Talk:Balver Märchenwochen
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Balver Märchenwochen redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Dear Triwbe, thanks for your comment. Please specify. What is too much? Best --Weissmann (talk) 10:08, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
This is not fancruft - it should be notable information about the festival. Why do you think it is not notable? Please explain. Something missing? Best --Weissmann (talk) 14:19, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Weissmann, I got the tag wrong. Do you think that it is a reasonably encyclopedic article simply to list the yearly production of the festival and add all the non-notable performer ? If you do, can you prove it. Wikipedia is not a list of non-notable information. You alo seem to have a hitory of creating many non-notable articles with minimal context. --triwbe (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, is this a problem for your? --Weissmann (talk) 09:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
In my opinion, this article either lacks sufficient Attribution that it satisfies the Notability criteria for Organizations and companies, or it may violate the Conflict of interest guideline, or perhaps it is a Copyright violation.
Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to verify any claims of notability. Even though the lack of reliable source attribution in an article is not grounds for deletion in itself, an article with absolutely no sources (or only external links to unreliable ones) suggests to some editors that multiple reliable sources may not, in fact, exist.
Although I am considering tagging this article for deletion according to the Deletion policy, I am nonetheless willing to assist User:Weissmann (talk · contribs), and other recent contributors to this article, to make some constructive improvements to it ... I do not have time to examine this article in depth at the moment, and it may improve over time, in which case this warning was premature.
Please respond on this Discussion page, instead of on my Talk page, in order to avoid fragmenting the conversation.
To better understand why I have used this template, please read Flag templates for deletion warnings ... I realize that some of the expressed possible concerns may not be appropriate in this case. —triwbe (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the [[Category:Flagged articles]] from
the message above
. it was flagged at least two months ago by Some Other Editor,
but the current version looks OK to me. Avicennasis @ 06:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)