Talk:Paudash Lake

message: The following factors have been given serious consideration:
(a) Canada’s 3 million lakes represent 60% of the total of all the lakes in the world.
(b) The premier recreational lake country in Canada, and indeed the world, is that of southern Ontario, with its 10,000 pristine glacial lakes.
(c) This is currently the only lake article, above the start level, which covers a southern Ontario lake. This alone makes it important to the Project
(d) This article is comprehensive in its description of what is a typical southern Ontario lake, as well as the surrounding southern Ontario lake country, and is very well written. Lake Central (talk) 06:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: To all of the many fine editors of the Paudash Lake site, I regret to note that this site was trashed on December 20th, 2008 by a wholly irresponsible individual. The so-called rationale set forth for the vandalism was, of course, preposterous. The site has been restored, however, we are dealing with a malicious individual who my strike again. Should you find this site has been trashed, please revert the site to Lake Central, as of Dec. 22, 2008. This individual has been sent the following notice:
I have received your message attempting to justify your behavior on the basis that “it is not acceptable to use words such as "spectacular" and "fabulous" and "beautiful" in a Wikipedia article”. Let us examine this interesting statement as regards geographic articles like Paudash Lake, shall we? 
Turning first to our worldwide Wikipedia Headquarters in San Francisco, we note in the Wikipedia article on the city (which is rated as a Featured Article), the word “fabulous” in the fourth paragraph. This is followed in the article by such words as “splendorous”, “ostentatious”, “flamboyant”, “grandeur”, “zany”, and the ever popular “legendary”, as applied to a rather sleazy rock promoter. As regards commercial promotion, there is the comment that “the decision by Virgin America to base its operations out of SFO reverses the trend of low-cost carriers opting to bypass SFO”.
Moving down the pike a bit from Headquaters, we now turn to the Wikipedia article on Yosemite National Park, which is also rated as a Featured Article. Here, in the very first paragraph, we find the word “spectacular” Furthermore, this is not the only time the word is used in the article. There is, of course a nice commerical promo that states “The park concession contract is now operated by Delaware North Companies "Parks and Resorts" (the official concessionaire name in DNC Parks and Resorts at Yosemite, Inc.).
Let me remind you that a “Featured Article”, our highest rating, is one which has “been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community". Oh, and do you recall that the San Francisco Wikipedia community founded Wikipedia and continues to run the organization and its computer servers? But then, again, perhaps you don’t think to much of our American cousins. Perhaps you are like your Hamilton and south shore area politicians such as Sheila Copps and Carolyn Perrish whose ghastly public comments on Americans are not something that I would wish to repeat on a Wikipedia site. 
So then, let us turn to a Canadian Wikipedia article on a site in your area which is rated as a “Selected Article” on the Canadian Portal, is a “Featured Article” in Europe, and a former “Featured Article” in North America. The article is on Niagara Falls and most certainly contains the word “spectacular”. It contain “spectacular” more than once, as well as a lot of "beauty" comments, such as “renowned both for their beauty”. Frankly, the commercial promo plugs in the article are simply too numerous to mention!
During 2008, Paudash Lake was one of Wikipedia’s most successful sites. As you either know, or should know, for several months during the year, the site set the record for the number of diffenent collaborators who edited the site. Now, you have used the excuse that “it is not acceptable to use words such as "spectacular" and "fabulous" and "beautiful" in a Wikipedia article”, to justify your trashing of this site which so many Wikipedians worked on during the last year. You, madam, are either a liar, a fool, or both.. Your disgusting, malicious, behavior is what is unacceptable. Lake Central (talk) 04:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#Paudash Lake.  ... discospinster talk 04:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your accusation against discospinster is wholely without foundation and violates WP:AGF and seems to constitute a personal attack. Her edits were clearly good faith edits which were made with legitimate justification to conform the article to NPOV standards. They did not change the article in any substantive way in regards to information. Be cautioned that your attempts to prevent her from making good faith edits might be viewed as an intimidation tactic, and get you in some hot water for WP:Own at least. 72.11.124.226 (talk) 21:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

text: What, precisely, does all that have to do with the article under discussion?  ... discospinster talk 22:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism Notice as of December 21, 2008 

message: I removed a lot of text from this article, in an attempt to get it closer to what is appropriate for the topic, omitting details that were not supported by references that probably do not belong in this article even if they were referenced, and information that is not about the lake but rather about the Muskoka/Haliburton region or the woodland which surrounds the lake.  The remaining article is still largely unsupported by references, and I am sure the article could be improved by taking away more.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Langhorner (talk • contribs) 17:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed a lot of text 

message: The many constructive editors of this article have made interesting additions and have corrected typos. The article contains background on the lake’s general area (Muskoka and Haliburton), because no other article has done so. 
This is a WikiProject Lakes article. If you have something constructive to contribute to the Project, I suggest you do so. In the meantime, you are nothing but a vandal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.12.3 (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We've been through this before, and since the last time, the policies of Wikipedia have not changed.  Articles must be written in a neutral point of view, and claims must be verified by reliable sources.  Please see this entry in the Wikipedia NPOV Noticeboard for the previous discussion.  ... discospinster talk 19:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: The information about cobalt contamination is referenced by a reliable source, unlike most of this section, so I have restored it.  Please explain why it should be removed here so we can arrive at a consensus before removing it again.Langhorner (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environmental Considerations