Talk:North Walsham

message: (I inserted the original comments above; apologies for not signing it back then) Those points still stand, but the improved page and structure is most welcome. Congratulations and thanks are due to the contributor/s who, especially in the last year, have made the North Walsham entry less perfunctory and laid the foundations for a really useful guide to the (albeit slowly) evolving town. Trevor H. (UK) 15:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Update commentary

message: The North Walsham Guide is not a 'non profit organistaion'. It is a 'website' developed by a website design company to assist with promoting local business and services (including their own). It is, in the first instance, a businesss directory. The site itself may indeed be of value and have a wealth of local information however Wikipedia has strict policies on the adding of external links.
Reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. I am of the opinion that this site is considered one to be avoided based on (1), (4), (13), (14).
There is also the matter of 'Advertising and conflicts of interest'. The link to the site has been added/edited/deleted and added again by BPNW who is actually Beauchamp Partnership North Walsham (www.bpnw.co.uk) and accordingly the policies state: in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if WP guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked.
Clearly by the edit log a 'cat and mouse' game has been going on with regards to this link which in itself is against editing policy on the part of both the person adding the link and also the user who is deleting the link.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.113.27 (talk) 10:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The North Walsham Guide 

message: I refer again to in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if WP guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked.. If you do not wish to break rules then with all due respect, respect them. If there is anything that you do not understand then ask and there are many who would be very willing to help in anyway possible.
The fact that the site links to its sponsors (owners and operators of the site) is not in question here and is not the issue in anyway. The guidelines state clearly not to add a link that you own, maintain, or represent even if the guidelines would normally encourage the linking of the site. This site was added and edited on multiple occassions by the owners.
If you wish to add content that is missing from WP on topics such as the Dilham Canal etc then as an Open project you are very welcome to contribute this information to WP which would be the prefered course of action here.
If you do not agree with the policy then this should be disussed in the relevant area.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.45.247 (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The North Walsham Guide 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on North Walsham. 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/20170211032229/http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/groups/public/documents/general_resources/ncc017867.xls to http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/groups/public/documents/general_resources/ncc017867.xls
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) 06:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified