Talk:Landmarkism
Add topicLatest comment: 13 years ago by DeknMike in topic Where did this article go?
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Landmarkism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg)
Where did this article go?
[edit]I see that a substantial article seems to have turned into the present stub. -- 202.124.75.187 (talk) 14:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
- rather than research the links presented in the text (but not in wikiformat), Novaseminary removed most of the article in Oct 2011, transforming it from an encylopedic source into a narrow stub.--DeknMike (talk) 04:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- ...And added good sources, inline citations, etc., insuring that what is in the article is well-sourced, neutral, and not OR. Of course, I and most other WP eds would welcome DeknMike or anyone else "researching the links" and adding material that is well-sourced, relevant, neutral, etc., which is why I added the stub tag, too. Or we could find other eleven-month-old talk page posts by IP editors and use "responses" to those to take pot shots at other editors. I think this article would benefit more from the former, though. Novaseminary (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry I wasn't babysitting every single article on Wikipedia that I might possibly want to read someday in the future. If you have enough time to defend your actions (where did those "good sources" go?), perhaps you have time to contribute some. I'll do some once I take the considerable effort to learn about the topic.--DeknMike (talk) 00:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
- ...And added good sources, inline citations, etc., insuring that what is in the article is well-sourced, neutral, and not OR. Of course, I and most other WP eds would welcome DeknMike or anyone else "researching the links" and adding material that is well-sourced, relevant, neutral, etc., which is why I added the stub tag, too. Or we could find other eleven-month-old talk page posts by IP editors and use "responses" to those to take pot shots at other editors. I think this article would benefit more from the former, though. Novaseminary (talk) 02:11, 10 January 2013 (UTC)