Talk:Catalina Yachts

message: I've been doing research on other sailboat companies of similar size and found most did not have articles at all. Surprised when this article had so much information by comparison. Then found that language of the description of the boats felt like sales material and not especially neutral. External links to corporate website and yacht broker seems a little questionable. I certainly don't want to go in and make any changes to article, much of which is well done, factual and informative, but I'm concerned about the POV here.
Additionally, although this is not really related to neutrality, it needs some sourcing work. Gonna try to find that tag somewhere as well.
Thoughts out there?
Bradfordschultze 00:52, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: (Comments)

message: AA Milne, an editor with some higher level of authority has removed a significant amount of information from this article. I believe that this has been done improperly and have asked him to cooperate with the return of the photos and timeline.
To the other active editors: we have to be careful with this article seeming to be too much opinion.
Thanks
Kevin Murray 23:09, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The information you added, at first glance, appears to be absolutely useless; the photos look like they're selling me something. I suggest removing the timeline, leaving it in the external links section, and putting effort into cleaning up the majority of the article. - ¡Kribbeh!Speak!\Contribs 23:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I've no greater authority than any other user, no greater level of authority than you. Please read WP:NPOV though. Articles MUST be neutral, not just seem to be neutral and users shouldn't express any opinion on the page. The article should be geared towards a passer by interested in finding out about Catalina Yachts, not a source of information (and by default advertising) for prospective customers and to me, anyway, that's how much of this article now appears. AA Milne 23:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Much infromation removed

message: If you want to make some changes fine. But where do you get off judging my intentions etc.
I reverted back, but am happy to discuss.
Kevin Murray 23:40, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't Agree

message: I've reverted to an earlier version, removed the photos of the interior ammenities, and removed the Timeline.
Perhaps this can accomodate all concerns, or at least many.
I've tried to rework this article to a nuetral POV since I began editing on 10-17.
My originalk goal was to write and article about Coronado Yachts and stumbled across the Catalina article, which was tagged for POV and lack of citations. I hope that I have been able to make it better and more interesting. I would like to continue this theme on other boat brands as well; when we've worked out the ground rules.
I have permission for the use of all the photos and the timeline from Catalina, but let's just let that issue go away for now.
Thanks.
Kevin Murray 23:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good, but please make sure that you follow WP:SPAM. As we dont want this article to become a page to promote the brand but instead it should be a NPOV article Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 00:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: COMPROMISE?

message: This article has failed the GA noms as it seems to be mostly cited from one source and an article on such a topic should have alot more information. If you feel that this review was in error feel free to take it to WP:GA/R. Tarret 23:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: Regarding the new "references" section: There are no references to these items in the article. For instance, the "Sail Magazine: August 2004 pages 54 - 57" item. Also, the "Catalina Timeline" is really just a nice external link. I don't believe we need a "Notes" section that is contains inline references and a "Notes" section that contains items that could be distributed elsewhere... The inline refs should be under "References".
I do tons of work with referencing. I typically don't include items that aren't easily verifiable. So the inclusion of "Sail Magazine: August 2004 pages 54 - 57" as a bibliography item makes little sense especially since nothing points to it in the article. It hangs out there alone. The article really doesn't need a bibliography section. I just think the items we have could be covered more simply as they stood.
I'd prefer that we not include items that aren't easily verifiable. E_dog95' Hi ' 23:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - I now understand your past experience defending boat-related articles from AfD nominations. I'll be doing what I can for referencing the article. E_dog95' Hi ' 00:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I see that I won't be able to make inline refs after all... E_dog95' Hi ' 05:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Making inline references also makes them available to readers and editors alike. By converting these references to the "general" variety (the way they've been done here) makes them inaccessible. The "general" method being implemented here does not align itself with Wikipedia:Verifiability. Cheers E_dog95' Hi ' 05:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't see why inline footnotes and a bibliography can not continue to be compatible as they have for centuries in print. At WP the preference is to call a bibliography a reference section, but that is just nomenclature. --Kevin Murray (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes AND references?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Catalina Yachts. 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://archive.is/20130118083023/http://www.boatus.com/goodoldboat/catalina.asp to http://www.boatus.com/goodoldboat/catalina.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905230612/http://www.catalina38.org/registry/history.htm to http://www.catalina38.org/registry/history.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208145702/http://luxurioustravelsources.com/catalina-425-yacht-for-sale/ to http://luxurioustravelsources.com/catalina-425-yacht-for-sale
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090329035301/http://capri14.org/ to http://www.capri14.org/
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) 02:55, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified