Talk:Rat-baiting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs. |
|||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on July 13, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
[edit] Pictures
If you find some higher quality useable pictures of Rat Baiting, please upload them. SirIsaacBrock 15:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Restored material
I agree that the restored material is informative and appropriate. Rbraunwa 14:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your support SirIsaacBrock 14:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] As usual
As usual for this series of articles, there is far too much anecdotal trivia and far too little discussion of the subject. I would have just removed the content, but apparently that is dramatically unacceptable. I ask that other editors justify the inclusion of all the tagged sections. Thanks. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- Factual information that supports and fills out an article is good thing :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SirIsaacBrock (talk • contribs) .
I have removed the tags because you have expended insufficient time and effort justifying their inclusion on this talk page. I think you're in violation of WP:POINT. There are plenty of shorter articles on Wikipedia that do not have inline references, and yet aren't filled with templates. I don't know how this fight started, and frankly I don't care, but stop disrupting the encyclopedia. If there are specific flaws in the article you would like remedied, then please point them out and civilly give SirIsaacBrock a chance to remedy them. –Joke 15:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- I would like him to remove the following as being not-encyclopedic or completly anticillary to the topic: Atmosphere, Rules, Rat-catcher, Billy, Jacko. I must insist that he either rewrite, or stop owning the article and allow me to rewrite the Technique section which is currently pure WP:OR. Hipocrite - «Talk» 15:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- While they don't deserve their own sections, some of the information in the Billy and Jacko section could be useful to give an idea of how many rats were involved and the sort of times expected. — Laura Scudder ☎ 16:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree that some of these sections could be rewritten, but I think they are each perfectly germane. As for technique, in principle it could be OR, but what makes you sure? –Joke 16:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- It is the responsibility of the person including the information to document it, using Reliable Sources. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
May I draw your attention to the four quite relevant references at the bottom of the page? I think you are required to assume good faith: that is, if someone provides relevant references, perhaps you should accept that they actually say what he claims they say, in the absence of evidence to the contrary. –Joke 16:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
- References do not support the information regarding technique. If they do, please cite the page where they do. I am required to assume good faith - however, I intend to verify the sources given. Where can we source "[a] true rat killer bit once, dropped the rat, bit again, dropped again, and so on?" Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't own the references (except for the Rats: ... book), have not looked at them, and do not have any interest in tracking them down. If you would like to, to confirm whether or not the information is in there, please do. Or as User:SirIsaacBrock to provide the page number, or a quote, if you dispute it. –Joke 16:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
