Talk:Mitholz

What this article needs
I was able to find some information on the history of the village on the Kandergrund site, but they don't break out the population, so I've sourced that to two news sites. It would be nice to be able to have a proper section on the village as it is today, including what buildings it has (school? shop?), transport services (there are bus stops in addition to the station), and especially officially sourced population. And also to cover its relationship to Blausee: I know the lake is within a nature reserve and is a popular excursion destination, but on Google Street View I see a separate blue sign for Blausee, so I wonder whether they are separate villages on any level, and what the history is in that respect. What we have now is a combination introduction and description.

I'm not sure what the England IP editor's or editors' concerns are: the first edit had no edit summary but since they added a quote from the CNN source, I thought it was probably that they wanted to clarify the safety assessment was ordered in 2018, not published in final form in 2018. The dates are a bit hazy in the sources I read; there was an interim report, and there have been two stages in determining what will happen with the remediation (plus more to come; the BBC report and others make the point that neither the amount of compensation nor where the residents will be offered places to live have yet been announced), but I made it as clear as I could, relying on the Kandergrund site. There's a news section on that site that will probably be useful for more specifics, but I also don't want this article to be almost entirely about the disaster. The IP also templated the two sources that appear in the intro/top matter; that's entirely inappropriate under WP:CITEVAR, but maybe they are on mobile and can only see that first section of the article and/or don't realise policy is to not change a consistent form of referencing. Beyond that I'm not sure what their beef is; it may of course be two people; the second edit accused me of being unable to write, which is not something I hear often and I don't think the prose in this article merits such an assessment. I don't like to use quotes unnecessarily on copyright grounds and because we shouldn't expect readers to read the footnotes; our primary job is to distill and explain what's in the sources. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)