Talk:Find A Grave
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
[edit] notability
Regarding notability: many Wikipedia articles reference find-a-grave's website. The find-a-grave website is by far the highest ranked website of its type.[1] Notability really isn't a problem here.
On the other hand, this article could really benefit from some reliable, neutral, 3rd party sources. Think along the lines of mainstream or industry press articles focusing specifically on find-a-grave.
Lastly, leave out the fan-cruft. Folks who want to know all of find-a-grave's options can simply click on the website link and find out. What this article should focus on is the website's significance. How has it impacted society? What is it good for? - those sorts of things. There are good and useful answers to these questions. We just need to make sure the article contains them - sourced. Rklawton 17:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just because its linked all over the Wikipedia doesn't make it notable. Unless you do something to address the lack of notability in the article, you should put the tag back on. Just saying it is notable (even if it is) is no reason to take down the tag. 2005 20:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, it does. Over 900 Wikipedia articles link to this one. The problem appears to be only with sourcing. As a result, a notability tag isn't useful. Rklawton 20:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- No it doesn't. This is an encyclopedia with guidelines and policies about how to write articles. The notability tag is an alert that an article needs to display its notability in the article. 2005 20:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- It looks like you are confused here. 16 million records obviously says nothing at all about notability. If someone made a copy of this site it would also have 16 million records, and zero notability. You need to read WP:N and WP:WEB. 2005 22:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- I guess what you are missing is the idea that 16 million records is huge for a graves database. That sort of thing would be obvious to a genealogist. Rklawton 22:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like you are confused here. 16 million records obviously says nothing at all about notability. If someone made a copy of this site it would also have 16 million records, and zero notability. You need to read WP:N and WP:WEB. 2005 22:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
i just don't see how crappy editing relates to notability. if that were the case we'd be left with just a dozen or so articles. if the goal of the placarding is to improve the article, it seems to me that the citations is sufficient to accomplish that goal. --emerson7 | Talk 05:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Some more 3rd party sources: [2] (March 2006), [3], [4], [5] - it's also been noticed all over the blogosphere, but these are citations I could find that seemed slightly more serious than a random blogpost. --Alvestrand 05:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
