| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Ashvale 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 was nominated for deletion on 24 August 2020. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trimming edit
Why was this section blanked?
The first sentence is cited by a poor source but the facts therein seem pertinent if a better source can be found. The latter part, re the MBE, clearly is directly pertinent to the subject of the wider industry and is cited with reliable sources, several more of which are available if required. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:24, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
- The Sun seems as a good as any other newspaper when it comes to fish and chips and so I agree that we should use this material, which seems reasonably uncontroversial. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:39, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- My instinct would be to be wary of going within a mile of it as a source, see also WP:THESUN, but would even they be able to concoct sensationalism or controversy on these facts? I'd rather find a better source; not sure. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- What is the relevance of the material about Devine to this section? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:34, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- My instinct would be to be wary of going within a mile of it as a source, see also WP:THESUN, but would even they be able to concoct sensationalism or controversy on these facts? I'd rather find a better source; not sure. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Boss of the article's subject gets major gong, essentially for making a notable fist of being boss of the article's subject, and related activities. Couldn't be more pertinent. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Even if the boss getting a "major gong" was relevant to this article - since "making a notable fist" (?) is not supported by what's present, it doesn't seem to be - that doesn't make it relevant to the section about a particular dish. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Boss of the article's subject gets major gong, essentially for making a notable fist of being boss of the article's subject, and related activities. Couldn't be more pertinent. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:52, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, it is not in the correct section. If you're awarded "for services to" your line of work, it's not going to be for making an erse of it. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- On reflection, if the gong was for making an erse of it, that would be doubly notable. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:53, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- The Sun is literally not as good as any other newspaper for Wikipedia cites. It's a deprecated source, which means it generally shouldn't be used on Wikipedia. If you have a better source for a claim, you should use the better source; and if you have no other source for a claim than The Sun, then the claim probably shouldn't be on Wikipedia - David Gerard (talk) 13:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- The Daily Mail give them a pretty good run for their money. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2020 (UTC)