Talk:Dunoon/Archives/2020 1

Notable people referencing
This section consists of a list of links to articles about the people in question and, as far as I have checked, their Dunoon connection is mentioned and referenced therein. (The one exception is the Harry Lauder article, which does not mention Dunoon, though the connection is reffed at the Laudervale article, also linked here.) What is the policy that requires links to an article to duplicate the refs within that article? Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The idea of dumping a list of names, which is an unstructured list, went out with the arc. More than 10 years ago. There is nothing wrong with duplicating refs in an article using ref tags, like everybody else does.   scope_creep Talk  11:27, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll post a help message and find the policy.   scope_creep Talk  11:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * There was never any suggestion that there was anything wrong with duplicating refs to the section, just that, if this hadn't been done, it was appropriate and necessary to obliterate it. By all means roll your sleeves up and add them, they're just a click away. Blanking the entire section when the verifications are so easily reached was at best a sledgehammer to crack a barely-existent nut. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Section order and other issues
I have to communicate here before I take it to dispute resolution on the Admin Noticeboard. The gap is not a problem in my eyes. There was text in the gap before you removed it. Also, you've left a lot of formatting errors (references and otherwise) in your blind revert. Please remedy so that it makes the resolution step easier. And stop communicating via my talk page, like I've asked.

As mentioned, having the Climate section in the Geography section is common in other articles, and having the Geography section near the top is also common in other articles. - Seasider53 (talk) 01:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

--

Moved from my talk page:

Hi Good work, but I did notice your using bare urls in the work that your doing at Dunoon. Can you convert them into proper full size cites. Bare urls decrease the quality of the article and add works for everybody else. I converted all the references in the article about a year ago into full cite and now full bare urls again. WP:REFB will show you how to do it. Its fairly straightforward. Thanks.  scope_creep Talk  10:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi You can't leave big gap at the top of the article. Create a new section, or move the Geography section down, or reorder it.  Either way you can leave a ugly empty gap at the top.    scope_creep Talk  01:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * please keep article-specific issues on the relevant article talk page. Also, please be more considerate of your reverts, since you're undoing a lot of mistakes you made. - Seasider53 (talk) 01:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Thanks for answering. I had a look at the Edinburgh and Glasgow article. They don't have a big gap at the top of the article. Reorder it in a way that removed the gap. I can really go anywhere. I don't know if the manual of style says anything.     scope_creep Talk  01:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I can move some of the pictures up, into the gallery and move the climate section further up the page and put the gallery down at the bottom.   scope_creep Talk  01:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This makes no sense. And why is the Climate section a subheading in the Gallery section? - ~ Seasider53 (talk) 01:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Can you please stop adding Google Play references. They are low-quality and probably Non-rs. That instance of the Colgate reference is a public domain book. It is easily located on Google Books and published in full as it public domain. This, which you have probably came across allows you to take a google book ref and it will format it on a page number. You have probably seen it before, but I've came across folk that have been here for year and have never seen in. Hope that helps.  scope_creep Talk  01:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * So... just remove the entire reference and put a tag there instead? - Seasider53 (talk) 01:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not asking you to move the section down there. I want the gap from the top removed, that's all. It not necessary to keep it there. Fire in, reorder the whole lot, do what you need to do, but please do not leave a gap at the top, or in any part of the article. It makes it very hard for the readers, if they're on a mobile device, which is now the majority of people, to read the page. They see the gap, and they think the article is gubbed, so they ignore it and don't read any further. They is a ton of evidence that has looked at this. They see it as damaged or looks out of shape and folk don't read it. It is really not the way to go. I go round these pages that have big gaps in them and fix them. It kind of old way that stuff was done about a decade or more ago But, its bad design. If you don't want to do it tonight, we can talk about it tomorrow, or I can do it, or you can do it, by maybe building a proper geography section and moving it down slightly out the way of the infobox. Any particular order, they're may be a particular way in the style guide, I don't know.  scope_creep Talk  01:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Could you not have weighted to the very least, until the conversation was finished.   scope_creep Talk  01:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The gap happens by default because of the infobox placement and the climate table. - Seasider53 (talk) 02:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And the only gap that appears in mobile view is to the right of the table of contents, which will happen in every article - Seasider53 (talk) 02:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)