Talk:Beneteau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Beneteau article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
Low rated as Low-importance on the assessment scale

Contents

[edit] NPOV

I've been looking at other sailboat builder articles and have found that many have weasel words which are loaded phrases that are in violation of WP:NPOV. This article is well-done in general but seems too advertisement-biased in its wording for Wikipedia.Bradfordschultze 07:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seeking absolute NPOV in an Imperfect World

Bradford,

I agree that there are as you say "weasel words" with this and other articles, including recent articles about sailboat manufacturers. HOWEVER, please look at other examples of articles about manufacturing companies and see whether such exist across the board. I suggest auto manufacturers as an example. In the case of both the marine and automotive media, it seems that writers lose their objectivity in the reporting process; unfortunately periodicals are one of the few sources of third party information.

I have tried to present interesting material while removing fluff and overstatement. However since information is limited and Wikipedia has a strict policy prohibiting expressing opinions or presenting original research, we are stuck with an imperfect situation.

Also since Wikipedia is open to contributions from all commers, I've tried to strike a compromise with onther contributors in toning-down their enthusiastic comments without opening a polarized battle.

I value your observation and I've taken a another pass at weasel redcution in this article. Ironically, I'm not a Beneteau fan.

I think that tagging this article as "Advertising" is unwarranted and will only lead to knee-jerk reactions from unsophisticated power-hungry "Editors."

Thanks!

Kevin Murray 14:27, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Competitors and Designers

The list in the Competitors and Past designers is rather long and doesn't seem worth including here, it's also repeated on the Hunter Marine, and most other boat builders' pages. Given that the other articles are in the Boat Builders category do we need this? Rich257 07:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The objective of putting the competitors at each manufacturers page is to offer a balanced point of view and avoid having the article be or appear to be an advertisment for the manufacturer. Clearly to someone looking at all of the article it would appar redundant, but otherwise this could be valuable and causes no harm.

Kevin Murray 20:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link suggestion

Could someone evaluate [http:// cruisingresources.com/resources.php?pt=1&ss=beneteau+monohull Beneteau cruising models] as a suggested External Link? The suggsted link and its related pages contain succinct and detailed specifications and other information about all Beneteau cruising boats. The pages, which I compile, contain no commercial content. Dstookey 15:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

According to http:// cruisingresources.com/crs_about "Sponsors ... pay me for placement near the top of a Topic page", which I would take as being much like a commercial site. Please explain why you think your site has no commercial content. Rich257 16:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Cruising Resources covers 294 subtopics of sailboat cruising, as well as over 1,500 cruising sailboat models. Of the 10,818 listings on the site, 88 of them have a paid-for preferential position (but not promotional wording). This sponsorship payment helps cover the costs of what is a hobby business, but CR is hardly a commercial site. The relatively few pages which I feel are topic-specific and information-dense enough to be useful to Wikipedia users (Beneteau, Gaff rig, etc.) do not contain sponsor listings, and I will not suggest the relatively few pages that do.

I notice that many External Links for sailing topics are fully commercial, and many others contain ads. I am interested in promoting my passion, sailboat cruising, through better coverage in Wikipedia and I shall be submitting a few additional draft articles on topics not yet covered (Beach Cruising, Crew in the boating sense, etc). If you feel that CR pages step over the line of commercialism, the listings on them may still be the best source for Wikipedia editors to use in identifying relevant external references that ARE acceptable. Dstookey 16:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there are many other commercial links on Wikipedia, which is not right and they should also be removed. I profess no partial knowledge in the area of sailboat cruising. I think you did not help your case by adding links to many articles and by adding only links and no content, as spammers tend to do, which is part of the reason why I removed them all. It is always tricky when someone adds links to sites they have an interest in, hence the WP:COI guidelines. Rich257 23:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

You are quite right. Today was my first day with Wikipedia. I thought I understood the guidelines, but obviously did not. You set me straight, and I appreciate it. Is a "Could someone evaluate . . ." message in the Discussion section (e.g. above) the proper way to suggest a link?

Yes indeed, Wikipedia aims to work on concensus rather than a battle over who last edited the page. Rich257 20:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)