Talk:Worsley Works

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Trains Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance within the Trains WikiProject.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Railways.
	This page is within the scope of the Rail transport modelling task force.

	Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
Stub	rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splash^talk 20:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

Although a railway modeller myself, I have applied a notability tag for two specific reasons:

• The scale of the organisation, and its notworthy ability both seem to fail criteria for inclusion here
• The style of the article - reads more like an advert than an encyclopedic entry which should state fact. My conclusion at present is if it were taken down to an encyclopedic entry, it would be down to a couple of lines of text

Rgds, - Trident13 14:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

As a railway modeller doing kit building including Worsley stuff I can confirm most of the facts in it. I don't know why someone stuck cite requests for every sentence, thats petty behaviour but some of it does want more reliable sources nailing to it. AlanCox

Unfortunately, for this article, WP expects reliable sources to be cited. Now if someone could provide details of the actual issues of the magazines referred to, that would mean the article carried rather more weight. (I am happy to weigh-in to an argument disputing that "Railway Modeller" and "Model Rail", for example, are 'Reliable Sources'!)

As it is, the article does still read a little like an advert. If it is targetted for deletion, someone could arrange for its copying to 'Trainspotting World', which is an enthusiast's Wiki that is less fussy about references, etc

EdJogg 00:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Some magazine references added. It isn't targetted for deletion, that was refused long ago. Some of the web references left. If the 2mm society isn't authoritative on 2mm then the pope isnt authoritative on catholicism. 3mm society is more problematic, its supplier list document is citeable but members only so not helpful. (81.2.110.250 16:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC))

No references and two external links for something that still reads like an advert? Reapplied reference and notability tags. I also suggest AlanCox reads WP:CIV. I like the suggestion of moving this to 'Trainspotting World', where the present version of the article would sit very appropriately - here, originally written by the company's owner, its an adver-blog rather than an encyclopedic article. Rgds, - Trident13 07:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Any better? I've tried to tackle all the remaining advert-like text. I have no axe to grind here, except that I dislike the way that certain articles on WP, that are either notable within their own field or else have received little mass-media coverage, are nevertheless targetted for deletion. However, Trident13's point about it starting out as an adver-blog is quite correct. Hopefully it has gone beyond that now.

EdJogg 20:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I have taken a few more pieces of adver-text: few producers of..., compared to expoxy...., command high prices (the last the worst of the lot). I am still not sure it passes notability, but happy to let it stand as it is. Rgds, - Trident13 13:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The epoxy stuff isnt advertext except in your strange mind, it does however probably really belong in a more general article about kit making. Prices is fact but its not really relevant to the company/history so who cares. (AlanCox 22:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC))