Talk:Derby pie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Explaination of tags
- {{notability}} This tag is about notability. It hard to judge if this product is notable with the current reference given. Better references would help. You could also ask User:FlagSteward who placed the tag for an explanation.
- {{primarysources}} This tag is about the quality of references. There are no third-party sources in the references. Please add such a source before removing this tag.
- {{advert}} This tag is about tone. The article reads like a sales pitch not an encyclopedia. "Popular additions are butterscotch, caramel, and other types of nuts." sounds like what would be on written on a menu. You could also ask User:FlagSteward who placed the tag for an explanation.
Thanks--BirgitteSB 18:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- You know, that took a while to type out... I'm sure you could have worked on or fixed one or more of the problems you mentioned in that time. Articles get improved by people improving them... just declaring what needs to be improved is more annoying than productive in the vast majority of cases. Explaining what popular additions are is encyclopedic, saying what ones are good or what brands make good toppings would be an advertisement. --W.marsh 19:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have spent a good deal of time the past few months finding references for articles that were tagged with {{Unreferenced}} in June of 2006. I decided to take one day this month and investigate the articles being tagged this month, before the category got unbearly large, and make an effort to educate the people connected with these articles. I think spending one day a month educating people about the referencing issues I deal with myself the rest of the month will pay dividends in the long run. I am quite confident in my productivity in general, and in taking the time to educate today.. Some people are instantly grateful, others ignore me, and a few need further explanations to see the large picture. Thank you for finding the newspaper reference. --BirgitteSB 21:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- Honestly, your one day of the month would probably be spent educating the people who add the tags in lieu of making an effort to improve articles. Even at the most cursory glance there are hundreds of references [1] someone could have added, but they chose to attack the article with ugly tags instead. For the record, I deeply appreciate anyone who actually improves articles and works on thankless backlogs... which you say you are, so I'll take you at your word and thank you for it. --W.marsh 21:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I have spent a good deal of time the past few months finding references for articles that were tagged with {{Unreferenced}} in June of 2006. I decided to take one day this month and investigate the articles being tagged this month, before the category got unbearly large, and make an effort to educate the people connected with these articles. I think spending one day a month educating people about the referencing issues I deal with myself the rest of the month will pay dividends in the long run. I am quite confident in my productivity in general, and in taking the time to educate today.. Some people are instantly grateful, others ignore me, and a few need further explanations to see the large picture. Thank you for finding the newspaper reference. --BirgitteSB 21:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Start-Class Food and drink articles | Low-importance Food and drink articles | Wikipedia requested photographs in Louisville | Start-Class Louisville articles | Mid-importance Louisville articles | Wikipedia requested photographs in Kentucky | Start-Class Kentucky articles | Low-importance Kentucky articles | Wikipedia requested photographs of food