Wikipedia:Content noticeboard: Difference between revisions
Tom Morris (talk | contribs) →Category work by 217.169.210.138: new section |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== [[Host-based intrusion detection system]] == |
== [[Host-based intrusion detection system]] == |
||
Unsourced since 2008. [[User:The Mark of the Beast|The Mark of the Beast]] ([[User talk:The Mark of the Beast|talk]]) 02:30, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
|||
== Is a list of links a legitimate WP article? == |
== Is a list of links a legitimate WP article? == |
||
Revision as of 23:51, 19 July 2011
| History of this page |
|---|
This page is now historical, new posts should be made at the dispute resolution noticeboard.
|
Noticeboard archives
Move article
Move 2011 Libyan uprising to Libyan Civil War (2011). The issue has been decided on its discussion tab. An administrator is required to make the move because it has been reserved to that level of user privilege. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.120.18.132 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 16 March 2011
Unsourced since 2008. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Is a list of links a legitimate WP article?
See New York Times Fiction Bestsellers of 1950. Just wondering. BartlebytheScrivener (talk) 20:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hey Bartleby, this is interesting. The first section strikes me as essentially legitimate, but excessively detailed--that is, too much information, which in my opinion is disallowed (in this case) by WP:NOTDIR. The rest strikes me as not legitimate at all. Drmies (talk) 14:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
- The 1950 and 1970 NYT Fiction Bestsellers articles should probably look like the 2000-2009 Nonfiction Bestsellers articles, but I don't have time to make the changes. What to do? BartlebytheScrivener (talk) 19:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Faulty editing to "Normans"
In the entry for "Normans", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normans I came across an edit that I did not catch on previous readings. There were several errors in a single sentence. I checked, and someone edited it at 10 PM last night. I can't help but wonder if someone crawled a bit too deep into the cup, and miscalculated their editing capabilities. I have all my capacities, but dare not undertake to undertake my own edits at this time. I am just concerned that this person could have changed the content in factual ways, to the detriment of the article. I see at least 4 errors in these 2 sentences from para. 2. Your thoughts...
"Norman adventurers established a kingdom in Sicily and southern Italy by conquest, and a o the Norman Conquest of England. Norman influence spread from these new centres to the Normans were born in the 21 centery Crusader States in the Near East, to Scotland and Wales in Great Britain, and to Ireland." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.199.4.169 (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- Fortunately 75.13.228.206 (talk · contribs) corrected the vandalism. Nev1 (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
The Middle Ages is one period of three period in history. There is currently a discussion at Talk:Middle Ages#Global Timeline regarding whether the article is about history or only includes the history of Europe. Further opinions would be welcome. --J. D. Redding 16:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- The first sentence of the first edit of this article was "Period in European History (see also History of Europe) which lasted from the end of the Western Roman Empire (late 4th century) to the beginning of the Renaissance." It has been about European history until May 1st, when Reddi made some wholesale changes which were then related. There's been a similar issue at Early Middle Ages. As we have a Wikiproject on this period I'm not clear why it's been brought up here instead of there. Dougweller (talk) 17:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, the term "Middle Ages" is a specifically Western construct. The article isn't about world history; if it were, it shouldn't be called "Middle Ages".--Cúchullain t/c 17:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Category work by 217.169.210.138
I've been doing recent change patrolling and found a large number of possibly controversial edits by IP 217.169.210.138 (talk, contribs) involving adding categories about collaborators with the Nazi regime. Could someone take a look at these and revert if appropriate? —Tom Morris (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
