Talk:Wagmag

This article was nominated for deletion on null. The result of the discussion was keep.

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Requested move[edit]

Reason for move: The article is misnamed, but there are worse stubs than this, and after finishing the move request I will do cleanup and add scaffolding and categories to make it a good stub. If it then still gets no real content put in it any time soon, it can be prod again.

The delete petitioner put "despite requests to improve the article...". I don't see any requests to improve the article here on the talk page. In fact I've only just started the talk page. Where are they then? If it's not proposed on the talk page it is rather hard for editors to see them isn't it? The original editor might have fallen under a bus, changed IP, or whatever, for all I know.

I don't think the article should be under this title, but rather than delete it I propose a move to Wagmag. The article is a stub, but I can't see any harm in that (I'll do some cleanup in a bit adding in some basic journal info). On the other hand, beyond the references it's not adding much right now, so may as well be deleted and can be recreated as Wagmag when somebody can be bothered actually to put some info in.

To be clear, I am not involved in this journal in any way and have never even heard of it. I just know from experience with Afterall, for example, and other articles, that with a bit of help from an editor putting some of the scaffolding in place (infoboxes etc), an editor unused to and a little scared of Wikipedia editing may suddenly start adding real content to it. I think it's worth trying, to delete it from the new location will be hardly more difficult than from here.

SimonTrew (talk) 14:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done dm (talk) 12:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reply[edit]

I was referring to the warning boxes on the article which had been added over time. I then looked at the creators contribs and .. it was just this one article. I'm fine with your proposal to move. dm (talk) 19:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

help[edit]

i need some help to links, source this article and am not clear of the coding and guidelines. I think in my attempt I did not cite material correctly. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mymontrose (talk • contribs) 21:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you need help, I am happy to help you fix this up. I am an inclusionist and see no harm in it being here, but it has been idle for about a month without inmprovement. Either hit me at User talk:SimonTrew or if you want I am you could try WP:Adoption. I know it is hard when you are starting out (as I am assuming you are). I struggle too but can maybe tell you things nobody told me.

The "Manual of Style" at WP:MOS is the Holy Bible for style guidelines here.

SimonTrew (talk) 22:09, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prod[edit]

OK this is the third time it's gone prod. It's just going around the houses now.

I've sourced the images. I've got copyright source. I've added information. I've helped the new Wikipedia editor who created the editor to give him some clues. I've added infoboxes. I've done, to the best of my understanding, everything I can to put the templates in the right place. And still it goes prod.

I give up, I just give up. SimonTrew (talk) 00:24, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Wagmag. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090327092509/http://www.visitbrooklyn.org:80/profile.php?pid=357 to http://www.visitbrooklyn.org/profile.php?pid=357

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]