Talk:Miss Earth 2007

Untitled
why should miss earth 2007 page be deleted? since their is a page on all other pageant miss universe,miss world, and miss international and year after year. could you explain that?--Zingostar 11:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, Zingostar, for my failure to note that the date of the event has now passed. In fact, that was the main problem. This article was initiated more than six months before the event. As such, it seemed to consist of advertising for something that was yet to happen, rather than reporting on results which have occurred. Such advertising is, indeed, due cause for speedy deletion. In this case, however, I withdraw my objection. TBird68 15:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi ok. thats totally fine with me. happy editing!--Zingostar 15:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Tags
I've readded the unref and original research tags because nothing in this article has a reference. Please don't remove these tags without first solving the problem. Thank you. Cumulus Clouds 17:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually no. You can compare with the previous Miss Earth articles and the offical website of Miss Earth. Indeed nationas that withdrawed did withdraw. Also nations that debut and nations that return could be proven true. Just look at the previous Miss Earth articles. References are not listed but the claims are proven true.

Sam72991 19:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * you are right sam--Zingostar 16:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Missearth07logo.jpg
Image:Missearth07logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

funny!
so this is funny. the anonymous and semi anonymous editors of this article - who keep adding unreferenced info to the articles, puffing it up with peacock wording, etc - had used 'inquirer.net' as a reference on most of these miss earth articles - in that absurd string of ten or fifteen references. i checked, and the inquirer article did not support the contentions it was being used as a reference for. however - i figured i'd read the whole inquirer.net article - and it had some interesting criticisms of the pageant, which i added to the article. naturally, the anons have removed it a couple of times already. but they never, ever use an edit summary, so it merely constitutes vandalism - removal of cited material without any reason - so it'll stay in the article. i just find it humorous that one of the refs that the anons were insisting on using in the article - they're now insisting on not using in the article, because content critical of the pageant is being highlighted. gotta love POV edits. Anastrophe (talk) 17:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Please stop putting criticisms on this article
Please stop putting criticisms on this article. As much as possible, try to write the article in the neutral point of view. Like the one that keeps on emphasizing the pageant broadcast was "amateurish", etc. Thank you very much.


 * please familiarize yourself with WP:NPOV. criticism does not violate NPOV - in fact, it balances the promotional quality the articles currently have. removing the criticism constitutes POV. please do NOT remove the criticisms - you are violating WP policy in doing so. Anastrophe (talk) 03:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Advertisement Tag
It is requested that in order to improve the quality of any articles e.g. Miss Earth 2007, editors should be specific in identifying the statements that necessitate any tags e.g. POV, Advert tag, and etc.; putting a tag (just like the advert tag in Miss Earth 2007) without distinguishing the section or parts of the article that makes it advertisement in nature is a quandary for other editors. This act impedes other editors’ action to improve the contents of an article. Based on my editorial review in the contents of the article including the history section, statements with advertisement in nature, as well as some points of conflict were deleted already. The article bears some redundancies in its contents, which I‘m about to delete e.g. pageant venue; nonetheless, the overall contents of the article are verifiable and based on third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, which is inlined to Wikipedia policy. Regarding the article’s images/photograph/s, this should be deleted if not in lined with Wikipedia policy. Thanks.--Jet Perry (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Miss Earth 2007. 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/20100818005300/http://www.womanoftheearth.tv/essentials/2007.html to http://womanoftheearth.tv/essentials/2007.html

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) 05:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)