Talk:Theroyalforums

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The references given do not establish notability. The "social knowledge" link is simply a directory which includes a link to The Royal Forums. The "Novella 2000" one looks to me (without really knowing the language) that it's probably an article about The Royal Forums; but that's just one very short article. The third one, timesonline article, merely mentions The Royal Forums as the source of some information it's using; it says nothing about The Royal Forums itself. Also, I see no evidence in these references that the forum is referred to as "TheRoyalForums" (without spaces, unless the .com is also given,) or "Theroyalforums". --Coppertwig 15:25, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the name of the article should be The Royal Forums, with spaces. But I don't agree with your diagnosis of irrelevance. I believe The Royal Forums, compared to other Internet Forums with Wiki articles, is among the most notable. There is some relevance here. TRF is a leader of the royal watching community. That it is often a major source for royal journalism speaks for itself. --Ashley Rovira (talk) 07:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)