Talk:Buck Nelson

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Silver seren in topic Sources

Delete this, and similar nonsense

edit

How can Wikipedia hope to be taken seriously, or trusted, when it covers this sort of thing? By all means refer to superstitions, folklore, etc. but do not apply to them that horrible fence-sitting neutrality which might lead gullible readers to think that there is any truth in them. That is a disservice to the spirit of learning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.54.130 (talk) 12:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Buck Nelson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Buck Nelson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:06, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Sources

edit

Although I'm not convinced this person meets our notability guidelines hence the tagging, I did find [1]. The subject is also briefly mentioned in [2] and [3] although neither would be enough to establish notability IMO. Nil Einne (talk) 05:05, 27 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Nil Einne! I'm coming across this article quite a while after the fact, but there does seem to be a fair amount of newspaper coverage from across the years.
So I think notability is fairly solid, especially since there's plenty of other areas to look for sources than just Newspapers.com. SilverserenC 04:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply