Talk:Eurasian Woodcock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Birds
Birds Portal
Eurasian Woodcock is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Birds To-do:

Discussion copied here from User talk:Benwildeboer

[edit] Edits to Eurasian Woodcock

HI,

You incorrectly identified my post on the Eurasian Woodcock as vandalism. Please leave the edit as is.

Thanks,

John

Sorry for any confusion. I deleted the edits for a few reasons.
  1. "This is particularly popular in the UK, where their size, speed and flight pattern makes them a very challenging shot"-- needs a reference
  2. "A right and left at Woodcock..."-- This is confusing. Clicking on the wikilink for right and left redirects me to the Relative direction article, which doesn't help clarify what the meaning of the statement in game hunting is.
  3. "...affords the shooter membership of a certain desirable club."-- give more details. What is the club? What are the exact requirements? What makes it notable?
Thanks for you editing help! (Don't forget to sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~)
--Benwildeboer 20:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi.
Re your remarks:
1. This must be referred to in the vast majority of books on shooting game in the UK. Should I provide one at random?
2. Perhaps I need to add some disambiguation to right and left. I'll get on the case.
3. I did mention the name of club before, but the people on the IRC channel for the vandalism program you are using said that it was not allowed as it could be deemed as advertising. What would you suggest?
My comments may well be poorly referenced and confusing, but they certainly aren't vandalism. We are asked to "Be bold in editing ... articles, because the joy of editing is that although it should be aimed for, perfection isn't required."
82.68.226.202 21:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


I apologize if I labeled your edits as vandalism, that wasn't my intention. To answer your questions:

  1. Any reference that backs up the information would be great, it can be from an electronic source as well. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for the official policy and help.
  2. That sounds like a great idea. I have no idea what a right and left is when being applied in a hunting frame of reference.
  3. I would either just drop the entire bit if it only refers to one club. If a right and left with Woodcock is difficult or considered prestigious, perhaps explain that. A reference would probably be a good idea for this section too.

Hope this helps some! --Benwildeboer 21:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

"A certain desirable club", as indicated above is not adequate since it can not be verified. it is up to you (82.68.226.202) to show that that your edits can be verified, not me. As a minimum, you need to name the club, if it's a real club, show that it is notable, and give a source. I'll leave the edit for now, to give you a chance to reference and verify, but I don't think it can stay as it is jimfbleak 08:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Fine, I've removed the red link since it is difficult to see how it can be any more than a dic def, and put the def in the article. I've clarified the club - I can't see that it's any more advertising than, say, the Carling Cup. jimfbleak 11:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)