Talk:Mission Ranch

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removing material[edit]

@Left guide: Why are you removing material from an article that has over 16,890 pageviews. A better way to do this is to add the tag Template:More citations needed. That way, viewers/editors can see what is in question and have an opportunity to fix it. When you just remove the text they don't see this information. Greg Henderson (talk) 18:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg, template is not a guideline. Please see Wikipedia:BURDEN with regard to unsourced contents. That is actually a guideline page and says quite the opposite of what you're saying. Given that you have a demonstrated history of adding things based on what you want covered rather than writing around reliable sources, many of removals done by other editors are in my view, very reasonable. Graywalls (talk) 09:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thaks for providing the WP reference. This clearly states: "editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. Consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step." I think this is very important. It saves time from having to undo or paste back the text just because it is lacking the proper citation. Moving forward I hope you and other editors have the courtesy to give an editor a chance to update their citations. Greg Henderson (talk) 22:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg, Any material that needs an inline citation but does not have one may be removed.. It also says that contents must be DIRECTLY supported, meaning that the information gathered from the source isn't dependent on who reads the source. So, the reasonable compromise in my opinion would be to gut the improperly cited materials from main space, and temporarily put it into talk page. Courtesy ping to @Left guide: Graywalls (talk) 23:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greghenderson2006, please see WP:NOTPROMO policy section point #5, which is paramount for cases like this, it begins with:

Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources.

so by default, material cited to the hotel's website stays out of the article unless you can gain consensus to the contrary, since it is a policy violation. Left guide (talk) 00:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do familiarize yourself with WP:ABOUTSELF though. Graywalls (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]