Revision as of 01:28, 23 July 2007 editGlassbreaker5791 (talk | contribs)471 edits Too much← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:49, 7 November 2007 edit undoTheRedPenOfDoom (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers135,756 edits →Google hits != notable: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Way too much of this information pertains more to the show then actual South Park republicans. While reading it I almost forgot that I wasn't on the show's page. The information needs some serious editing as a huge amount of the information is not relevent to the topic of the article. ] 01:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | Way too much of this information pertains more to the show then actual South Park republicans. While reading it I almost forgot that I wasn't on the show's page. The information needs some serious editing as a huge amount of the information is not relevent to the topic of the article. ] 01:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
== Google hits != notable == | |||
Just because you can google and get 'a lot' of web hits does NOT mean the subject meets Misplaced Pages notability guidelines. ]] 16:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:49, 7 November 2007
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the South Park Republican article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
Animation: South Park Unassessed | |||||||||||||
|
Archives |
The External links
I'm wondering, are the entries in the external links section actually the sources used for the article? If so, I'd like to reclassify them as such using the layout at Template:Reflist. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 03:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've put the {{External links}} tag on the article, those links need to be cleaned up. If they're references, please work them into the article as footnotes. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk|contribs) 01:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
=Messy and Needs Sources
The "Meaning of Term" and "Usage" sections neither cite any sources and both, especially the prior, are sloppy. Someone want to take a try at rewriting them? --Col.clawhammer 10:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Too much
Way too much of this information pertains more to the show then actual South Park republicans. While reading it I almost forgot that I wasn't on the show's page. The information needs some serious editing as a huge amount of the information is not relevent to the topic of the article. Glassbreaker5791 01:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Google hits != notable
Just because you can google and get 'a lot' of web hits does NOT mean the subject meets Misplaced Pages notability guidelines. WP:NOTABLETheRedPenOfDoom 16:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Categories: