Talk:Woodstock, Virginia

No embedded links

@Woodrusher: Please stop adding embedded links to the body of the article. Don't do things like Valley Baseball League. If whatever you want to link to already has a Wikipedia article written about it, use a WP:WIKILINK instead; if it doesn't, then don't embed a link to the things website. Cleaning these up is a bit time consuming as it is, but you keep adding more so it's making things even more time consuming. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

WP:REFPUNC

@Woodrusher: On Wikipedia, footnote markers come after punctuation in almost all cases; so, please makes sure to add references after periods, commas, etc. Also, please don't add any space between punctuation and references or between consecutive references per WP:REFSPACE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

MOS:LQ

@Woodrusher: On Wikipedia, closing quotation marks generally come before (i.e. inside) punctuation, except in certain cases. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Excessive detail

@Woodrusher: Wikipedia articles are intended to be written in a summary style, which means it's not really necessary or desirable to include too much detail. One of the nice things about Wikipedia is that multiple articles can be linked internally through WP:WIKILINKS; so, when you mention a person, place that has a Wikipedia article written about it in this article, it's not really necessary to start copying-pasting detailed content from that article into this article when a link accomplish the same thing. The content your adding to the article about the Revolutionary War and Civil War is about things which should probably be mentioned here, but not in so much detail; that information is better suited for articles about these other things.

There is also another problem with doing this kind of thing that as explained in WP:CWW. Recently an administrator named Diannaa went through and cleaned-up lots of content that was apparently copied-pasted verbatim from external websites or at least too closely paraphrased. This kind of thing is problematic from a copyright standpoint because the licensing on these other websites may not be compatible with WP:COPY. Content on external websites also tend to be written in a tone or style which may be fine for the website, but not for Wikipedia per WP:NPOV and WP:TONE. Since Wikipedia's general licensing does allow it's content to be freely re-used, there's generally no problem with a licensing stand point, but proper attribution still needs to be given. So, when you take content written by others from other Wikipedia articles and add it to this article, there still needs to be attribution given to the source of the original content. The tone of the content is also usually OK since it tends to be written in "Wikipedia's style", but it may be more suited for the source article in detail and terminology than it would be in some other article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:50, 2 November 2019 (UTC)