Talk:Crime Expo South Africa/Archive 1

message: http://www.2010cup.co.za/ is not the official web site for the world cup. I have removed the link from this page as it is misleading. The official web site appears to be this site for now:  --Rballou 21:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official 2010 FIFA World Cup Site

message: I have removed one link about that claimed to be to the official South Africa web site for the world cup. I have commented out another link because it claims to be part of the "Citzen newspaper", but actually redirects to the blog section of a web site . Reinstate this link correctly if it is appropriate for this page. --Rballou 21:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability Section

message: Since this "article" is nothing but a badly written editorial plus a whole bunch of links to external sites, I suggest spicing it up with a link to this page; you know - "NPOV" and all that jazz. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 00:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting link I suggest adding 

message: is a pay site. A free one would be very much preferable. --Guinnog 20:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This link

message: A article redirected from the Citizen was previously deleted. This article contains very useful information and references, and should therefore NOT be deleted. Persons againt, or critics of the Crime Expo SA article should want to have it deleted because of its value. The title of the article is: "Crime doesn't pay. Or does it?" It was written by Mike Stopforth 
http://www.moneyweb.co.za/blogs/mike_stopforth/781476.htm
:Firstly, sign your posts to the talk page using four tildes so we know who is commenting. Secondly, I have nothing against the Crime Expo SA, I do have trouble understanding why the page remains pourly formatted and why my changes to try to help the page are constantly removed and are considered "vandalism". Thank you for correctly attributing this article, nonetheless. --Rballou 01:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moneyweb article not to be deleted as Reference 

message: I have updated one of the external links to demonstrate how I think the external links should be worded. They should include the author as well, but the BBC article did not disclose an author. I believe this should be done because several of the article titles are suggestive about the nature and controversy around this site. Nonetheless, check Wikipedia:Cite your sources for more information on how you can improve this article. Thanks. --Rballou 02:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also you should remove the external links to foreign web sites unless it meets the following criteria: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Foreign-language sites. I do not think these links meet this criteria. --Rballou 16:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Thanks for helping improving this article. There is a lot of information available to improve this article. information for and against this article should be provided to make it as balanced as possible.--NdlovuX 04:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thanks for help 

message: When was this article "protected"? By whom? Because of what "vandalism"? If it is indeed protected, then how can The Elephant Man continue to add thin, unsubstantial filling to it? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 07:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing the tag as I see no evidence for it. --Guinnog 09:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  vprotected? 

message: It is very clear that people is trying to make this article one-sided by removing information that I have placed. 
I has a discussion here that was deleted? Why? Are you corrupt?--NdlovuX 23:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which discussion do you believe was deleted? Who do you think deleted it? And why do you think this article merits the controversial tag? Please remain WP:CIVIL when discussing changes to an article; focussing on properly referenced NPOV additions we can make to the article would be more productive than these general attacks on other editors. Thanks --Guinnog 23:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Are you referring to the work that I did? If so my user name is Rballou and you should not blame Guinnog for my edits. Again, if you are referring to my edits, then you should note that every single one has an explaination of why the edits were made. To expalin a bit farther here: 1) I compacted several facts into fewer sections because several sections only had one sentence in them. Case and point: . Notice that "Alternatives to the Crime Expo SA website" only has one sentence in it that does not actual constitute any information. The purpose of the sentence is solely to link to outside information. If alternatives were suggested in the article, they should be explained here with the citation. From Wikipedia:Guide to layout: "Just as for paragraphs, sections and subsections that are very short will make the article look cluttered and inhibit the flow. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading, and in these circumstances, it may be preferable to use bullet points." 2) I removed the Tourism section (see the link above) because it repeated the same information that was available in the Travel Industry section (which was above it in the article, so I removed the tourism section). If I mistakenly deleted a link, please add it to my changes. Or revert. Note that I am trying to give you and other editors ideas on how I think the article can be improved. I gain nothing and frankly do not care to gain anything by editing this article. My primary interest in this article came from the spamming that was occuring on the 2010 World Cup page. In fact, I'm done working on this article. Best of luck. --Rballou 02:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

text: NdlovuX, I'm done working on this article for now. The article for this web site isn't something I'm interested in working on right now. I think some of the links to Wikipedia:Manual of Style articles that can be found on this talk page will explain everything that I was trying to do. Good luck. --Rballou 13:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: NdlovuX, I'm disappointed you have restored what seems to me a less good version of the article. I request you read Rballou's lengthy explanation of changes made, followed by the links to MoS, and see if you can appreciate why the changes made were valid. --Guinnog 13:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY DO YOU REMOVE MY DISCUSSIONS ?

message: I've rewritten the article, using what was already there and what I could find from the references. Changelog:
# Removed LOTS of weaseling and narrative from the article to give it a more "arm's length" and neutral feel (i.e. reporting ON the website itself rather than reporting WHAT the website SAYS).
# Removed any quotes or statements referenced to blogs. They are NOT reliable sources.
# Removed the "Logo" subsection, it does not serve an editorial purpose in the article itself.
# Condensed and combined the various criticism sections into one section titled "Reaction".
# Lumped the "Anti" websites into a "Response" section only mentioning the most prominent two and leaving out blogs as per above.
# Removed the section "Crime Expo SA warning to Tourists". As mentioned above an encyclopedia article should report ON the website, not report the website's CONTENT.
# (in conjunction with the next point) Created a "Press coverage" section to give some idea as to how far the story has been carried internationally.
# (in conjunction with the previous point) Removed the External links section as all the stories covered are sourced from the SAME Reuters article. Created a "Press coverage" section instead to simply list the different INTERNATIONAL media that have carried it (that the story has been carried in local media is not "encyclopaedic" information to the casual reader).
# Formatted all the references using the "footnote" style. I think it looks nicer.
# Removed multiple references to the same article or website.
Zunaid 14:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work. Well done. --Guinnog 15:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. Wizzy…☎ 15:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite of 16:39, 15 September 2006 

message: Since the site has changed its name the article should too. Someone be bold please! Zunaid 15:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Guinnog 15:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to channge title to [[Crime Expo South Africa]] 

message: Comments are made about Pieter Boshoff's "anti-Crime Expo South Africa Campaign" on the website of "Why South Africa is Crap" at the link http://southafricaiscrap.blogspot.com/2006/09/war-of-websites-boshoff-cracking-up.html 
On this blog comments are provided about Pieter Boshoff's anti-Crime Expo South Africa campaign.
This blog used the IOL website's information as source:
http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3015&art_id=vn20060926135134641C198636
--NdlovuX 06:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pieter Boshoff's anti-Crime Expo South Africa Campaign