Revision as of 04:43, 6 June 2009 editMelanieN (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users91,574 edits →Reference tag needed - what's that?: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:48, 6 June 2009 edit undoMelanieN (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users91,574 edits →Reference tag needed - what's that?Next edit → | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
There is a notice at the bottom of the page explaining why the references cited in the text do not show up. It says a reference tag is needed. But I was unable to find out from "help" what they are talking about or what needs to be done. Can someone pleasle add the necessary reference tag so that references will show up? | There is a notice at the bottom of the page explaining why the references cited in the text do not show up. It says a reference tag is needed. But I was unable to find out from "help" what they are talking about or what needs to be done. Can someone pleasle add the necessary reference tag so that references will show up? | ||
LATER: Thank you for fixing this! | |||
] (]) 04:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)MelanieN | ] (]) 04:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)MelanieN |
Revision as of 23:48, 6 June 2009
California Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
I deleted the following paragraph:
"Rockridge residents know their neighborhood for another unique fact: it is one of only a handful of California neighborhoods where it is possible to live without a car. Many homes in the Rockridge neighborhood are marketed as "green" dwellings for this reason."
...as essentially unverifiable and POV. Frankly, it's "possible" to live in any neighborhood without a car. It may not be convenient - but what's convenient and what's not is a POV question. In any case, while California generally isn't as public transit-centric as eastern cities like New York or Boston, there are numerous neighborhoods in Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco, Albany, El Cerrito, San Leandro, Hayward, and doubtless elsewhere throughout the Bay Area where it's perfectly possible to live without a car. So aside from being unveriafiable, I think it's rather inaccurate.
If anyone can come up with a reasonable argument for why the statement is (a) valid, (b) verifiable, and (c) NPOV, feel free to make it. Jcb9 20:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Real estate agent schmaltz
...Listen to some of the unverifiable/POV material in this article: "Other portions of the neighborhood consist of small bungalows and cottages that are popular for their quintessential California charm and character."..."Rockridge's homes "represent some of the most coveted real estate in the Bay Area.""..."Several of these restaurants have achieved national and international reputations for excellence in fine dining." This sounds like schmaltzy drek and drivel oozing straight off the centerfold of a glossy real-estate listing brochure. I'd tweak these a bit. Anyone have other thoughts to the contrary?Critical Chris (talk) 09:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Reference tag needed - what's that?
There is a notice at the bottom of the page explaining why the references cited in the text do not show up. It says a reference tag is needed. But I was unable to find out from "help" what they are talking about or what needs to be done. Can someone pleasle add the necessary reference tag so that references will show up?
LATER: Thank you for fixing this!
MelanieN (talk) 04:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)MelanieN
Categories: