Talk:Birdworld
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Birdworld article. 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 article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Birdworld - secondary sources
editVisitBritain, the UK's official tourist body has the following, among many other references: search.visitbritain.com--Technopat (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The article as it stands...
editRight folks, Let’s see if between us we can resolve this dispute as adult Wikipedians. As it stands, the article is now a perfect example of what many outsiders criticise Wikipedia for, including, but not limited to, the lack of good faith shown by some editors.
Rather than being bold, and simply reverting to the very first edit made here in 2007, and before taking this up at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, I’d like to see if we can reach some sort of consensus – the essence of Wikipedia? - as to how to proceed with this article.
I see that at least two administrators have been involved at times here, and I, for one, would appreciate some sort of input from ‘em, but other editors need to get involved here also.
Mutual accusations of hijacking the page are hardly examples of good faith... and reverting to previous versions verges on vandalism, so let's get the show on the road and solve this. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 22:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Best solution would be, assuming that both Birdworlds are notable, to create two articles, Birdworld (UK) and Birdworld (Australia), with this page as a disambiguation between them. And both pages must be free of copyrighted text, they shouldn't be partial or whole copies of the park's websites. Fram (talk) 06:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- The original Birdworld article was hijacked in Nov 2009 by a one shot editor replacing it with the Australian one. I have recreated the latest version at Birdworld (Australia) so it has an independent existance as an article. Meanwhile the Original has been overwritten by an editor admitting a Conflict of Interest. Copyvio is copyvio no matter who wrote the original and the overwriting removed all Wiki formatting. We welcome improvements to articles written in original text and building on the work already contributed. Motmit (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input.--Technopat (talk) 13:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)