Talk:Thyon

{{closed|text =

{{Moved discussion from|Wikipedia:Help_desk#Disagree_with_an_article_assessment|2=[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=836612801#Disagree_with_an_article_assessment] Guliolopez (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2018 (UTC)}}

I recently spent time greatly expanding and improving an article on a Swiss location I know well. (By no means the first edit I have made in Wikipedia). I now see the rubric: "This article is written like a manual or guidebook. Please help rewrite this article from a descriptive, neutral point of view, and remove advice or instruction."

Furthermore two edits have been made ("citation needed") where I have explained something precisely because it needs explaining, not cross-referencing,as no such references exist in Wikipedia.

Whilst I am happy to review what I wrote, and make one or two modifications, I simply disagree with the assessment of it being a "manual" (!) and I would argue that any article in Wikipedia that includes descriptions of a place used for recreation or tourism inevitably has overtones of a "guide-book" - and if so, so what? According to Wikipedia's entry "encyclopedia articles focus on factual information concerning the subject named in the article’s title."

In the article I am referring to, Thyon, there is nothing that is not fact, and I have in any event tried to give references where it would be helpful.

I am very willing to "improve" but I would like to know:

who makes such assessments?

how and where can they be debated?

Divonnais (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

:Hi {{reply|Divonnais}}. Thanks for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AHelp_desk&type=revision&diff=836610701&oldid=836606287 your note at Wikipedia:Help desk]. I have moved your note to this article talk page because, as {{u|Vexations}} mentioned, article talk pages are the places we discuss article content.

:Thanks also for your efforts to improve the article. While the tag that I added was (obviously) not intended as a critique or commentary on your own good-faith efforts (reflecting, in several cases, pre-existing issues), if you got that impression, I can but apologise.

:In any event, while you have asked a number of questions in your note, and I will be happy to address or answer them as best I can, I might first explain why I tagged the article.

:In short I added this tag because:

:* Unattributed opinions, like the resort being [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thyon&diff=next&oldid=830054604 "seamlessly integrated" and "easily connected" with the whole area], seemed at odds with the relevant ATTRIBUTEPOV guidelines,

:* Subjective statements, like the resort "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thyon&diff=next&oldid=829947051 enjoying spectacular views]" are not typically appropriate to the relevant WTW guidelines, and

:* Guidebook style text, like that which talks about how to get there from the airport, or the opening times/dates of the local restaurant, seemed more in keeping with the Wikivoyage project than the Wikipedia's NOTGUIDEBOOK guidelines.

:Anyway. To your other point, about discussing/addressing these issues (to the extent that there is consensus to remove the hatnote), if you're happy for me to do so, I can make a first attempt myself. If that works for you.

:Thanks again. Guliolopez (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

::Issue is addressed. Hatnote is removed. Thread is closed. Guliolopez (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

}}