![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page was moved with no announcement or discussion from Wenham, Massachusetts to Wenham, Essex County, Massachusetts, and then Wenham, Massachusetts was made a disambig page between this and some neighborhood in Carver, Massachusetts also called Wenham. I believe that this move is inappropriate, and ought to be reversed, for the following reasons:
AJD ( talk) 19:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Where is the disambiguation page now? -- Una Smith ( talk) 05:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm doing a brief edit of the refs. Generally WP is against raw url's and also web sites as refs. However considerable information is stated in the official website. I notice some advertisments have been stated in the external links. Hold out your hands, you get a mental ruler blow or even a face slap in memory of Miss B. or you might have to go to the office for a stern lecture from the other Miss B. I'm taking out the blatent commercial sites. They may be your only source but they are still not according to policy. I'm taking the tag off the top. It is dated 2009. The article has a complement of refs now. If you think some specific statement needs a ref you can either find one or put a request for a ref on that statement. Generally WP favors classical refs such as you would see in a scholarly article,at least in its stated policy, so if you want to expand, perhaps you should find an old history of Wenham. There's plenty around. Depends on the time you want to spend.Branigan 11:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
The last paragraph of the history has a chain of two refs apparently on the 1997 changes to the museum. The problem is, the refs are dated to 1943 and 1993. What, were the authors prophets? Exactly why are they in there and what do they say? Unfortunately one is a rare pamphlet. The paragraph is very short. It should not be difficult to find all of its facts in more convenient sources, if indeed they are correct. Or, if you actually have the pamphlet, perhaps you could place it on the right fact and make the prophecy paradox go away?Branigan 12:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Wenham, Massachusetts. 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) 09:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page was moved with no announcement or discussion from Wenham, Massachusetts to Wenham, Essex County, Massachusetts, and then Wenham, Massachusetts was made a disambig page between this and some neighborhood in Carver, Massachusetts also called Wenham. I believe that this move is inappropriate, and ought to be reversed, for the following reasons:
AJD ( talk) 19:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Where is the disambiguation page now? -- Una Smith ( talk) 05:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm doing a brief edit of the refs. Generally WP is against raw url's and also web sites as refs. However considerable information is stated in the official website. I notice some advertisments have been stated in the external links. Hold out your hands, you get a mental ruler blow or even a face slap in memory of Miss B. or you might have to go to the office for a stern lecture from the other Miss B. I'm taking out the blatent commercial sites. They may be your only source but they are still not according to policy. I'm taking the tag off the top. It is dated 2009. The article has a complement of refs now. If you think some specific statement needs a ref you can either find one or put a request for a ref on that statement. Generally WP favors classical refs such as you would see in a scholarly article,at least in its stated policy, so if you want to expand, perhaps you should find an old history of Wenham. There's plenty around. Depends on the time you want to spend.Branigan 11:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
The last paragraph of the history has a chain of two refs apparently on the 1997 changes to the museum. The problem is, the refs are dated to 1943 and 1993. What, were the authors prophets? Exactly why are they in there and what do they say? Unfortunately one is a rare pamphlet. The paragraph is very short. It should not be difficult to find all of its facts in more convenient sources, if indeed they are correct. Or, if you actually have the pamphlet, perhaps you could place it on the right fact and make the prophecy paradox go away?Branigan 12:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Wenham, Massachusetts. 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) 09:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)