It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 July 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Sports and Games This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance). An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Professional wrestling Low‑importance Bill Verna is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Australia: Sports Low‑importance Bill Verna is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Australian sports (assessed as Low-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian What's this? at the National Library of Australia. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

The magazine cited is not notable and should not be used as it's veracity is impossible to gauge. As it does not appear online anywhere in any other citations anywhere, it can not be deciphered as to whether or not it is anything other than a locla newsletter. Hardly a reliable source if so, so it should not be used. TaintedZebra ( talk) 06:21, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Additional note. A proper citation of a published work must include the author. This has not been done. TaintedZebra ( talk) 06:34, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Not always. If no author is listed, none can be given. Stating that the veracity of the reference needs to be verified is essentially accusing me of fabricating the source. I urge you not to continue down that path, as it is incredibly offensive. The information is cited. The only reason I can think of for removing it would be that you don't like the article and are on a crusade to have it deleted. I'll assume good faith and trust that you have some higher purpose in mind, however. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 06:39, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Where did you get the source from if you didn't get it online? Or if you did please link it. TaintedZebra ( talk) 06:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Well, you could have just asked. Unfortunately, it is difficult to access. If you type one of the phrases (for example, "appreciated and admired as a player throughout the world") into a google search, you will come up with the source. Because of some shuffling on the page, however, you will have to access the cached version. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 06:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

It doesn't matter now anyway. Someone else has brought up another good point and removed the note. TaintedZebra ( talk) 06:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Oh and we could have done this first you know - instead of you firing warnings at me arbitrarily. Sort of like shooting first and asking questions second. TaintedZebra ( talk) 06:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Kind of like deleting sourced content without bothering to make a polite inquiry? I wonder if you would be so kind as to clarify what this "good point" was, as it seems to be exactly what you were already saying. If it is the neutrality, please note that I was not saying that Verna was any of those things, but rather that he was described in those words. That is most certainly not a violation of NPOV. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 06:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

I think you'll find the user was saying the source violates WP:NPOV, not you. I was doing the right thing. I was removing content that did not comply with WP rules. You were the one who assumed bad faith and over reacted. Instead of a warning you should have just asked me what I was doing informally. Then we could have discussed it. And I never used NPOV before. It was JBSupreme who brought it up, along with a few other terms in his edit summary which I also never used, but do agree with. At the end of the day, offline sources of published work (as opposed to online) must include an author. Otherwise they fail WP:V. TaintedZebra ( talk) 07:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

I don't see anything about that at WP:V. Could you please point me to the relevant section. Thanks, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 07:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Actually I should have mentioned WP:RS as well. But it boils down to WP:BURDEN. It says (just to save you going over there); The source should be cited clearly and precisely to enable readers to find the text that supports the article content in question. Editors should cite sources fully, providing as much publication information as possible, including page numbers when citing books. Now obviously this isn't a book, it's a magazine you're citing. But the key words are "as much publication information as possible". That - by interpretation (and I think there's a consensus for it but I don't know where and I think it was some time ago as well) - includes the author of the article. Now with a book that would be easy (usually) but with a magazine (especially one over 50 years old and not notable as well) that's impossible. That's why I said what I said in the edit summary that it's impossible to verify. I probably shouldn't have pinned it to just WP:V but it's a contributor. TaintedZebra ( talk) 07:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

With all due respect, you seem to have overlooked the words "as possible". An unsigned article (and they exist all over the place, including in many major contemporary newspapers), by definition, doesn't have an author listed. This doesn't make the article unreliable. It just means that as much information as possible should go into the citation, which would mean everything except the author. At any rate, it's getting late, and there's some stuff I really wanted to get finished tonight, so I'm going to have to put this distraction on hold. Take care, GaryColemanFan ( talk) 07:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

But if you don't include the author, library indexes won't pick it up. Archives rely on that sort of thing, particularly with magazines. It applies for newspapers as well. That's why the author is crucial to the citiation. But anyway, because the copy of the article you gave me is in itself suspect under WP:RS we may have an additional issue on top of everything else. Especially as it is cached. TaintedZebra ( talk) 07:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bill Verna. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090903064447/http://geocities.com/worlddwebb/bholu_brothers/ to http://www.geocities.com/worlddwebb/bholu_brothers/

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC) reply