Talk:Bone china

message: This para seems to be POV pushing, carry undue weight, have primary sources misformatted-- have I missed something?
==Boycotting by vegetarians==
Due to the use of animal bones in the production of some bone china some vegetarians and vegans will avoid using or purchasing bone china.
-- Clem Rutter (talk) 15:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple issues

message: Vegetarians & vegans:- Please can the persistent disruptive editor stop. They have recently been making a number of damaging edits, often with misleading comments. They have now recently started to post warnings about 3 revert rule, when it is they who are close to being in breach. They motivation is unclear as their edit history clearly shows they are unfamiliar with the subject.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.98.204.203 (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Further references have been added, which now total 15. This is far in excess of what should be needed but hopefully it should counter the repeated damaging edits of (an agenda pushing?) persistently disruptive editor who has not explained their reasons for removing referenced content on the talk page, or join discussions.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.98.204.203 (talk) 14:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, uninvolved editor here. While I don't see any issue with the text in the article currently , there's no reason for this to have so many "supporting" references. Suggest we pick one or two good quality, reliable (WP:RS) sources and just use those. Do you see an issue with this approach? - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 10:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello Ryk72 - I'm more than happy for you to trim down the number of references. My only caution is about the potential reaction of a particularly disagreeable individual who has recently made a series ill-educated and detrimental edits.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.98.204.203 (talk) 15:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi . Many thanks for your reply, and for taking the time to respond. Greatly appreciate it. I think it's best if we focus on the content, so I've taken the liberty of changing the section heading above; apologies if this is presumptuous. I'm glad that we can agree to reduce the number of references for this part of the article; so I'll go through each and make a short list with some reasoning/thoughts. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 19:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

text: Hello Ryk72 - thank you. I support your constructive and collaborative efforts to rationalise the references. There were too many, although the reason for this sits with another unconstructive editor. I'm more than happy for you to reduce the number of references providing that mention remains of the avoidance of bone china by some vegetarians and vegans, and that the disagreeable individual does not take this has an opportunity to continue their quarrelsome behaviour.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.98.204.203 (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello  & . I've rationalised the references for this section per the discussion above, and also updated the web references to use the  format, and included the link to the paper book which was lost in an earlier edit. I still feel we have (1-2) too many references for this section. Please let me know if you have any opinions or thoughts on both the current state and also any potential improvements. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 06:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  We still have an editor that doesn't wish to understand WP:UNDUE. Considering further, the heading is not accurate, I think it is far too strong to express that a small interest group who happen to be vegan are campaigning for a boycott, and I don't believe that vegetarians wish to be involved. Perhaps just Cultural issues would suffice. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 14:58, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi  & . I have no particular issues with the removal of extraneous sources. The information is still in the article, and still sourced. I also have no major issue with renaming the section to "Cultural issues", which I will do in the next day or so if there are no objections. I am, however, having issues finding sources for the following section of this Talk page; plenty of sources for artificial bone ash existing, not many for its use in the commercial manufacture of bone china, mostly supporting use for pottery glazes. Please comment in that section, especially if you have any sources available. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 13:12, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Boycott by Vegetarians & Vegans

message: Hello, I hope an editor more knowledgeable than I would correct the final entry which is totally improper written English, lacking a verb. It would make things ever so much better to read. 70.171.212.234 (talk) 04:51, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Resolved; readded text removed in this edit. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 11:48, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural issues - missing verb