Talk:Rainbow Magic

Edit request from Lindsey16, 4 December 2010

This page really needs some real editing. The names are all going wrong. I have an example: "Helena the Horse Riding Fairy" got "edited" by someone and turned into "Helen The Taekwondo Fairy". I hope someone could please edit this page. Lindsey16 (talk) 13:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Books and Series contents

I went through the list of books and series at the listed official web site - http://www.rainbowmagiconline.com/uk/index.html and updated the books section of this article using the classification and contents they used there. There seems to be some disagreement that they are classifying the series and contents correctly. Is there some other site that is more official than the "official" one listed in the article? Absent that I suggest we stick with what the official site says. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I also did some cleanup in this section. The individual series names don't belong in the table of contents as this entire section is effectively just a list with no added details about any of the books. Adding the series names greatly overbalanced the table of contents and reduced its effectiveness for basically no gain in the usability of this article. I also put the list in two columns to shorten the article, reduce white space and make the info easier to scan and read. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC) oh yeah! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.58.116 (talk) 17:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 May 2012

75.63.31.182 (talk) 00:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

You don't seem to know the difference between One-Offs and Special Editions, do you?

Special Editions are available either all year round, or at certain points of the year. They involve looking for three objects instead of one.

One-Offs are only published at one point, and then are never released again. They involve looking for one object, and not being part of a select group.

Also, I have a problem with your organization. You're clearly copying from a website that has several fairies missing and doesn't update regularly. One page doesn't work, and the page it leads to is clearly incomplete.

BTW, there's no official "Christmas" or "Holiday" categories. Everything that isn't part of a certain group is either "Special" or "One-Off". I'm not asking for you to change it, but I recommend it.

Sorry I acted like a trolling bitch.

Anoymonous

Where are you getting your information? That is the key thing missing so far. At this point in time the "Official" site is authoritative and presumed to be complete and correct. I verified everything with the official site and the organization matches what they say - this is on purpose. If they are wrong point me to a better source of information. If you have a better source that supports what you say I would have no problem with the article being changed to support that. We can't go just on what you assert, even if you are right. My knowledge of this subject is based soley on what is in the article and what is in the sources used to support article info. And you are correct - I know nothing else about this topic. I shouldn't need to.

Wiki policy about this is articulated at the article Wikipedia:Verifiability. One key point there is

Verifiability, and not truth, is one of the fundamental requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia; truth, of itself, is not a substitute for meeting the verifiability requirement. No matter how convinced you are that something is true, do not add it to an article unless it is verifiable.

All I am asking is for some way to verify that what you state is supported by some reliable source that I can look at and verify what you are stating.

I got to this article by following a vandal who had a habit of adding deliberately fake info to articles. I was trying to clean things up after this and other articles were corrupted. My only interest is having verifiable info in the article and some way to keep it that way. I did some additional cleanups to make the article easier to read and use, but that is secondary to the need for good references. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Look at the back of any Rainbow Magic book published in the UK. Notice how they group anything not already part of a select group (Example, Ocean Fairies) into the special edition category. The only ones that don't show up are the One-Offs (Hannah, Kate, and Elizabeth), whose books are only published at one point, and then are never released again.

I got my information of Amazon UK. Which is completely accurate.

Once again, sorry I acted like a bitch.

Anoymonous

I understand your actions were based on your frustration of trying to keep an article correct. I have noticed that you have been editing and maintaining this article since August 2011. I think you have been doing a good job - I am only pushing back as there needs to some independent way to verify what you have been adding and some of it did conflict with a normally reliable source.

I'm looking at this Amazon UK link. In your opinion is this a complete list? I'm looked at the last cover of Shannon and didn't see any classification. Can you point me to a specific web link that illustrates what you are stating. Something from the actual books themselves is definitely a better reference than the official website if it supports what is in the article. this link supports Penny the Pony Fairy as part of the Pet Keepers Fairies

Anyway I will edit the article to put in the Amazon UK link as a reference and return to the way you organized the section. Let me know if that is OK. The edit protect will be gone in a few days anyway so you can edit again then. As long as stuff you add is verifiable there will be no problems. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I got this off the Annual 2012 page;

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rainbow-Magic-Annual-Daisy-Meadows/dp/1408308142#_

P.S. Jennifer the Babysitter Fairy has been confirmed. Look on Amazon UK. You'll find it.

Anoymonous

OK. The back cover of that book at this link says http://www.rainbowmagicbooks.co.uk is the current website. Do you consider the content there correct? If so that would be a good reference as well. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Sadly, several fairies (Hannah, Cara, the other 3 Princess Fairies) are missing. They haven't updated it since they added Natalie.

Anoymonous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.63.31.182 (talk) 03:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't really like this website. By the way She wrote appraxipatly 165 books. This website should have more information. I can hardly find any information. I have to keep going to different websites.

Then add the information you think is missing (include references to where you got the info). Wikipedia is open to everyone to edit and is written by volunteers based on what they find interesting to do. See Wikipedia:Editing policy. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:23, 25 June 2013 (UTC)