![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Larkin with Toads was copied or moved into Larkin 25 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
I have started constructing this page to record data on the Larkin25/ Larkin 25 Festival from June to December 2010. I hope the information is accurate. Any useful contributions and pictures appreciated. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 19:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
This is open for any contributors to add any relevant content and increase neutrality. It has not been produced by anyone involved in the festival and is not intended as a 'free promo', just for public information. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I have no personal or 'conflict of interest' in this copy. Of course, anyone is welcome to add and make suggestions if they are useful and informative. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 12:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I am updating with stories on educational role, etc. as they appear. Please add any others of relevance. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 14:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Before making extensive edits and removing sections post on this page first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarkinToad2010 ( talk • contribs) 21:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
The Larkin 25 facebook site is run by the festival and facebook is now often given priority over webpages for official corporate info. It's not spam, it's information. It's unhelpful to start removing sections and official links, it constitutes vandalism. The links are for quick access so don't keep chopping them. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 22:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
LarkinToad2010 I have reverted the article to the last good edit by
J3Mrs, with a few tweeks. This editor has a proven record of
good article contributions and is merely raising your editing to a higher level of quality. Your comment "You did not 'improve' anything. Stick to your own region and stop vandalising this article" is quite offensive so be
civil and do not accuse editors of Vandalism. As for "own Region" you appear to be getting on the
ownership bandwagon. The external link thisisulllarkin25 is a blog website, which along with the facebook website is not permitted on wikipedia, as per
Wikipedia:ELNO. Your current record of edits on other articles and resultant messages on their talkpages accusing other editors of vandalism, after correcting your edits, See:-
[1] and use of anon IPs is unwelcome.
Richard Harvey (
talk)
07:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
It is clear that this "Larkin 25" as an arts festival in the City of Kingston upon Hull is not getting any significant coverage outside the local area. What coverage that there is, is centred around Philip Larkin himself and not Larkin 25 the festival.
For example :
all the other refs are to local sources.
As I see it, this page serves as a promotional page for a local event, that is not receiving any notice outside the area and NOT as an encyclopaedic article.
Rather than just listing it for WP:AfD, I am proposing that the details of the memorials be merged to a section on the Philip Larkin and this page act as a re-direct.
Codf1977 ( talk) 08:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I disagree that it significant coverage of the event, it is coverage of how Hull is marking the 25th anniversary of the passing of Philip Larkin and should be merged with Philip Larkin as per WP:BEFORE it is not significant enough to warrant it's own article. Codf1977 ( talk) 13:40, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm opposed to a merge as I think it would be inappropriate. I also think there's enough to justify this article on its own.-- Michig ( talk) 16:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Larkin 25 has received widespread media coverage in The Times, Guardian, BBC and will continue to do so as it has only just launched. It is important that arts coverage outside London gains equal coverage in the media, as happened with the Liverpool08 Culture Festival. It also adds balance to the views of Hull as only a place of economic decline, benefit dependency and crime. Larkin is a major cultural figure, of recorded public popularity and therefore this article is of major cultural importance and should not be merged with the Philip Larkin entry. It is notable that most of the hostitility and vandalism to this topic is coming from outside Hull and East Riding. The entry has already been judged by editors as of significance in its own right so stop vandalising links and rewriting every other sentence unless it is helpful and informative (few such so far). Just rejoice at the news that the cultural scene in Hull is getting coverage and that readers will benefit from knowledge of this cultural event in its own entry, not buried in the sprawling P Larkin entry. PS Also NB that Larkin 25 is not the sole property of the Philip Larkin Society, an independent charity who are playing a part in running the event alongside public bodies such as Hull City Council and Hull Uni. Some seem determined to mislead readers into believing Larkin 25 is a 'PLS' event, it's not, it's a City of Hull-wide event. There seems to be a contingent determined to suppress knowledge of this event at every opportunity and ruin the article at every chance. It is a cultural event, paid for by UK tax-payer and open to all to participate. It is not a biographical detail and therefore only the very ignorant or those set on vandalism and 'tit for tat' changes would deem it so. The case for Larkin 25's fight for life has already been established. There is no alternative to it rising Phoenix-like at every attempt to suppress it. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 15:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
:::::How about this? "I'm opposed to a merge as I think it would be inappropriate. I also think there's enough to justify this article on its own.-- Michig ( talk) 16:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)" LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Just in case there any further doubt of the standing of the Larkin 25 events, it's made it to the BBC's flagship current affairs show, 'Today'. [2] Of course, it's already in The Times and Guardian. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
A number of edits have been undone that offered links to specific topics and removed updates to facts regarding the event. That the launch of Larkin with Toads is being timed to coincide with the Clipper return is stated here and this certainly 'evidence' of this intention: here. It's very unhelpful that every attempt to update and refresh the page is being vandalised in this fashion. Unless there is an error or alternative reference, could you stop undoing the updates? I have trimmed the existing text to accommodate the refreshed information so it is less than helpful to keep restoring old stuff. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I had already added a link to the 'official' Larkin Toad Flickr group. Could I suggest a limit on additional links to Flickr toad groups as these can be accessed once on the site. There is also no need to add 'what Flickr is' in the link as this is well-known and links only need short, to-the-point lablels. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarkinToad2010 ( talk • contribs) 11:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Can I suggest that users keep to the short format when contributing to this article? For instance, in referencing a newspaper, Author (optional) Name of Publication, Date of article, [Link to article with title of article], date retrieved. Corrections to typos and useful additions welcome but not this template thing as it makes the edit screen very cluttered and hard to navigate and there's no need for all this 'cryptic' information. And when footnoting papers, there' no need to put the publisher on the reference. The 'short', untemplated form is perfectly acceptable and the template is 'optional' as it states here LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 21:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I've begun a copyedit for conciseness, including the removal of extensive duplication between the various sections. I have a good deal more to go, including a try to reduce the number of references. The tense of the article is a problem--it may be necessary to rewrite a little once the festival is over. I put the appropriate "current" tag to alert readers. DGG ( talk ) 04:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
This article seems to consist of a large amount of non-notable trivia. Alot of this should be removed as per WP:NOTMEMORIAL, and probably WP:PROMOTION. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 06:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
This is the tagline of the festival as you would know if you had bothered to read the content instead of making pedantic vandal edits. This is an arts festival, not a physics conference. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
So, be aware that I know very well what you are doing, including raking up old disputes on this informative article that were resolved a long while back. Secondly, note that this is an article about a one-off arts festival in a city that doesn't usually get much positive coverage. There is no "trivia", is is information about a one-off British arts event that anybody researching the arts, social sciences, etc. might wish to know about. In the social sciences, the "trivia" of everyday life is known as evidence or on a site that claims to inform, fact. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 08:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I have a set of images of the toads but because they are not classed as permanent they are not covered by Freedom of panorama rules and so are not valid to be loaded at Commons. I have tried e-mailing the organisation to see if they have any objections to us using them but have had no reply. If anyone who is up on our licensing and copyright situation that can point in the right direction then I may be able to get them loaded. Keith D ( talk) 11:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
After a somewhat traumatic bout of article wrecking (and more vandalism to the artwork), I am grateful for the restoration of the established pattern of this article, hope it stays that way for now. I am trying to stand back from Larkin 25 now a framework has been laid down and would welcome some fresh input and images. The tags and removals are not welcome and I hope they will not return. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
The new photo is welcome and one or two more might be ideal if you have them. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
It would be helpful if users read the background and had some knowledge of the topic before making blind edits for the sake of making edits. The detail about one idea for Larkin's statue with a bike was because he was often seen riding his bike around town. Also, it is perfectly OK to use present tense for quotes from texts and articles. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The section of excessive detail & duplication "Larkin 25 key events" has been removed; we do not normally include such sections. Please do not restore without consensus. The excessive use of the festival name has also been reduced--such use is normally taken as the hallmark of a promotional article. DGG ( talk ) 20:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Considering there is a separate article on the subject, the extensive section here seems unnecessary and should per WP:Summary style , be replaced by a short summary. I notice some of the detail here does not appear in that separate article , so it should be moved over to make it more complete.
There is another alternative: merging the two articles. Personally, I think it preferable, as it will make one strong article. But either way will do, as long as everything isn't said twice. DGG ( talk ) 21:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
The series of incompetent edits have ruined this article and mistakes such as 'festival 25' betray a lack of respect and knowledge on the part of the 'editors' concerned. I deem this vandalism and an attempt to destroy the article. Larkin with Toads should not be merged until the Larkin 25 festival closes. It's the usual suspects and the incompetence of your edits betray your agenda of bringing this informative article to its knees. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC) The underhand edits you lot have done are riddled with typos and mistakes and therefore constitute vandalism. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Despite the efforts of the anti-Larkin 25 lobby to take down Larkin with Toads, it would be polite (and good faith) to leave the wikilink to Larkin with Toads in the Larkin 25 article. It is still a viable article in its own right and a national art event discussed in the national media so it should not be deleted. It's a keep (as is Larkin 25). LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I have just carefully updated this section. And talking about the discussion page, in future users who want to make radical changes and delete links should practice what they preach and post here first. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 19:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
An anonymous IP came along today and did some really good copy editing. The anonymous IP is IP: 92.40.106.208. Thanks. Maybe this person is an editor by profession. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 21:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
It appears another anonymous IP came along today, and accomplished some good copy editing, as well. This would be IP: 86.156.165.25. Thanks. Perhaps this person is also an editor by profession. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 22:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I think that the article in its current form (refence time stamp on signature) is really good. The past/present tense problems have seemingly been cleared up, and the non-notable minor details that have plagued this article have been removed. I wonder if it would now qualify for "good article" status. I've never nominated one before, so I leave it open for community discussion. The Eskimo ( talk) 17:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Don't you think you ought to wait until the statue is in place?-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 09:58, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
It's an ongoing event and the article won't be finished until then and is liable to change. Also the recent edit wars won't help at GA-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 10:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, we may want to wait on GA for a bit. I went through the sources and, for the most part, they all seem legitimate and pass wp:rs...BUT I did see quite a few instances where the information in the source and the article didn't match. The first two sentences, for instance, include place names that are not found in the cited sources. I admit to not being very familiar with place-naming conventions in England. Perhaps someone could double check the first paragraph against the two cited sources and see if I'm missing something. The Eskimo ( talk) 14:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I added a third ref to the lead that gave the exact end-date of the event as being December 2. I also mentioned that the end-date marks the 25th anniversary of Larkin's death. I wonder if something about the unveiling of the stature should be mentined here, since the sources indicate that the unveiling is what all this is leading up to, and will be the culmination of the event? The Eskimo ( talk) 16:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Which you did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm quite astounded by this "feeding frenzy" to get this article to GA. Larkin Toad deserves the credit for supplying the info and some recent edits are frankly awful, leaving no context! -- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The bits I put back in-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
No, I just like plain English.-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The last sentence of the first paragraph, the bit about funding for the festival, needs a ref. I have only found one that the festival will cost £500,000...but it does not really mention the source of funding. The Eskimo ( talk) 17:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I deleted the last sentence (no refs) of the first paragraph, and replaced it with a sentence about how the festival will conclude with the unveiling of the statue. This accomplishes both getting rid of un-sourced material, as well as being able to delete the separate statue section all together and trim some fat from the article. The unveiling of the statue is what the entire festival is leading up to, and it should be in the lead somewhere. Also, the only thing lost from the separate section is that there was a selection process, which is trivial and pretty typical for public statues; the designer's name, and that the opinion of one of the sources that the Larkin statue will resemble another statue, which, though sourced, is still just an opinion. The Eskimo ( talk) 19:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
References
I don't understand why this was removed and so I put it back. It has been removed twice with no reasonable explanation, apart from my being an IP. Why on earth shouldn't it be here? I'd really like a good explanation.-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 11:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not Larkin toad but you thinking i am is completely distorting your view of this article. It needs a section on the statue whatever you think but how many decent articles have you edited? I don't think you recognise what decent content is. Without the statue a major part of the festival is ignored, if it's in the lede it should be elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 11:59, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
well, I'm still not Larkin toad but read Eskimo's last edit above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
So what you are saying is it is not possible for an Ip to edit this article even if the IP makes perfectly valid edits.-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
You think this "By late July 2010, The Hull Daily Mail reported that over 30,000 of the guides had been distributed. A marketing company was employed to cope with the high level of public interest." is notable but not a statue, can you explain why?-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Is every IP with an IP similar to LT is a suspected sockpuppet it is impossible for an IP to edit and I maintain I an not LT. For all Steve Quinn's bluster I am unable to find where it says the statue is inappropriate and that there is "Consensus", perhaps he could point me in the right direction. And yes I do see ownership by editors preventing IPs editing. I suggest you forget the sockpuppetry and try to explain in terms this IP can understand as to why the statue is not important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 15:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been asked to have a look how this article would do as a GA nominee. I think it's close, but there are a few possible problems:
Ucucha 01:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The Eskimo ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I just did a pretty major overhaul of this article, and would like to get a consensus one way or the other if the version as of the time stamp above is an improvement over previous version. Please comment and explain with support or not support The Eskimo ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Reads very well. Nice mix of successes and problems. Bmcln1 ( talk) 21:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree that it reads very well, and the article gives good coverage of this event. I especially liked the lede, and the last section ("Reception"). The article shows that this festival did have some hurdles to overcome in order to make it a success. If I see any details that need fixin' I will let you know. Good job, and thanks for taking this on. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 23:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
The first paragraph is supposed to summarise the article which it doesn't. It should have a reference to the statue in the body of the article. It is not an improvement. -- 86.156.75.77 ( talk) 22:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I think the article looks pretty good in its current state, changes to the lede an all. Anyone see any glaring problems? If not, what's next? The Eskimo ( talk) 14:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
The article has now been archived with essential final details which are not to be removed. Thanks to all the positive readers who looked in but no thanks to those who caused so much hassle in getting this heritage event recorded here and ruined the orignal layout. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.243.76 - AKA LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 08:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
The idea is to use as few words as possible not keep adding the obvious.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 00:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to get rid of the black & white image, it's in the Larkin article and not relevant here. I presume a photograph of the sculpure will eventually replace it.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 23:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to establish some consensus here about the statue section. It seems overly lengthy and minutely detailed in comparison to the rest of the article. Do others agree? Should the section be trimmed down, or merged with the festival section, or left as is, or something else? The Eskimo ( talk) 23:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Larkin 25. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:53, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from Larkin with Toads was copied or moved into Larkin 25 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
I have started constructing this page to record data on the Larkin25/ Larkin 25 Festival from June to December 2010. I hope the information is accurate. Any useful contributions and pictures appreciated. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 19:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
This is open for any contributors to add any relevant content and increase neutrality. It has not been produced by anyone involved in the festival and is not intended as a 'free promo', just for public information. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
I have no personal or 'conflict of interest' in this copy. Of course, anyone is welcome to add and make suggestions if they are useful and informative. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 12:05, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I am updating with stories on educational role, etc. as they appear. Please add any others of relevance. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 14:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Before making extensive edits and removing sections post on this page first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarkinToad2010 ( talk • contribs) 21:03, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
The Larkin 25 facebook site is run by the festival and facebook is now often given priority over webpages for official corporate info. It's not spam, it's information. It's unhelpful to start removing sections and official links, it constitutes vandalism. The links are for quick access so don't keep chopping them. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 22:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
LarkinToad2010 I have reverted the article to the last good edit by
J3Mrs, with a few tweeks. This editor has a proven record of
good article contributions and is merely raising your editing to a higher level of quality. Your comment "You did not 'improve' anything. Stick to your own region and stop vandalising this article" is quite offensive so be
civil and do not accuse editors of Vandalism. As for "own Region" you appear to be getting on the
ownership bandwagon. The external link thisisulllarkin25 is a blog website, which along with the facebook website is not permitted on wikipedia, as per
Wikipedia:ELNO. Your current record of edits on other articles and resultant messages on their talkpages accusing other editors of vandalism, after correcting your edits, See:-
[1] and use of anon IPs is unwelcome.
Richard Harvey (
talk)
07:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
It is clear that this "Larkin 25" as an arts festival in the City of Kingston upon Hull is not getting any significant coverage outside the local area. What coverage that there is, is centred around Philip Larkin himself and not Larkin 25 the festival.
For example :
all the other refs are to local sources.
As I see it, this page serves as a promotional page for a local event, that is not receiving any notice outside the area and NOT as an encyclopaedic article.
Rather than just listing it for WP:AfD, I am proposing that the details of the memorials be merged to a section on the Philip Larkin and this page act as a re-direct.
Codf1977 ( talk) 08:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I disagree that it significant coverage of the event, it is coverage of how Hull is marking the 25th anniversary of the passing of Philip Larkin and should be merged with Philip Larkin as per WP:BEFORE it is not significant enough to warrant it's own article. Codf1977 ( talk) 13:40, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm opposed to a merge as I think it would be inappropriate. I also think there's enough to justify this article on its own.-- Michig ( talk) 16:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Larkin 25 has received widespread media coverage in The Times, Guardian, BBC and will continue to do so as it has only just launched. It is important that arts coverage outside London gains equal coverage in the media, as happened with the Liverpool08 Culture Festival. It also adds balance to the views of Hull as only a place of economic decline, benefit dependency and crime. Larkin is a major cultural figure, of recorded public popularity and therefore this article is of major cultural importance and should not be merged with the Philip Larkin entry. It is notable that most of the hostitility and vandalism to this topic is coming from outside Hull and East Riding. The entry has already been judged by editors as of significance in its own right so stop vandalising links and rewriting every other sentence unless it is helpful and informative (few such so far). Just rejoice at the news that the cultural scene in Hull is getting coverage and that readers will benefit from knowledge of this cultural event in its own entry, not buried in the sprawling P Larkin entry. PS Also NB that Larkin 25 is not the sole property of the Philip Larkin Society, an independent charity who are playing a part in running the event alongside public bodies such as Hull City Council and Hull Uni. Some seem determined to mislead readers into believing Larkin 25 is a 'PLS' event, it's not, it's a City of Hull-wide event. There seems to be a contingent determined to suppress knowledge of this event at every opportunity and ruin the article at every chance. It is a cultural event, paid for by UK tax-payer and open to all to participate. It is not a biographical detail and therefore only the very ignorant or those set on vandalism and 'tit for tat' changes would deem it so. The case for Larkin 25's fight for life has already been established. There is no alternative to it rising Phoenix-like at every attempt to suppress it. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 15:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
:::::How about this? "I'm opposed to a merge as I think it would be inappropriate. I also think there's enough to justify this article on its own.-- Michig ( talk) 16:29, 2 July 2010 (UTC)" LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Just in case there any further doubt of the standing of the Larkin 25 events, it's made it to the BBC's flagship current affairs show, 'Today'. [2] Of course, it's already in The Times and Guardian. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:18, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
A number of edits have been undone that offered links to specific topics and removed updates to facts regarding the event. That the launch of Larkin with Toads is being timed to coincide with the Clipper return is stated here and this certainly 'evidence' of this intention: here. It's very unhelpful that every attempt to update and refresh the page is being vandalised in this fashion. Unless there is an error or alternative reference, could you stop undoing the updates? I have trimmed the existing text to accommodate the refreshed information so it is less than helpful to keep restoring old stuff. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I had already added a link to the 'official' Larkin Toad Flickr group. Could I suggest a limit on additional links to Flickr toad groups as these can be accessed once on the site. There is also no need to add 'what Flickr is' in the link as this is well-known and links only need short, to-the-point lablels. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LarkinToad2010 ( talk • contribs) 11:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Can I suggest that users keep to the short format when contributing to this article? For instance, in referencing a newspaper, Author (optional) Name of Publication, Date of article, [Link to article with title of article], date retrieved. Corrections to typos and useful additions welcome but not this template thing as it makes the edit screen very cluttered and hard to navigate and there's no need for all this 'cryptic' information. And when footnoting papers, there' no need to put the publisher on the reference. The 'short', untemplated form is perfectly acceptable and the template is 'optional' as it states here LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 21:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I've begun a copyedit for conciseness, including the removal of extensive duplication between the various sections. I have a good deal more to go, including a try to reduce the number of references. The tense of the article is a problem--it may be necessary to rewrite a little once the festival is over. I put the appropriate "current" tag to alert readers. DGG ( talk ) 04:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
This article seems to consist of a large amount of non-notable trivia. Alot of this should be removed as per WP:NOTMEMORIAL, and probably WP:PROMOTION. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 06:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
This is the tagline of the festival as you would know if you had bothered to read the content instead of making pedantic vandal edits. This is an arts festival, not a physics conference. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
So, be aware that I know very well what you are doing, including raking up old disputes on this informative article that were resolved a long while back. Secondly, note that this is an article about a one-off arts festival in a city that doesn't usually get much positive coverage. There is no "trivia", is is information about a one-off British arts event that anybody researching the arts, social sciences, etc. might wish to know about. In the social sciences, the "trivia" of everyday life is known as evidence or on a site that claims to inform, fact. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 08:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I have a set of images of the toads but because they are not classed as permanent they are not covered by Freedom of panorama rules and so are not valid to be loaded at Commons. I have tried e-mailing the organisation to see if they have any objections to us using them but have had no reply. If anyone who is up on our licensing and copyright situation that can point in the right direction then I may be able to get them loaded. Keith D ( talk) 11:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
After a somewhat traumatic bout of article wrecking (and more vandalism to the artwork), I am grateful for the restoration of the established pattern of this article, hope it stays that way for now. I am trying to stand back from Larkin 25 now a framework has been laid down and would welcome some fresh input and images. The tags and removals are not welcome and I hope they will not return. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
The new photo is welcome and one or two more might be ideal if you have them. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 13:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
It would be helpful if users read the background and had some knowledge of the topic before making blind edits for the sake of making edits. The detail about one idea for Larkin's statue with a bike was because he was often seen riding his bike around town. Also, it is perfectly OK to use present tense for quotes from texts and articles. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
The section of excessive detail & duplication "Larkin 25 key events" has been removed; we do not normally include such sections. Please do not restore without consensus. The excessive use of the festival name has also been reduced--such use is normally taken as the hallmark of a promotional article. DGG ( talk ) 20:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Considering there is a separate article on the subject, the extensive section here seems unnecessary and should per WP:Summary style , be replaced by a short summary. I notice some of the detail here does not appear in that separate article , so it should be moved over to make it more complete.
There is another alternative: merging the two articles. Personally, I think it preferable, as it will make one strong article. But either way will do, as long as everything isn't said twice. DGG ( talk ) 21:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
The series of incompetent edits have ruined this article and mistakes such as 'festival 25' betray a lack of respect and knowledge on the part of the 'editors' concerned. I deem this vandalism and an attempt to destroy the article. Larkin with Toads should not be merged until the Larkin 25 festival closes. It's the usual suspects and the incompetence of your edits betray your agenda of bringing this informative article to its knees. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC) The underhand edits you lot have done are riddled with typos and mistakes and therefore constitute vandalism. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 07:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Despite the efforts of the anti-Larkin 25 lobby to take down Larkin with Toads, it would be polite (and good faith) to leave the wikilink to Larkin with Toads in the Larkin 25 article. It is still a viable article in its own right and a national art event discussed in the national media so it should not be deleted. It's a keep (as is Larkin 25). LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 17:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I have just carefully updated this section. And talking about the discussion page, in future users who want to make radical changes and delete links should practice what they preach and post here first. LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 19:23, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
An anonymous IP came along today and did some really good copy editing. The anonymous IP is IP: 92.40.106.208. Thanks. Maybe this person is an editor by profession. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 21:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
It appears another anonymous IP came along today, and accomplished some good copy editing, as well. This would be IP: 86.156.165.25. Thanks. Perhaps this person is also an editor by profession. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 22:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I think that the article in its current form (refence time stamp on signature) is really good. The past/present tense problems have seemingly been cleared up, and the non-notable minor details that have plagued this article have been removed. I wonder if it would now qualify for "good article" status. I've never nominated one before, so I leave it open for community discussion. The Eskimo ( talk) 17:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Don't you think you ought to wait until the statue is in place?-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 09:58, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
It's an ongoing event and the article won't be finished until then and is liable to change. Also the recent edit wars won't help at GA-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 10:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, we may want to wait on GA for a bit. I went through the sources and, for the most part, they all seem legitimate and pass wp:rs...BUT I did see quite a few instances where the information in the source and the article didn't match. The first two sentences, for instance, include place names that are not found in the cited sources. I admit to not being very familiar with place-naming conventions in England. Perhaps someone could double check the first paragraph against the two cited sources and see if I'm missing something. The Eskimo ( talk) 14:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I added a third ref to the lead that gave the exact end-date of the event as being December 2. I also mentioned that the end-date marks the 25th anniversary of Larkin's death. I wonder if something about the unveiling of the stature should be mentined here, since the sources indicate that the unveiling is what all this is leading up to, and will be the culmination of the event? The Eskimo ( talk) 16:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Which you did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm quite astounded by this "feeding frenzy" to get this article to GA. Larkin Toad deserves the credit for supplying the info and some recent edits are frankly awful, leaving no context! -- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The bits I put back in-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
No, I just like plain English.-- 86.156.159.128 ( talk) 16:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The last sentence of the first paragraph, the bit about funding for the festival, needs a ref. I have only found one that the festival will cost £500,000...but it does not really mention the source of funding. The Eskimo ( talk) 17:27, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
I deleted the last sentence (no refs) of the first paragraph, and replaced it with a sentence about how the festival will conclude with the unveiling of the statue. This accomplishes both getting rid of un-sourced material, as well as being able to delete the separate statue section all together and trim some fat from the article. The unveiling of the statue is what the entire festival is leading up to, and it should be in the lead somewhere. Also, the only thing lost from the separate section is that there was a selection process, which is trivial and pretty typical for public statues; the designer's name, and that the opinion of one of the sources that the Larkin statue will resemble another statue, which, though sourced, is still just an opinion. The Eskimo ( talk) 19:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
References
I don't understand why this was removed and so I put it back. It has been removed twice with no reasonable explanation, apart from my being an IP. Why on earth shouldn't it be here? I'd really like a good explanation.-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 11:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not Larkin toad but you thinking i am is completely distorting your view of this article. It needs a section on the statue whatever you think but how many decent articles have you edited? I don't think you recognise what decent content is. Without the statue a major part of the festival is ignored, if it's in the lede it should be elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 11:59, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
well, I'm still not Larkin toad but read Eskimo's last edit above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
So what you are saying is it is not possible for an Ip to edit this article even if the IP makes perfectly valid edits.-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
You think this "By late July 2010, The Hull Daily Mail reported that over 30,000 of the guides had been distributed. A marketing company was employed to cope with the high level of public interest." is notable but not a statue, can you explain why?-- 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 12:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Is every IP with an IP similar to LT is a suspected sockpuppet it is impossible for an IP to edit and I maintain I an not LT. For all Steve Quinn's bluster I am unable to find where it says the statue is inappropriate and that there is "Consensus", perhaps he could point me in the right direction. And yes I do see ownership by editors preventing IPs editing. I suggest you forget the sockpuppetry and try to explain in terms this IP can understand as to why the statue is not important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.76.224 ( talk) 15:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been asked to have a look how this article would do as a GA nominee. I think it's close, but there are a few possible problems:
Ucucha 01:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The Eskimo ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I just did a pretty major overhaul of this article, and would like to get a consensus one way or the other if the version as of the time stamp above is an improvement over previous version. Please comment and explain with support or not support The Eskimo ( talk) 21:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Reads very well. Nice mix of successes and problems. Bmcln1 ( talk) 21:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree that it reads very well, and the article gives good coverage of this event. I especially liked the lede, and the last section ("Reception"). The article shows that this festival did have some hurdles to overcome in order to make it a success. If I see any details that need fixin' I will let you know. Good job, and thanks for taking this on. ---- Steve Quinn ( talk) 23:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
The first paragraph is supposed to summarise the article which it doesn't. It should have a reference to the statue in the body of the article. It is not an improvement. -- 86.156.75.77 ( talk) 22:18, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I think the article looks pretty good in its current state, changes to the lede an all. Anyone see any glaring problems? If not, what's next? The Eskimo ( talk) 14:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
The article has now been archived with essential final details which are not to be removed. Thanks to all the positive readers who looked in but no thanks to those who caused so much hassle in getting this heritage event recorded here and ruined the orignal layout. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.243.76 - AKA LarkinToad2010 ( talk) 08:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
The idea is to use as few words as possible not keep adding the obvious.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 00:08, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to get rid of the black & white image, it's in the Larkin article and not relevant here. I presume a photograph of the sculpure will eventually replace it.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 23:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to establish some consensus here about the statue section. It seems overly lengthy and minutely detailed in comparison to the rest of the article. Do others agree? Should the section be trimmed down, or merged with the festival section, or left as is, or something else? The Eskimo ( talk) 23:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Larkin 25. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:53, 17 December 2017 (UTC)