Talk:Jeanne d'Arc Basin

Canada: Newfoundland & Labrador Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Jeanne d'Arc Basin is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Some recommendations

Thanks to GeoIainK for the dramatic expansion of this article! I have a couple of recommendations. First, you have to keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an academic journal. There appear to be a lot of primary sources, but Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on secondary sources (see Primary, secondary and tertiary sources). Second, the lead section should mainly summarize the contents of the body and should generally have few citations itself (see Citations). RockMagnetist (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

follow-up to suggestions

Thanks for the encouragement and I see your point on the style of referencing information. This is definitely a different style medium to those which are most familiar to me. Would a summary review publication on the formation and hydrocarbon potential of the Jeanne d'Arc Basin by a well informed individual that has been posted as an authoritative source on a government informational site such as the following PDF (http://www.nr.gov.nl.ca/nr/invest/jeanne_d_arc_presentation.pdf) be an appropriate secondary source for most of the article (with minor re-write) and then just eliminate all or most of the primary sources? There are very few general (non-primary) sources that I can think of on this topic. GeoIainK (talk) 00:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the slow reply. I see you have been doing a lot of work on the citations. It looks like you have some good secondary sources now. You certainly don't need to eliminate all the primary sources. The key point in Primary, secondary and tertiary sources is that primary sources can be used for facts, but interpretation should be left to secondary sources. RockMagnetist (talk) 15:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

actions

Added secondary references and deleted a number of primary references to achieve better balance and more closely match advice from RockMagnetist GeoIainK (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jeanne d'Arc Basin. 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/20140429183659/http://www.slb.com/resources/publications/industry_articles/westerngeco/200706epwhiterose.aspx to http://www.slb.com/resources/publications/industry_articles/westerngeco/200706epwhiterose.aspx

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).

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) 16:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jeanne d'Arc Basin. 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/20101114222701/http://www.cnlopb.nl.ca/ to http://www.cnlopb.nl.ca/

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).

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) 16:42, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]