Talk:Fly (dinghy)
(Redirected from Talk:Fly (Dinghy))
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
CSD
[edit]Hangon: If this information about an obscure British Sailing Dinghy isn't presented here I suspect it will be lost. I'll add references in the week but I need access to a hard copy of a book for that and I don't have immediate access. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZzMLH MLH (talk • contribs)
- Hi, if you believe the subject is notable enough to merit an article (please read WP:NOTE for notability guidelines) but need some time to work on the article to bring it up to par, you can have the article moved to your user space so it will not be at risk of immediate deletion. I can help you do that if you want. XXX antiuser eh? 12:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually it's not a problem. All I need is a verifiable reference. I can just reference the book I found the class in - I don't need page numbers etc. I'm not sure if you'd call the fly dinghy notable but if you're going to have a section on Dinghy Classes it seems a shame to miss any - especially since information on the more obscure ones will be more useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZzMLH MLH (talk • contribs) 12:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- You're going to want more than just the one - you'll need non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. I'll add the CVRDA link, as I used it for the specs (what we have, anyway), but more would be good. And generally "notable" on Wikipedia doesn't mean the same thing as it might elsewhere - the class is sufficiently notable in this case if it has the required sources. - Bilby (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Many thanks Bilby, what a difference! ZzMLH MLH (talk —Preceding undated comment added 16:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC).
- You're going to want more than just the one - you'll need non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. I'll add the CVRDA link, as I used it for the specs (what we have, anyway), but more would be good. And generally "notable" on Wikipedia doesn't mean the same thing as it might elsewhere - the class is sufficiently notable in this case if it has the required sources. - Bilby (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)