Talk:Heaton Moor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greater Manchester , a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Greater Manchester-related articles. In so doing it works and collaborates with its mother project WikiProject UK Geography . If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. (Add assessment comments) | |
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance within the Greater Manchester WikiProject. | |
=="More than a name" - linkspam?==
I'm disputing the inclusion of this war memorial site. The link does not point to anything notable regarding Heaton Moor.
Copy of ongoing discussion, originally started on my talk page, is below.
- Hi. You have deleted almost all of the external links I had added to the various Stockport area pages, stating that they are spam. This is unreasonable. My community project is researching all the individual war memorials in the Stockport area and it is therefore perfectly reasonable to add the link to the relevent "suburb" pages. For example, there is a page for Heaton Moor; Heaton Moor has a war memorial; I am researching the names on it; why would I not put a link so that local resident know of it? If you wish me to call each link soemthing else, then fine. johnmh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmh (talk • contribs)
-
- Hi John. I'm sorry you think my removal of those links to [1] was unreasonable. The same link had been added to many Stockport town sites. Following the link did not reveal content specific to the town concerned. My criteria for there removal was the guidelines issued at WP:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer, in particular "appearing to the Wikipedia community that you are trying to abuse Wikipedia for self-promotion....Adding the same link to many articles. The first person who notices you doing this will go through all your recent contributions with an itchy trigger finger on the revert button.". I don't dispute the fact that it's worthy and valuable external link, but adding it to every town's article I do class as spamming. Using your example, suppose I knew of a website which listed restaurants in Stockport, should I add this link to every Stockport town's article? --Oscarthecat 20:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- My apologies for not "signing" the post to you. I don't know how to do that.
-
-
-
- I have read the guidelines and remain convinced that you are not being reasonable or consistent.Using two of your own examples - if the restaurant website listed businesses in a very distinct part of the borough, why would it be unreasonable to post on that specific page. Stockport is not a single entity (part of it is in Cheshire, part in Lancashire, for exmaple). Taking your other comment that content is not specific to the suburb page, why have you left the Stockport link intact - when like all the others it is not specific (as it contains all the details of the other memorials). Assuming that I am not going to be able to persuade you over this, please if there is a "disputes" procedure to which I may refer my complaint.
-
Hello again, Oscarthecat. I certainly welcome the views of others, although you are now saying that you have deleted the link as there is nothing "notable" as against your original reason of there being nothing "specific". "Notable" is entirely subjective and "in the eye of the beholder".
If I may simply restate my reasons for wanting to add the link to this (and the other relevent pages? I am undertaking a voluntary project within the local authority area of Stockport to research the lives and deaths of some 3000 men who were killed in the Great War. There are a number of war memorials scattered through the area - which is diverse and, as a local authority area, was only created in 1974.I had intended to provide a link to the project for each distinct suburb of the area (which has its own war memorial).
In many circumstances, people might well regard themselves as coming from, to use your example, Heaton Moor. Certainly if they were searching on Wikipedia for biographies of the men remembered on the Heaton Moor War Memorial, they would not look on the Stockport page, but on the Heaton Moor one. Returning to your original objection that there is nothing "specific" about Heaton Moor, you are right on one level. The project is not exclusively Heaton Moor. Nor is it exclusively Stockport (the largest of the suburbs in the area).Johnmh 08:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think that the Heaton Moor article has too many external links few of which relate to an encyclopedia article, WP:NOT#LINK is probably the relevent policy. Here's my thoughts on the links:
- Blogspot - remove, no content
- Council - remove, adds nothing to article
- Heatonmoor.com - keep root page, delete subpage links
- Onthemoor.com - keep root page only, the history page could also be used to expand the article and cited as ref
- Savoy - delete, advert
- House advert - delete
- Church - delete, adds nothing to article, virtually no content
- More than a name - delete, if it goes anywhere it should be in the Stockport article. That's not to say the info from the link shouldn't be summarised here for Heaton Moor and a citation added. JMiall 08:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I saw the initial addition of the link, and as Oscarthecat says, it lit up the spam warning lights. A new user adding multiple instances of a link to an obscure site will always be worth looking at, and in addition it didn't seem to fit an obvious need. At first sight, it was a plain case of someone aiming to publicise their web site. But, the description of memorials is an accepted, even desired, part of articles on UK areas, and following on from that, the details of the dead would seem to fit WP:EL "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." Now, Johnmh, if you had added properly referenced descriptions of the memorials in the Heaton Moor (etc) area, and then added a link to your site, I think it would have breezed through. Your project puts you in a good position to add top-notch portraits of the memorials to WP - why don't you do that on a case-by-case basis? Mr Stephen 09:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Mr Stephen - Thanks for your helpful comments. You mention that it appeared to be a "plain case of someone aiming to publicise their website". You are absolutely right - it was exactly that. I had not appreciated that this might be a violation of Wikipedia rules but accept that it must be. In which case, there is no more to be said - the links should stay deleted. If at some point, oscarthecat feels that they could stand in some way, then s/he can add them back. But either way, I'm done here. Thanks for the explanation. Best wishes. Bye. John
[edit] Ouch.
After going through finely, I can notice that the person who originally expanded upon this beloved little place of ours really didn't know that much about it. I've just gone through and picked apart a lot, rewritten the Education section (all but one of the schools mentioned are in Heaton Mersey) and added through my own knowledge to the section about the Savoy cinema.
If you're a local, by the way, then yes, it probably will close at some point in the future, hence the sign.
Can people make sure in future that if they edit this page then they supply accurate information? It's a bit far removed from the centre of attention to be changed straight away, and an encyclopaedia shouldn't provide misinformation.
As for the person who wrote the part on the Kushoom Koly, you should be ashamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pianoabuser (talk • contribs) 17:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
