Wikipedia

Talk:Starwood Festival

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page
This article was the subject of two mediations and an arbitration. [1]
The mediations and the arbitration have been concluded.


New Site: Wisteria Campground [2]

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have changed some of the deletions concerning the structures devoted to certain activities. Though the names of some of these areas will change, such areas will still be devoted thus. There will still be an area called "Kid Village" for kids' programming. There will probably not be a "Roundhouse", but there might be a "Didgedome", and areas will be designated for the same kind of drumming no matter what they will be named. There will definitely not be a "Brushfire Island", as the new site has no island, but there will be a multi-media show. Rosencomet (talk) 03:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Reversion of Changes

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

This article has gone through many changes over the past years, and the so=called "advertising copy" has long ago been changed to a simple description of the event and it's components without fluff or vanity language. Gutting the article makes it a less complete article, and certainly does nothing to improve it. IMO, it is the advert tag that should have been deleted, not the text, and I have done so. I have deleted the name David Jay Brown from the list because his article has been redirected, though I consider this, too, to be a major mistake. I will see if I can find additional citations to support the "People" section, or it may not survive, but I hope the rest which is well cited will remain.JuliusAaron (talk) 03:05, 25 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

If there are specific citations an editor feels are needed, he/she should add a tag requesting them and give others the opportunity to come up with them, rather than deleting whole sections.Rosencomet (talk) 17:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
The long lists of people was inappropriate - articles onBurning Man or Rainbow Gathering avoid this. Articles such as this one should be based mainly on what independent third party sources meeting our criteria at WP:RS says about the subject and that applies to such lists as well.
References should be used as references, so the removal of the long list was appropriate although I would imagine that the article can be expanded using some of the deleted references.
Unsourced material, particularly to do with living people, can be deleted or a citation tag placed. I do both depending on context - I'm more likely to delete unsourced material dealing with living people than add a citation tag.
Rosencomet, as the executive director of the Association for Consciousness Exploration which runs Starwood you should be doing only very minor editing on this article but you are of course free to make suggestions here. Dougweller (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your attention. I think if you review the edit history for the last two years, you'll see that apart from the addition of a few musicians and speakers to the lists and a few reviews to the references, my edits have mostly been fixing links or deleting over-linking and redlinks. This is even more true on the Association for Consciousness Exploration article.Rosencomet (talk) 17:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Lists

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
  • Comment I am returning some more of the huge deletion of data by Qworty to this article. In this case, the lists of notable people and acts that have appeared at the festival over the years. The argument User:Rosencomet makes, which I have excerpted here, speaks for itself; the lists are not, as some festival articles present them, by the year or even by the day, but for economy's sake a simple list of only those notable enough to have their own entries, only one per, and with no external links (so they're not promotional). They certainly help support notability, and are IMHO an important feature to the article.

Lists such as these, and even more extensive ones, are common on festival articles. IMO, there is nothing "unencyclopedic" about them. On the contrary, they are an important component to an event that books speakers and/or entertainers. Also, the term "Listcruft" does not apply at all to these lists, as reading the Listcruft article makes clear. They are obviously relevent and notable to the subject of the article, and should not be broken out for their own article. They are not indiscriminate, but include only people notable enough in their own right to have articles. They are shorter than many lists in articles about other festivals, non-repetitious, and do not include external links to commercial websites. This material would certainly be of interest to anyone interested in checking out an article on the Starwood Festival. Here is a partial list of other festivals' articles that have lists of acts (or contest winners, or whatever relevent term there is for the kind of festival it is). They are of all kinds of festivals.

(I deleted a couple of redlinks, and will delete a couple upon returning the original lists to the article.) JuliusAaron (talk) 17:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Actually, there is one external link by Big Brother and the Holding Company, which I believe was placed there to satisfy a "fact tag" years ago. The above material, by the way, came from the archives of this talk page. JuliusAaron (talk) 17:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

The correct policy to cite in this instance is WP:Source list, which clearly states that all relevant WP policies apply to a list. Thus, each item in the list must be WP:V and not WP:OR. Unfortunately, the two lists given in this article are without WP:RS and constitute WP:OR. Therefore I am going to remove the problematic sections per WP:Source list, without prejudice to re-addition of elements if anyone is able to dig up appropriate sourcing for any particular item. Two other points are 1) It doesn't matter what lists exist in other articles, as that is WP:OTHERSTUFF, and 2) The addition of these long lists appears to be promotional. Qworty (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Starwood Festival. 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) 01:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Starwood_Festival&oldid=1208150932"