This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bird Cage Theatre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bird Cage Theatre. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
It looks like there's a slow-moving edit war cyclically adding and removing the blurb about the longest poker game, dating back to October 2018 when User:72.201.108.190 removed a number of stories about the Bird Cage based on information to the contrary. Reading the edit history, there seems to be a great amount of information there that could be used to enrich the page rather than just to justify taking it apart.
I wonder - would it be possible to strike a compromise, and have that and some of the deleted material included in order to cover the various 'myths' about the place? Both explaining the assertions that have become part of the building's mythology over the years, and presenting the counter information to explain why they're unlikely? Rather than relegating it all to deletions and comments on deletions? -- K.Yadin ( talk) 07:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)