Talk:Auchtermuchty

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Mid‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible correction: this piece suggests John Junor was from Auchtermuchty. He wasn't -- but he used Auchtermuchty in his newspaper columns as a sort of imaginary touchstone for all the traditional values he admired...

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Auchtermuchty. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090406091101/http://www.smartcommunityfife.org.uk/auchtermuchty-and-dunshalt/ to http://www.smartcommunityfife.org.uk/auchtermuchty-and-dunshalt/

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) 05:05, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question.

I saw that my addition to the trivia section was removed. Why? there seems to be a precedent for listing mentions of the town in popular media judging by the previous entries of several books. Datuser01 (talk) 03:58, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a considerable campaign to deny that the town is referenced in Gloryhammer. AnselaJonla (talk) 12:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gloryhammer

@Mutt Lunker: I am somewhat confused by you reverting my edit. You cite WP:NMUSIC which is a notability guideline which covers article creation and deletion, and the mentions being "trivial" a term I have only heard in the context of notibility guidelines. I am not creating a page for Gloryhammer - they already have a Wikipedia page. You also state that the sources are of dubious reliability. How reliable do the sources need to be to add that a metal band mentioned a small Scottish town? This isn't exactly high politics. Why does, for example, El Correo not meet it? ~ El D. (talk to me) 00:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no lower threshold for the reliability of sources for some topics versus others but I had missed the inclusion of the one from El Correo, which is a WP:RS. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored my edit after your comment, feel free to remove any sources you dislike. Re: different reliability standards, there are several policies that enumerate higher reliability standards for certain topics and therefore implicitly lower standards for other topics, though feel free to differ that this is categorical not a sliding scale. Best wishes, ~ El D. (talk to me) 13:10, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]