Talk:Butterfly house

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Butterfly zoo)
Jump to: navigation, search

New name, same content as Butterfly farm[edit]

The name of this article just had to be changed from Butterfly zoo to Butterfly house. No facility calls itself a butterfly zoo. I've begun a rewrite with additional references. I intend to create a list article that will contain most of the current content, which is really just a list at this point. Contact me on my talk page if you see any problems.

  Bfpage |leave a message  02:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Good idea. Why didn't you just move the article instead of manually copy/pasting it? This category should also be moved at some point for consistency. JKDw (talk) 05:15, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you so much for taking an interest in the 'Butteerflu farm/Butterfly house (conservatory}'. I was instructed once, probably by a well-meaning editor that the procedure for correctly 're-naming' an article was to create a new article with a new name, paste the content for the poorly named article into the new article, and delete the content from the old article into the new article and then ask for a speedy deletion of the old article....I am guessing right now, that this may not be the 'proper' way of doing things like this.
What is the next step in the 'proper' way of doing this? Please assume good faith on my part, my 'renaming' was meant to improve the content of the subject and to improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. The bare urls were in the old article and I realize that they have to be re-formatted into the 'proper' way of citing references.
I have already begun to edit the new article and so I am not sure that merging would work in this instance. I've still have all of the information from the old article in the new article. It is probably in the best interest for all involved to know that I will continue to work on the new article to improve the citations and wikilinks.
Again, thank you for letting me know that there was a better way of renaming an article...at least I was bold!
Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  13:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Manually moving a page is not recommended (except in the case of a merger) because the page history will be lost, and all links to the old name will have to be manually renamed. But no problem, it will just get fixed by an admin. I never assumed bad faith for a moment; I was just curious why you chose to do it the hard way! To do it the easy way, hover your mouse over the 'More' tab to the left of the search bar, click on 'Move', fill in the blanks, and the rest will be done automatically. Thank you too. I appreciate your bold work with the article. JKDw (talk) 15:10, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Needs references of substance[edit]

All of the references appear in the list, which only indicate that the butterfly houses exist. What's lacking are references that corroborate the prose of the article (i.e. History and Activities). These are required to prevent any personal opinions or original research from encroaching. --Animalparty-- (talk) 03:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

B-Class criteria checklist[edit]

The following checklist is posted with the intent of determining whether this article meets the six B-Class criteria:

References

Is the article is suitably referenced, with inline citations? Does it have has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged?

Scope

Does the article reasonably cover the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies? Does it contain a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing?

Layout and organization

Does the article has a defined structure? Is the content organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind?

Well written

Is the article reasonably well-written? Does the prose contain no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly?

Supporting materials

Does the article contain supporting materials where appropriate? Illustrations? Diagrams? Infobox?

Understandable

Does the article present its content in an appropriately understandable way? Is it is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible? Does the article incorrectly assume unnecessary technical background OR are technical terms explained or avoided where possible.

Input anyone?

  Bfpage |leave a message  02:16, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to uprate this to C-class for now, as I think it qualifies there as it stands. However, it's basically a list, and in most of the "zoo" articles, the discussion of what it is (this article) and the list would be separate (i.e., "Butterfly house" and "List of butterfly houses"). I'm not sure if they are separated if the article (as opposed to the list) would qualify as "C", let alone "B"). Don Lammers (talk) 23:59, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
OK, I did the split. I am setting this back to stub because it does not have any citations. If anyone can find a couple of citations, it would be a start-class article (it has enough text). Don Lammers (talk) 02:44, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Page move[edit]

I've just moved this article to a new title - the old title ("Butterfly house (conservatory)") was ill-formed by most Wikipedia standards. The usual guideline for when a subject has two names is to give the article the more commonly used name and to create a redirect from the alternative name. This also required moving the former "Butterfly house" article to the more appropriate "Butterfly house (disambiguation)". Grutness...wha? 01:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)