Talk:Blacon

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cheshire Low‑importance

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Assessment Report

Article still needs some expansion(use Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements as a guide.)
Keep on supplying References and Citations for any additional material. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.)
It might be an idea to try for "Good Article" status after some mroe work: if not successful, it would give further pointers as to what would be required.

DDStretch (talk) 02:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Your comments below were noted and the following amendments have replaced what you pointed out as POV:

"Blacon people are commited to building a kind and caring community" has been replaced with the following:

"Blacon people are involved in many local community-led initiatives and projects, such as "Blacon Together", which aims to make Blacon a kind and caring community."

Aiming to make the place a kind and caring community is the raison d'être of the community led and government sponsored http://www.blacon-together.com/.

I have futher included the citation for ""Blacon Together"" good

So I am agreeing with you! This is now, not a point of view, but national government policy on communities Twinney12 20:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refererence or contribute to other wiki pages regarding government policies on communities.The Blacon page should be encyclopedic and not an expression of personal opinion, pride or hope for a given location whether or not we as editors agree with them. Editor

Still POV

"Blacon people are commited to building a kind and caring community" is not NPOV and is not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. It is not enough for you (or even the entire population of Blacon) to think it true; it is still personal opinion. The obvious answer is to find a reliable source, say a local newspaper, in which a well-known personality has been quoted as saying this and use that instead. For the moment I've changed that part of the sentence to avoid stating an opinion as fact; please do not reinsert it in the original form. Sorry, but NPOV is a matter of non-negotiable Wikipedia policy, and it overrides your (or my) opinions, however strong they may be. Loganberry (Talk) 00:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tag

I added the cleanup tag to this article, because:

It's not all written from a neutral point of view. For example, Blacon people are commited to building a kind and caring community may or may not be true, but is certainly not neutral. Both are needed for Wikipedia articles; as Jimmy Wales has said, NPOV is non-negotiable and must always be conformed to regardless of individual editors' feelings or beliefs. I removed the intro sentence because it was redundant: all WP articles have to conform to NPOV, so there's no point in saying so explicitly in one article.

The tone is not always the formal one expected from an encyclopedia article. For example, if you take a 10 or 15 minute walk from any part of the estate, you are again in open countryside is in an inappropriate second-person voice, and It is a Village/Town... a Mini-Town...(?) is unclear; it should be described as whatever its official status is - if any reliable source has described it as a "Mini-Town" then that information can be included as long as it is verifiable.

The navigational templates at the bottom don't seem to fit here. For example, the "Historic counties of England" template is for articles about such, not for articles about places within them.

On a slightly different note, please don't anyone incorporate the comments above from the anon editor into the article. Personal opinions, positive or negative, are again a violation of the NPOV policy and as such would be unacceptable. It is not Wikipedia's job to change (or indeed confirm) opinions of a place; it is Wikipedia's job to report the facts.

Hopefully these comments will help editors who have more knowledge of Blacon than I do. Loganberry (Talk) 23:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blacon

I removed a large portion of text from this talk page which appeared to be lifted verbatim from another source. Talk pages are not intended for use as workspace or repositories of information not suitable for main articles. I have other concerns about this article, particularly the inclusion of text in the references section (only actual references should be listed) and some of the external links, e.g. to local schools with no evidence of their notability. It would be great if any interested editors could work together to improve this article, otherwise it may require more attention from neutral parties. Deizio talk 18:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, I did not realize the talk page was not to be used in that way - I was going to give a link to the talk page. My interest is to be as helpful as possible to readers of the Blacon site; I may have misunderstood the whole ethos of the Wiki aims. I have only added the links for the schools to offer the reader of the article as much information as possible. I can remove the links, but if I remember, I was told off for not having them there. Shall we just say "Blacon has some schools" then, "and lots of houses, it is rundown, but things are getting better".

Policing

Could a date be put to the establishment of the 'new' divisional headquarters of the Cheshire Constabulary? The premises will become less 'new' as time goes by.Cloptonson (talk) 12:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Blacon. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

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) 22:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blacon. 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/20081120012137/http://www.chester.gov.uk/council_and_democracy/city_councillors/your_councillors/councillor_by_ward.aspx to http://www.chester.gov.uk/council_and_democracy/city_councillors/your_councillors/councillor_by_ward.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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).

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) 09:28, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]