Talk:Operation Clambake

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Operation Clambake has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
November 11, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
November 13, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Good article
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Operation Clambake:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
  • Article requests : If available, add free use images to improve article quality, preferably from Wikimedia Commons.
  • Expand : *As always, add info to expand article from reputable secondary sources, sourced with proper formatting, WP:CIT.

Use by scholars as convenience link[edit]

We can drop this statement, if editors prefer – I suppose it is OR, really – but I would consider it uncontentious and easily verifiable. While looking for sources, I just came across a number of such uses and thought it was fair to the site to mention it. Some examples: [1] [2] [3] [4] Jayen466 10:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

"Cited as an archival resource by scholars in academic works" would be more accurate. Cirt (talk) 13:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, much better. Jayen466 13:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 Done. Cirt (talk) 13:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

"Cowan notes that most of the content presented by the site is not the result of original research by the owner but rather a collection of hyperlinks to media reports, scholarly and popular articles, court documents and out-of-print books."

Sounds like it has his vote! :) AndroidCat (talk) 07:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

The article makes no mention of what I assumed was the origin of the term "Operation Clambake", which is a recurring theme/event from Kurt Vonnegut's books. Does anybody know anything about this? Naymetayken (talk) 14:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

No, and I have not come across that in secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 15:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Surfeit of watchdog articles paragraph reads like advocacy in favor of scientology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.124.75 (talk) 04:37, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it's so bad. It's a discussion about where the site sits in the overall discourse, from a sociological perspective. I think it's relevant to the overall balance of the article. --Slashme (talk) 06:19, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Operation Clambake. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)