Talk:Black Creek, British Columbia

Story of E.B.C.

I have removed this content twice as it appears to be nonsense and therefore vandalism of this stub article. The author, Wordtoyourcat, has offered no source to support the content and has not responded to the question whether this is vandalism. Assuming this is a good faith edit, a verifiable source for the content must be provided to support this as genuine content. I also challenge this content as lacking the tone/style required of an encylopedia. --KenWalker | Talk 16:31, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

E.B.C.

Everything I wrote definitely happened. I lived it. It's more of a discussion piece about how Black Creek and Saratoga Beach in general is becoming nothing more than a marketable tourist trap. What was once a good tight knit community is now being divided by a few resort owners who clearly care very little about the community or preservation of the surrounding environment. Saratoga Beach is a mess and though I have personally tried to have this problem fixed by going through the proper channels, I have basically been told that the problem of a polluted beach - which has been pretty much turned into a dumping ground for ignorant people throughout the summer months - is not a major issue with the regional board. --RyanGibbons, 10:23 16 November 2007

• Thanks for your response however, as to "...definitely happened. I lived it . . " see WP:OR and WP:V. Beyond that there are issues about the relevance, coherence and encylopedic tone of the content, but since the content you have added to the article. It does not appear to pass the basic test of being verifiable. If a reliable source, other than your own observance of the situation, can not be provided, the content should be deleted. --KenWalker | Talk 18:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
• Well, aside from the lost copies of EBC times we really have nothing published but there are about 30 or so other people who can verify everything I wrote. Wouldn't the point of this page be to shed light on the community? Call me crazy but Saratoga, its residents and their stories seem like a fairly important part of the community. Also, if there is something you'd like for me to fix up grammar wise, please feel free to fire some constructive criticism my way rather than saying my writing lacks coherence, relevance and an encyclopedic tone. I've never written a piece for an encyclopedia before but it would be nice to learn. -RyanGibbons, 15:21, 16 November 2007
  • As to the source of the information, again, have a look at WP:OR (which says that we don't put things in wikipedia because we know from our own knowledge) and WP:V which says that a source must be provided to back up information added to an article. That other folks you know could back this up, doesn't make it. Check out the references and if you have questions I would be happy to help. The other comments I have made (my apologies if they did not come across as constructive) don't go into detail because my guess is that there is no verifiable source so those points won't matter. But since you have asked, the answers to your questions and more can be found in WP:MOS where they are set out more clearly than they are here.
    • As to coherence without some attempt to place the events you refer to at a particular point in time, it is hard understand the point you are making. It talks about retaliation. Retaliation for what? You say the area is known for outrageous acts and then that it is known for a home for a group of folks. Then it talks about some events, which may be the outrageous acts or it may be that they are acts done by the EBC or it may be both. Then it seems to describe obscurely acts of vandalism to protect the area they call home . . . . . What are "tourorists"? It is not a coherent description.
    • As to relevance: The article is about Black Creek. The locations you refer to are not part of Black Creek. Because some "no-goodnicks" are perhaps from there, does not make the story you are telling relevant to an article about Black Creek.
    • As to encylopedic tone: Nothing magic about this. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Things like "known to be a hot-bed for most of the wildly outrageous acts", "a small band of "Creekers"", "a group of no-goodnicks" don't sound like an encyclopedia.

As well, I note you have tried to sign your posts here, but have a look at Wikipedia:Signatures which will put you on the right path. There is a button to use to do it or you can type --~~~~ at the end of your post to do it easily.

Don't give up, your efforts are welcome, but this isn't a place for what you have added here.

I hope that helps and that what I have said comes across as constructive because that it what I intend. --KenWalker | Talk 00:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Jesus, you're really into this. If it's that big of a pain in the ass I'll take it out. I was bored and trying to liven Black Creek's recent history up. I know for a fact that it brought some more viewers to this page but since all you wanna do is rain on everyone's parade I'll let you. You win, you're the boss man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordtoyourcat (talk • contribs)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black Creek, British Columbia. 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/20060104022326/http://www.britishcolumbia.com:80/regions/towns/?townID=46 to http://www.britishcolumbia.com/regions/towns/?townID=46

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 14:35, 3 November 2016 (UTC)