Talk:Kilbirnie

Is James Clifford significant enough to stay? Should it be put under the history of that particular church instead? The references are a bit dodgy, as well. 130.132.62.193 15:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I had a valid point...

Deleting without conversation is unfair, and you should have at least mentioned it or changed what in your eyes deemed unacceptable.

Largely unreferenced
The article's primary problem is the glaring lack of reliable sources and inline citations. Without them most of the content isn't deemed suitable for an encyclopedia, and is open to removal. 99.12.243.171 (talk) 21:38, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (Same user, new IP) I've restored the maintenance templates, added more to specific sections, and removed some unsourced and non notable persons and places. Wikipedia's not a directory, a place for original research or a site for advertising local establishments. Such edits will be removed. Thanks, 99.136.254.88 (talk) 13:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kilbirnie. 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/20061005135912/http://www.kilbirnieauldkirk.org.uk/ to http://www.kilbirnieauldkirk.org.uk/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130202160818/http://www.s1kilbirnie.com/ to http://www.s1kilbirnie.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)