![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
I notice on my watchlist that a cleanup tag was added to this article by another editor. This and other dab pages that include red-link NRHP items might all get cleaned up by a bot, sometime, which would refine the supporting bluelinks for each red-link item. There's a botrequest in for this, anyhow. I don't happen to think it helps to call for manual cleanup, as that would be tedious and not add very much, IMHO. -- doncram ( talk) 00:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
An editor has repeatedly visited to remove an item, "* Georgetown East Main Street Residential District, Georgetown, KY, listed on the NRHP in Kentucky", from this dab page, with cryptic edit summaries. (The item showed currently as a red-link.) I restored it again now, now placing it in the "See also" section for variety's sake. I have no idea what the editor's objection is. Is the editor's objection that the editor thinks it should be in the See also section, instead? Then why remove it.
Could the editor please explain his/her views for discussion, rather than edit warring about this. Removal of substantial content is, well, negative. To me, it seems sneaky and wp:POINTY and other bad things to try to remove material and hope it doesn't get noticed. -- doncram ( talk) 14:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
I notice on my watchlist that a cleanup tag was added to this article by another editor. This and other dab pages that include red-link NRHP items might all get cleaned up by a bot, sometime, which would refine the supporting bluelinks for each red-link item. There's a botrequest in for this, anyhow. I don't happen to think it helps to call for manual cleanup, as that would be tedious and not add very much, IMHO. -- doncram ( talk) 00:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
An editor has repeatedly visited to remove an item, "* Georgetown East Main Street Residential District, Georgetown, KY, listed on the NRHP in Kentucky", from this dab page, with cryptic edit summaries. (The item showed currently as a red-link.) I restored it again now, now placing it in the "See also" section for variety's sake. I have no idea what the editor's objection is. Is the editor's objection that the editor thinks it should be in the See also section, instead? Then why remove it.
Could the editor please explain his/her views for discussion, rather than edit warring about this. Removal of substantial content is, well, negative. To me, it seems sneaky and wp:POINTY and other bad things to try to remove material and hope it doesn't get noticed. -- doncram ( talk) 14:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)