http://www.corfemullen-pc.gov.uk/Contents/Text/Index.asp?SiteId=50&SiteExtra=6670093&TopNavId=54&NavSideId=342

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:54, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Edits on 14th August, @TJC: said:

I'm afraid I cannot agree with your assertion the half the content should be removed because Wikipedia is not a business directory. Some of the entries, I accept, are somewhat commercial, but schools and churches? Also the number of pubs and clubs in the town (it was a village) are relevant to the character of the location and would apply to any village or small town. Most of these entries have been there since I created the page many years ago.

Are you going to do the same on all pages that list such details? You could be kept quite busy. Terry C (talk) 09:30, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

My edit did not say that this article can not discuss schools and churches (which is why I kept the schools and churches that had demonstrated notability in, replacing the unsuitable lists with suitable prose).

My edit is saying that the article has to comply with Wikipedia policies – here, linked, are few relevant ones:

• WP:NOTDIRECTORY: Wikipedia is not a business directory, and WP:NOTGUIDE: Wikipedia is not a guide book. We don't simply list things, regardless of whether they are notable in the context of an encyclopedia article. If there are other pages that just list the street addresses of branch libraries and cafes, yes we would delete those lists.
• MOS:LIST: The article can absolutely discuss churches, schools, and even pubs and other businesses, but not as bare lists without context. These sorts of things can absolutely be relevant to the character of a place, but they say nothing on their own. By all means, write something about the facilities in Corfe Mullen. Even better, write something that demonstrates how they shape the character of the place.
• WP:RS: cite reliable sources that demonstrate notability of the topic, and WP:NOR: no original research. This was the main problem with the 'Sport' and 'Entertainment' sections (aside from them being written in an unencyclopedic style and vague about details). There is nothing inherently notable about a village club, so demonstrate its notability by citing sources.

Please, by all means, reintroduce relevant details to the facilities section in line with these policies. But in the meantime, the plain lists and other trivia must go.

I started the ball rolling with the church and schools paragraphs in that edit – demonstrating, for example, how you can include the encylopedic fact that the place is served by 3 primary schools, while recognising that the details of an individual primary school are not inherently notable enough to discuss in an encyclopedia. Joe D (t) 10:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

As someone who is also from and lives in Corfe Mullen, I am very confused how @TJC (in his reasoning for their reversion of my edit) has come to the conclusion that Corfe Mullen is considered a town these days or that is considered a settled issue, most residents and sources still describe it as a village (including the Town Council ), the Corfe Mullen page even describes itself as a village. Reading an archived version of the minutes for the meeting when the council adopted Town Council status, it states that "Resolving to have town status will not change the nature or character of Corfe Mullen" and that "The Clerk stressed that any change would not mean that Corfe Mullen can no longer be viewed as a village."

This BBC article even still refers to residents as "villagers" post the adoption of Town Council status. And this area profileby Richards Estate Agents of the village still describes it as such.

If you want to be pedantic it could still be considered a parish seeing as it is listed as such under Dorset Council's list of area profiles (found here) and that there is nothing that legally distinguished parish and town councils.

I think it would be thus inaccurate to describe it as a town because that would not accurately reflect the identity and status of the village properly to readers.

I am starting this talk page section in the hope that we can come to a consensus on this issue, so that a (minor) edit war may not ensue. Night Thrasher (talk) 04:33, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

I too do not wish to start a flame war regarding this topic, but the Corfe Mullen Town Council website at , refers to the conurbation as a town, although they do say that it 'retains its village identity'. You have to ask yourself why they elevated it to a town if they still think of it as a village.

I think legally, Corfe Mullen is probably a town, (I haven't checked), because I don't think Parish Councils can unilaterally elevate themselves to town status without some sort of legal legitimacy.

As stated, I don't agree with what has happened because the geography of the place has no resemblance to a town. Where is the Town Centre?

I was a bit dubious when Verwood was promoted, but at least they have any area which looks like a (tiny) shopping centre. Terry C (talk) 10:19, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

@TJC their is nothing that legally distinguishes a town from a parish or a village, unlike other countries, the UK doesn't really have a set of standards that "make" somewhere one or the other.

Perhaps, in the past, town status was more dependent on whether they were given a charter to confer market town status, which was the case for Wimborne.

Also, where on the CMTC website is Corfe Mullen described as a town though? It's splash page (here) still describes it as "a large civil parish". Night Thrasher (talk) 16:18, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

Does it really matter? ~2026-16629-55 (talk) 22:09, 15 March 2026 (UTC)